It is a distant memory now, but during Scotland's six-match development tour of South Africa in 1997, just after the sport went open, I am fairly sure the only team they met that did not contain a player who had served a doping suspension was one that had a convicted murderer in its ranks.
As we wait, then, to discover the fate of 19-year-old Sam Chalmers, the son of one of the greats of the Scottish game who has apparently failed a dope test and is set to face an International Rugby Board panel as a result, there seems substantial reason to feel surprise on more grounds than simply that he is Craig's boy. Indeed, it has been a recurring source of amazement that so few drugs offences have been reported in the sport of rugby union since full-time professionalism offered such enhanced rewards for taking such risks with health and regulations. After all, it is a sport where the benefits of taking a substance that will accelerate a player's route to greater pace and power are obvious.
Yet every so often the likes of World Cup organisers or the domestic authorities offer unsolicited updates on the absence of positive tests in the course of competitions or seasons.
In an era where the likes of athletics, baseball and cycling have been torn apart by drug scandals, is it not naive to think that, as often seems to be implied with those releases, rugby has somehow created a superior culture?
In that context, what is perhaps of greatest concern is that rugby officialdom seems to be maintaining that it should not even confirm or deny that a case is under examination before the final outcome is known. Such a system opens up the possibility of the sort of abuse found in other sports where the authorities have simply kept embarrassing cases quiet.
When cases arise, therefore, the sport concerned must admit to their existence. That may seem harsh on players who may be found to have done little wrong, as I hope is the case with young Chalmers. However, as in all walks of life, those making mistakes which raise suspicion of wrongdoing may have the right to be considered innocent, but must also have their day in court to ensure their cases are examined in a way that satisfies the wider community that matters have been dealt with properly. Without that sort of transparency the scope for all sorts of abuse is obvious.
Why are you making commenting on The Herald only available to subscribers?
It should have been a safe space for informed debate, somewhere for readers to discuss issues around the biggest stories of the day, but all too often the below the line comments on most websites have become bogged down by off-topic discussions and abuse.
heraldscotland.com is tackling this problem by allowing only subscribers to comment.
We are doing this to improve the experience for our loyal readers and we believe it will reduce the ability of trolls and troublemakers, who occasionally find their way onto our site, to abuse our journalists and readers. We also hope it will help the comments section fulfil its promise as a part of Scotland's conversation with itself.
We are lucky at The Herald. We are read by an informed, educated readership who can add their knowledge and insights to our stories.
That is invaluable.
We are making the subscriber-only change to support our valued readers, who tell us they don't want the site cluttered up with irrelevant comments, untruths and abuse.
In the past, the journalist’s job was to collect and distribute information to the audience. Technology means that readers can shape a discussion. We look forward to hearing from you on heraldscotland.com
Comments & Moderation
Readers’ comments: You are personally liable for the content of any comments you upload to this website, so please act responsibly. We do not pre-moderate or monitor readers’ comments appearing on our websites, but we do post-moderate in response to complaints we receive or otherwise when a potential problem comes to our attention. You can make a complaint by using the ‘report this post’ link . We may then apply our discretion under the user terms to amend or delete comments.
Post moderation is undertaken full-time 9am-6pm on weekdays, and on a part-time basis outwith those hours.
Read the rules hereComments are closed on this article