... and tell that to the Jamaican authorities who apparently only dope test one athlete every time a blue moon comes around and only if his name isn't Bob Marley or someone else famous.

They'd have a hard time dope testing Bob Marley.

I cant wait for the Aussie Rules World Cup every four years.

But seriously it would be more related to access to Government Funding then what other overseas codes think.

Again, there is a serious misunderstanding of how it works. Has absolutely nothing to do with government funding. If it did, then it certainly would be political, as governments can alwaysbe bought, blackmailed, lobbied by their backers and supporters, whatever people do to gain a political advantage.

To do this to ASADA/WADA would be the equivalent of governments interfering with the judicial process.that might happen in a dictatorship but it is very rare indeed in our system. It is also why WADA can override the local equivalents of ASADA because many of then are subject to corruption, and if this were to happen it would call the whole system into disrepute.

One of the reasons why drugs in sport has cleaned up its act internationally is due to this. It is not perfect but it is a hell of a lot better than it used to be, and fora country like Australia, subject to an established rule of law, it is about as good as it gets.

It is interesting that these powerbrokers still seem to think they can get around these things (think Essendon with their established political connections). They can't, and we are a hell of a lot better off because of it.

Well, surprise ... surprise ... AFL to drop case against Dr Bruce Reid

Also the fat controller has denied any deal with Reid to drop the charges against him, still listed to go to the Supreme Court on Thus.

http://www.theage.com.au/afl/afl-news/no-deal-with-reid-demetriou-20130913-2to7z.html

Well, surprise ... surprise ... AFL to drop case against Dr Bruce Reid

It still doesn't make any difference. The afl may drop the case for financial, political, whatever reasons, if ASADA/WADA have a different view he will still be charged. That is the way it is.

It still doesn't make any difference. The afl may drop the case for financial, political, whatever reasons, if ASADA/WADA have a different view he will still be charged. That is the way it is.

And he may well have a few questions to answer from the Medical Board. Id be very surprised if he's out of the woods just yet.

Also the fat controller has denied any deal with Reid to drop the charges against him, still listed to go to the Supreme Court on Thus.

http://www.theage.com.au/afl/afl-news/no-deal-with-reid-demetriou-20130913-2to7z.html

Hilarious piece. Andy totaly goes Homer Le Grand. I don't think I've ever heard a reporter get such a savaging from an AFL person

Hilarious piece. Andy totaly goes Homer Le Grand. I don't think I've ever heard a reporter get such a savaging from an AFL person

I think Vlad, AFL and some others may have there integrity on the line if brought under oath. I believe they could have had good reason to settle.

And he may well have a few questions to answer from the Medical Board. Id be very surprised if he's out of the woods just yet.

I doubt it.

Reid was not involved in the implementation of the supplements program.

He had concerns and sent a letter to the football manager and CEO but it is clear they never acted on it.

There was evidence that Reid was by passed in a cowboy culture and poor governance led by the Golden One.

The Medical Board won't go chasing this one unless ASADA lay specific charges on Reid for failures.

Again, there is a serious misunderstanding of how it works. Has absolutely nothing to do with government funding. If it did, then it certainly would be political, as governments can alwaysbe bought, blackmailed, lobbied by their backers and supporters, whatever people do to gain a political advantage.

To do this to ASADA/WADA would be the equivalent of governments interfering with the judicial process.that might happen in a dictatorship but it is very rare indeed in our system. It is also why WADA can override the local equivalents of ASADA because many of then are subject to corruption, and if this were to happen it would call the whole system into disrepute.

One of the reasons why drugs in sport has cleaned up its act internationally is due to this. It is not perfect but it is a hell of a lot better than it used to be, and fora country like Australia, subject to an established rule of law, it is about as good as it gets.

It is interesting that these powerbrokers still seem to think they can get around these things (think Essendon with their established political connections). They can't, and we are a hell of a lot better off because of it.

