After hearing this morning that the full England squad are prepared to boycott Saturday's crutial game against Turkey unless Rio Ferdinand is re-instated to the squad after his failure to show for a routine drugs test. I was wondering what the thoughts are of other people?

I have voted yes for they are justified in doing so. However Rio taking the drugs test 36 hrs after requesting is enough time to get drugs outta his system.

I think it was unfair to ban him, they should have given him the benefit of the doubt. But they should fine him.

I think banning him from this crucial game is the wrong decision for the FA to make. Also another 'nameless' player I read in the metro today did the same thing a year ago. He just got a fine but no ban. So double standards I feel is becoming apparent.

Yes, boycott the game (so long as it doesn't rule us out of Euro 2004).

I thought it was unjust for the players to act in this way, afterall Rio only had himself to blame for opting not to show for the routine test and he knew he would be punished for not doing so. I do think the FA were a bit harsh to ban him, but I guess they have to be seen to be anti-drugs and can't afford to be seen to be avoiding the issue. Also, is it really worth running the risk of failing to qualify just cos of one player's stupidity?!

Firstly, the FA should not have banned Rio. They had discretion as the rules say a player may be disciplined for not attending a drug testing. He was moving house that day and simply forgot! He apparently even phoned 2 hours after the appointment time to apologise and offered to do the test then. Obviously the doctor (or whoever) must have already gone home because it was arranged for 36 hours later. To my mind the FA have chosen the wrong thing to get tough about and made themselves look stupid.

That said, should the England players strike? No.

If the PFA had gone to all it's members and they had voted to strike, then that would be a different matter - that would be a Union acting in the interests of it's members. But this is not the PFA making the threat but a bunch of jumped-up, over-paid millionairre kids who think they can do anything. In my opinion they should remember their places and leave the thinking to others. They can take comfort in the fact that thy earn huge sums of money and in the joy of playing football for their country. The FA should slap them down!

I don't think it's justified to stage a boycott. At the end of the day it's Rio's own fault for not taking the test. The FA are trying to make an example out of him and I think they are right in doing so to avoid this sort of thing happening in the future.

I think this event, coupled with the two alleged rapes is going to be the straw that breaks the camel's back in relation to footballers and their behvaiour.

Tony Parsons in Monday's Mirror described the situation perfectly.

The article can be found here (http://www.mirror.co.uk/columnists/tonyparsons/)

Yes, but Tony Parsons is a bit of an idiot

The Mirror portrays itself as a left-wing anti-war paper, but continues to use thugs such as the rightwing Christian Fundamentalist Tony Parsons, that scouse git Brian Reade and that political thug with the 'tache wotsisname...the walrus ...(goes away for a minute) Paul Routledge, who were all so keen on bombing Iraq back in '91

Anyway, back to the post...I doubt the players would boycott the game. They're unlikely to turn down the chance of increasing their profiles and earning more cash, are they?

I agree that Rio should miss the game and the FA should set an example. Rio said he was moving house at the time, so could not provide a sample. Hello? Earth calling? He can spare an entire afternoon to play football, but no time for a sample?

Lock him and throw away the key. And chuck in the Leeds players who committed that racist attack too.

Originally posted by Abby
The Mirror portrays itself as a left-wing anti-war paper, but continues to use thugs such as the rightwing Christian Fundamentalist Tony Parsons, that scouse git Brian Reade and that political thug with the 'tache wotsisname...the walrus ...(goes away for a minute) Paul Routledge, who were all so keen on bombing Iraq back in '91

I agree. I hate the Mirror. I only read it because it was on the bar while I was having a pint. I think the world would be a better place withuot ALL tabloids.

As I understand it, the ban has only come about because the match falls before the hearing does. They dont want to take the risk of playing him while he is under a cloud.

If the match had been after the hearing, and he had been cleared, we wouldnt be in this position

That does rather fly in the face of innocent until proven guilty mind you. I wonder why they couldnt bring the hearing forward?


I think if a drugs test is this important then he should not have forgotten, bet no-one does again

I do not think the players should be boycotting, if they dont turn up the points will go to Turkey, and we will probably have more points took off us

How does that help anyone?

Basically it is all a bloody mess, something the FA are skilled at creating all too often if you ask me

This has to be a first............. the FA in trouble for not taking the PI** out of a footballer, when they have been taking it for so long !!!!!!!!!.

To be asked to take a drugs test is not something one forgets IMO. This fellow has form, enough to fill an A3 piece of paper. He's been shown to be ill disciplined off the field in the past.

Bet the bloody Turk F. A wouldn't have suspended any of their players until Monday unlike our F . A :mad:

Come on ENGLAND :thumbsup:

Listened to the news last night and one opinion was that if they hadn't banned him Turkey may have raised an objection after the game and had the result annulled.

Originally posted by Jon
Bet the bloody Turk F. A wouldn't have suspended any of their players until Monday unlike our F . A :mad:

Come on ENGLAND :thumbsup:

Your probably right there.