5 hours ago, Ethan Tremblay said:

One strike and I lose my job. The AFL are ridiculously lenient on their players. I have no doubt that this ‘leniency’ contributes to players dabbling in illegal drug use. 

I believe the risk factors and dangerous tools in your job might be a bit different from those of an afl footballer Ethan. Just saying...

1 hour ago, Moonshadow said:

I believe the risk factors and dangerous tools in your job might be a bit different from those of an afl footballer Ethan. Just saying...

You’re not wrong, placing stickers on apples can be more dangerous than people think. 

Edited February 25, 20196 yr by Ethan Tremblay

49 minutes ago, Bombay Airconditioning said:

How does citing mental health issues enable a player to bypass a drug test?

Why did the players ever agree to hair testing, was it tied into the EBA?

 

cheers

Got it in one BA.

1 hour ago, Bombay Airconditioning said:

How does citing mental health issues enable a player to bypass a drug test?

Why did the players ever agree to hair testing, was it tied into the EBA?

 

cheers

Q.1. Apparently, the Code allows mental health issues, as an exemption from testing.  It doesn't seem like players need to supply medical evidence to such claims.  It sounds like a big loophole in the code.  One would think that if a player was too unwell to take a test, he is too unwell to play at AFL standard. 

If more than a few players at a club were claiming mhi to exempt from testing one would be concerned about the management of that club.  Alarm bells should be sounding at the AFL long before 16 (or 10 or 5) players from one club used mhi as an out.   AFL prefers to keep its head in the sand and hope it all goes away.

After all, its the optics that count, right?

Q.2.  I don't know the history of the testing

Edited February 25, 20196 yr by Lucifer's Hero

That’s what happens when players can’t have a fagg and a beer. 

Edited February 25, 20196 yr by america de cali

6 hours ago, Demonland said:

I think there should be a no tolerance policy for those caught. I have never been a fan of a three strikes policy.

Three strikes is like a horse on the horizon, disappearing into a neo-Gothic mist and strongly running free and confused now that it has bolted. It's going to take a helluva effort to get him back into the paddock.

 

Edited February 25, 20196 yr by Deemania since 56

29 minutes ago, america de cali said:

That’s what happens when players can’t have a fagg and a beer. 

Aren't they called Fads these days?

2 hours ago, Deeminion said:

Is it unreasonable for me to want the players that play for my club to abstain from recreational drugs in order to achieve the maximum in peak performance in the prime of their playing careers?

These guys get paid a boat load to play at their best and be in peak physical and mental conditioning. I don't want them to be robots and they don't have to be choir boys but I don't want them to be off their nut or out of their skins on the weekends. I want premierships which means for 26 weeks in and out and for the preseasons their minds and bodies need to be on the job to achieve that.

There is no room for recreational drugs to infect the minds and bodies of elite athletes.

So what is it? Abstinence or not having to be choir boys. You have to pick one or the other. 

I'd suggest more players have had their performance impacted by mental health - mostly depression and anxiety - in recent years than drugs and that comes from bottling up the stress of their jobs. Give me a player at 95% body capacity and 100% mental capacity any day over a player who treats their body like a temple but is fighting mental challenges.

I'd love for players to go out  after a game and have somewhere between 0 and 5 vodka lime sodas, dance, make friends and laugh for a while and call it a night for 40 weeks a year and then live like monks for the other 10 in the lead in to finals but that's not going to happen.

Firstly for most people it's not realistic to go 25 weeks straight without at least having some nights when you let your hair down, secondly the alcohol might be worse than the drugs for their bodies anyway! That's not a reason to do drugs but zero tolerance and name and shame could see a lot of guys throwing careers away over something that didn't hurt them or anyone else.

2 hours ago, binman said:

And the AFL made a rod for it's own back including testing for recreational drugs. Stupid. I understand their motivation  (getting treatment for players) but they should have stayed well clear of something that is none of their business. That said I as applaud the hark min approach they have taken.

They almost had no choice but to do something after the Eagles drama. I think that's what a lot of people are forgetting. Cousins - life ruined. Kerr -jailed, Fletcher - had to be resuscitated. Chick - off the rails. 

They made a big error publicising so much about the 3 strikes, loop holes and more than anything disclosing data about the number of players testing positive and on 2 strikes. They went out and publicised it like it was something to be proud of when it should be all in the background. 

3 hours ago, DeeSpencer said:

The current policy has stopped a repeat Ben Cousins. That was its aim and it has been successful. 

