GSP hopes Silva, Diaz cases prompt 'more stringent' drug testing

GSP hopes Silva, Diaz cases prompt 'more stringent' drug testing

If you were wondering about Georges St-Pierre’s thoughts on Anderson Silva's and Nick Diaz’s positive UFC 83 drug tests, you can stop.

As usual, St-Pierre took the high road when asked by *Le Journal de Montreal’s Kevin Dubé for his opinion of the situation.

“Like everyone else, I was surprised when I heard the news,” he said sarcastically, according to the interviewer.

St-Pierre went on to say it wasn’t his place to judge Silva, who tested positive for two steroids ahead of the bout, or Diaz, who tested positive for marijuana metabolites in his post-fight drug screening.

“I don’t wish them any ill will; it's terrible what happened to Anderson Silva – to his career, and also to him physically,” St-Pierre sympathized. “It’s not my intention to bash anyone, either."

St-Pierre has stated on more than one occasion that unless the UFC institutes a year-round WADA-sanctioned random drug-testing program he will not return to MMA. Although he is a vocal opponent of performance-enhancing drugs, the French-Canadian fighter said he won’t be a steroid whistle-blower. He says he will, however, continue to rally for a cleaner sport.

"I'm not a rat and I'll never go public and name names to reporters. My only hope is that we deal with this [PED] problem," St-Pierre said flatly. “I hope if one thing comes out of this, it's that testing will be done more stringently.”

“I really don't know [if this will prompt the UFC to increase out-of-competition drug testing]," St-Pierre said incredulously. "Maybe nothing will change. It depends on a lot of people."

One thing "Rush" does know is that, contrary to rumors stating otherwise, he still hasn’t made any plans to return to the cage in 2015.

"I think some journalists should re-check the credibility of their sources."

 

*Cagewriter mistakenly reported that Dubé writes for La Press de Montreal. Dubé in fact writes for La Journal de Montreal. A link to the original source was also added to the original report. We apologize for the error and omission.