http://www.smh.com.au/afl/afl-news/coalition-may-strike-on-afl-illicit-drugs-policy-20130903-2t3dw.html

http://www.sportslawyer.com.au/uploadedFiles/1204521901558-5293.pdf

http://www.heraldsun.com.au/sport/feds-to-pressure-afl-on-drugs/story-e6frf9if-1111113582679

http://www.afl.com.au/afl-hq/partners/government-partners

http://www.smh.com.au/afl/afl-news/afl-funding-knockback-20120501-1xx8j.html

I could continue

http://www.smh.com.au/afl/afl-news/coalition-may-strike-on-afl-illicit-drugs-policy-20130903-2t3dw.htmlhttp://www.sportslawyer.com.au/uploadedFiles/1204521901558-5293.pdfhttp://www.heraldsun.com.au/sport/feds-to-pressure-afl-on-drugs/story-e6frf9if-1111113582679http://www.afl.com.au/afl-hq/partners/government-partnershttp://www.smh.com.au/afl/afl-news/afl-funding-knockback-20120501-1xx8j.htmlI could continue

The coalition government threatening to force a change in the AFL's three strike policy on drugs has nothing to do with WADA/ASADA. It is more akin to the difference between a law enforcement approach to drugs control (the Coalition) or a Medical one (the AFL). I have written extensively on how stupid and counterproductive the Richard Nixon inspired war on drugs has been. It doesn't work, promotes criminality and the profits go to organized crime outside state control (and the tax system). Far better to take away the market for criminals by having it taken away from organized crime by having it controlled and supplied by the state but under the supervision of the medical profession, where the welfare of the victim is at its heart. ( I can send you a 30000 word paper on this very subject I have written if you are interested). This is really what the AFL's policy is all, having players welfare as being paramount and in the hands of the medical profession. Brandis and his ilk in the coalition are driven by their ideology around Law and Order where they see the solution to these things as chasing the criminals (including the victims) and locking them all up. The welfare of the individual has nothing whatever to do with it.

This however does not affect WADA/ASADA. They are there to enforce internationally agreed protocols about drugs in sport. The Organisations who sign up to this, and nearly all sporting Organisations around the world do, otherwise they would be regarded a pariahs. The sporting organisation agree on a certain level of testing, and this can vary from sport to sport, but once drug cheating is detected then it is up to the local equivalent of ASADA to evaluate the seriousness of the offence and issue infraction notices. If the offenders are subsequently deemed guilty then an automatic two year ban is imposed ( which can be lessened to six months if there is a high degree of cooperation or mitigating circumstances). The latest revised WADA codes are calling for the automatic bans to be increased to four years. Since Essendon have fought this process most of the way, when the infraction notices are issued, which I have no doubt they will be, they will more than likely come with two year bans.

Given the Coalition's hard-line Law and Order approach, rather than lessening drug detection activity, they are likely in my view to demand a greater frequency of testing. This will also likely come with a demand that positive tests are immediately made public, rather than the way the AFL code operates which leaves it in the hands of the club doctor for the first two positive tests, and after the third make it public. Any public diclosure will of course be accompanied by a huge media circus, and so a much greater number of young men's lives will be ruined as a result of it than would have occurred under the current AFL policy, and much less likely that they will eventually be cured.

Great humanitarians are people like Brandis!

We're talking of two different types of drug use although there is some overlap. The three strikes policy deals more with social or party drugs and the WADA code deals with the performance enhancing side of the drug scene (which covers masking agents and untested substances).

Both can be lethal and, in fact, in the Roy Masters interview on The Back Page above, Masters alluded to a comment made to him by the head of the ACC John Lawler, to the effect that on the basis of their knowledge, they were frightened by the possibility that we were close to the first death of an athlete through doping which was spinning out of control (I think there's a strong possibility that many deaths have taken place around the world and possibility in this country - certainly among body builders).

Both issues certainly warrant political intervention but I agree the heavy handed populist brand is not necessarily the right way to go.

The coalition government threatening to force a change in the AFL's three strike policy on drugs has nothing to do with WADA/ASADA. It is more akin to the difference between a law enforcement approach to drugs control (the Coalition) or a Medical one (the AFL). I have written extensively on how stupid and counterproductive the Richard Nixon inspired war on drugs has been. It doesn't work, promotes criminality and the profits go to organized crime outside state control (and the tax system). Far better to take away the market for criminals by having it taken away from organized crime by having it controlled and supplied by the state but under the supervision of the medical profession, where the welfare of the victim is at its heart. ( I can send you a 30000 word paper on this very subject I have written if you are interested). This is really what the AFL's policy is all, having players welfare as being paramount and in the hands of the medical profession. Brandis and his ilk in the coalition are driven by their ideology around Law and Order where they see the solution to these things as chasing the criminals (including the victims) and locking them all up. The welfare of the individual has nothing whatever to do with it.

This however does not affect WADA/ASADA. They are there to enforce internationally agreed protocols about drugs in sport. The Organisations who sign up to this, and nearly all sporting Organisations around the world do, otherwise they would be regarded a pariahs. The sporting organisation agree on a certain level of testing, and this can vary from sport to sport, but once drug cheating is detected then it is up to the local equivalent of ASADA to evaluate the seriousness of the offence and issue infraction notices. If the offenders are subsequently deemed guilty then an automatic two year ban is imposed ( which can be lessened to six months if there is a high degree of cooperation or mitigating circumstances). The latest revised WADA codes are calling for the automatic bans to be increased to four years. Since Essendon have fought this process most of the way, when the infraction notices are issued, which I have no doubt they will be, they will more than likely come with two year bans.

Given the Coalition's hard-line Law and Order approach, rather than lessening drug detection activity, they are likely in my view to demand a greater frequency of testing. This will also likely come with a demand that positive tests are immediately made public, rather than the way the AFL code operates which leaves it in the hands of the club doctor for the first two positive tests, and after the third make it public. Any public diclosure will of course be accompanied by a huge media circus, and so a much greater number of young men's lives will be ruined as a result of it than would have occurred under the current AFL policy, and much less likely that they will eventually be cured.

Great humanitarians are people like Brandis!

WOW you are truly passionate about this topic.

Sure send me the information.

We're talking of two different types of drug use although there is some overlap. The three strikes policy deals more with social or party drugs and the WADA code deals with the performance enhancing side of the drug scene (which covers masking agents and untested substances).

Both can be lethal and, in fact, in the Roy Masters interview on The Back Page above, Masters alluded to a comment made to him by the head of the ACC John Lawler, to the effect that on the basis of their knowledge, they were frightened by the possibility that we were close to the first death of an athlete through doping which was spinning out of control (I think there's a strong possibility that many deaths have taken place around the world and possibility in this country - certainly among body builders).

Both issues certainly warrant political intervention but I agree the heavy handed populist brand is not necessarily the right way to go.

WJ, I realize there is a difference between performance enhancing and recreational use, and the AFL's drug's policy is primarily, but not entirely, about recreational drugs. My point was more the philosophical difference in approach between a law and order approach and one base on a medical one with the user as its focus. This applies both to recreational and performance enhancing, and they both have very different outcomes.

WJ, I realize there is a difference between performance enhancing and recreational use, and the AFL's drug's policy is primarily, but not entirely, about recreational drugs. My point was more the philosophical difference in approach between a law and order approach and one base on a medical one with the user as its focus. This applies both to recreational and performance enhancing, and they both have very different outcomes.

I agree that there are different and possibly better ways to approach drugs and doping but the AFL has handed enforcement of policy re performance enhancing drugs to a higher authority which primarily cares not about an approach from a medical POV or the user, other than to catch out and sanction.

And on what I've heard about its policy on recreational drugs the AFL seems only to pay lip service to rehabilitation.

Well, surprise ... surprise ... AFL to drop case against Dr Bruce Reid

Another case of the Ess spin doctors trying to control the agenda???

The AFL doesn't like that stuff. They get angry, Its their domain....

I doubt it.

Reid was not involved in the implementation of the supplements program.

He had concerns and sent a letter to the football manager and CEO but it is clear they never acted on it.

There was evidence that Reid was by passed in a cowboy culture and poor governance led by the Golden One.

The Medical Board won't go chasing this one unless ASADA lay specific charges on Reid for failures.

I am still waiting for Worksafe Victoria to investigate the druggos.

If that was my wokplace and I forced my staff to ingest drugs and have repeat injections of unknown substances I would be in jail. Full stop.

How is it that statutory body of the Govt can overlook this?? Its a figging disgrace.

The coalition government threatening to force a change in the AFL's three strike policy on drugs has nothing to do with WADA/ASADA. It is more akin to the difference between a law enforcement approach to drugs control (the Coalition) or a Medical one (the AFL). I have written extensively on how stupid and counterproductive the Richard Nixon inspired war on drugs has been. It doesn't work, promotes criminality and the profits go to organized crime outside state control (and the tax system). Far better to take away the market for criminals by having it taken away from organized crime by having it controlled and supplied by the state but under the supervision of the medical profession, where the welfare of the victim is at its heart. ( I can send you a 30000 word paper on this very subject I have written if you are interested). This is really what the AFL's policy is all, having players welfare as being paramount and in the hands of the medical profession. Brandis and his ilk in the coalition are driven by their ideology around Law and Order where they see the solution to these things as chasing the criminals (including the victims) and locking them all up. The welfare of the individual has nothing whatever to do with it.

This however does not affect WADA/ASADA. They are there to enforce internationally agreed protocols about drugs in sport. The Organisations who sign up to this, and nearly all sporting Organisations around the world do, otherwise they would be regarded a pariahs. The sporting organisation agree on a certain level of testing, and this can vary from sport to sport, but once drug cheating is detected then it is up to the local equivalent of ASADA to evaluate the seriousness of the offence and issue infraction notices. If the offenders are subsequently deemed guilty then an automatic two year ban is imposed ( which can be lessened to six months if there is a high degree of cooperation or mitigating circumstances). The latest revised WADA codes are calling for the automatic bans to be increased to four years. Since Essendon have fought this process most of the way, when the infraction notices are issued, which I have no doubt they will be, they will more than likely come with two year bans.

Given the Coalition's hard-line Law and Order approach, rather than lessening drug detection activity, they are likely in my view to demand a greater frequency of testing. This will also likely come with a demand that positive tests are immediately made public, rather than the way the AFL code operates which leaves it in the hands of the club doctor for the first two positive tests, and after the third make it public. Any public diclosure will of course be accompanied by a huge media circus, and so a much greater number of young men's lives will be ruined as a result of it than would have occurred under the current AFL policy, and much less likely that they will eventually be cured.

Great humanitarians are people like Brandis!

Your partisan diatribe is junk and you have no idea what you are talking about. The Govt has to play by WADA's rules otherwise its whole National sporting program at world champs and the olympics would be compromised. They have already felt significant heat because of the 3 strikes policy of the AFL. The AFL and former Govt had a number of big fights over the AFLs policy.

Stop trying to rewrite history and create your own agenda.

Guys keep the 3 strikes policy out of this thread, it has absolutely nothing to do with the ASADA investigation of Essendon.

There have been a number of threads discussing these issues in the past and it is a good topic but not here.

Guys keep the 3 strikes policy out of this thread, it has absolutely nothing to do with the ASADA investigation of Essendon.

There have been a number of threads discussing these issues in the past and it is a good topic but not here.

Never said it did. Simply saying the Govt relationship with WADA has been through some angst because of the 3 strikes. Nothing to do with Ess.

I am still waiting for Worksafe Victoria to investigate the druggos.

If that was my wokplace and I forced my staff to ingest drugs and have repeat injections of unknown substances I would be in jail. Full stop.

How is it that statutory body of the Govt can overlook this?? Its a figging disgrace.

Why not you get the facts first?

Workplace Victoria will only move ( if they plan to) once ASADA is finished it's investigation.

At the moment there is no cast iron proof of what you are alleging.

Why not you get the facts first?

Workplace Victoria will only move ( if they plan to) once ASADA is finished it's investigation.

At the moment there is no cast iron proof of what you are alleging.

hes not alleging

hes going on the facts supplied by jab Watson/spikey mcviegh

I am still waiting for Worksafe Victoria to investigate the druggos.

If that was my wokplace and I forced my staff to ingest drugs and have repeat injections of unknown substances I would be in jail. Full stop.

How is it that statutory body of the Govt can overlook this?? Its a figging disgrace.

I'm sure you'd also be in trouble if you forced your staff to take ice baths and run 10kms time trials whilst yelling at them.

hes not alleging

hes going on the facts supplied by jab Watson/spikey mcviegh

He is alleging based on someone else alleging.

That does not make it factual.

You're assumption of ignorance by others in some of the basic ASADA/WADA official processes/protocol is an astounding assumption in itself. Well done. Oh, and i never said the process wouldn't run its course, whatever that may be.

Whilst i wouldn't be surprised to see 1 or 2 "token" infraction notices being issued to scape goats by year's end or over the off season, with more than likely a 6 month max suspension (and possibly a few more being given suspended sentence infractions), I look forward with interest in seeing how your prediction of impending disaster will hurl itself upon the AFL and the soon to be "essentially" broke Bombers in the next 12 months.

Sorry but i'm more than happy to agree to disagree with your impending doom call. I will happily ban myself from this site for the equivelent of the maximum length of suspension given IF your prediction of at least (approx) 10 Bomber players are given 2 year suspension infraction notices. And no, 1,2 or 3 won't qualify

I am happy to let it run its course. We will soon see who is right.