Don't be so sure about that 'Dee'...it's still early days & there have been more than Ben who have destroyed/lost their lives.

1 hour ago, america de cali said:

That’s what happens when players can’t have a fagg and a beer. 

Alan Rowarth used to light up after every quarter...

 

Drugs are obviously a huge problem in society not just AFL. Just because these footballers are elite athletes doesn't mean there any different to your average local footballer or tradie. At my local club you go out on a Saturday night with 20 blokes & 15 would be doing drugs, it's just the modern world. Yeah I get these players are paid good money to play football & represent the AFL & club but I guarante that's the furthest thing from their mind on a weekend... I work with people who do drugs & we are subject to random drug tests & its one strike and your out, yet they run the gaunlet, could only imagine what some would do with 2 strikes. Plus the league bosses aren't far behind the players, anyone who thinks their ammune to it are kidding themsleves..

I know for a fact one of our players has pulled his head in over the past 18 months & he's output has skyrocketed.

Nick Riewoldt  denies recreational drug use at St Kilda in his time there.   He probably also denies their documented dwarf tossing and their issue with school girls.

The bloke is full of [censored].

I cannot believe that any media outlet is giving airplay to Nick Riewoldt on moral/health issues in sport.

Under his leadership and later captaincy, the entire St Kilda playing group was a disgrace to sport for every social-issue reason you could think of - performance enhancing drugs, illicit drugs, sexting and nude photos, sex with probably underage girls, group sex with drugged and drunken girls who might not even have been willing, the list goes on. He was an amazing footballer but has no credibility beyond football. 

 

really disappointing that the MH movement is being tarnished by people taking drugs and this 3 strike policy. 

I don't really understand why the AFL are testing for non performance enhancing drugs.  My opinion is the AFL should deal with things that are under the scope of the AFL. Recreational drugs are an issue for the police so I would not be testing players aside from performance enhancing drugs.

5 minutes ago, DubDee said:

really disappointing that the MH movement is being tarnished by people taking drugs and this 3 strike policy. 

I don't really understand why the AFL are testing for non performance enhancing drugs.  My opinion is the AFL should deal with things that are under the scope of the AFL. Recreational drugs are an issue for the police so I would not be testing players aside from performance enhancing drugs.

problem is many "illicit" drugs are performance (potentially) enhancing such as meth and coke which are commonly consumed as "party" drugs

What a lot of people forget is how drugs actually stay in your system. Yeah it's all random but players drink, some smoke. We know this. If a player as a joint after a match to unwind, I don't see anything wrong with that. It's better than them going out and downing 10 beers. But marijuana stays in your system for weeks. You can do cocaine on a Saturday, get tested on a Wednesday and be clean. Weed should be discouraged like alcohol and smoking. If a player has a BA reading of 1.0 they're not getting suspended are they? The only way to get 0% use of illicit (cocaine, ecstasy) drugs is to do testing every day. Or at least have set testing to maximise coverage. So tests every Mon Weds and Fri. 

Even having a strict 4-week ban on the first strike doesn't actually address the fact that most illicit drugs can be easily filtered out of the system in a fast and efficient way. 

10 minutes ago, daisycutter said:

problem is many "illicit" drugs are performance (potentially) enhancing such as meth and coke which are commonly consumed as "party" drugs

...and they are treated as such if they are found in their system on game day as happened to the C/wood player last season.

So there is no problem if the AFL don't test, the performance enhancing aspect is already covered by WADA.

 

15 hours ago, DeeSpencer said:

So what is it? Abstinence or not having to be choir boys. You have to pick one or the other. 

I'd suggest more players have had their performance impacted by mental health - mostly depression and anxiety - in recent years than drugs and that comes from bottling up the stress of their jobs. Give me a player at 95% body capacity and 100% mental capacity any day over a player who treats their body like a temple but is fighting mental challenges.

I'd love for players to go out  after a game and have somewhere between 0 and 5 vodka lime sodas, dance, make friends and laugh for a while and call it a night for 40 weeks a year and then live like monks for the other 10 in the lead in to finals but that's not going to happen.

 

I see you've extended the concept of 2 byes per year to eliminate two full weeks from the calendar.

55 minutes ago, rjay said:

...and they are treated as such if they are found in their system on game day as happened to the C/wood player last season.

So there is no problem if the AFL don't test, the performance enhancing aspect is already covered by WADA.

 

i know that, i was just pointing out that "illicit" and "performance enhancing" are not always mutually exclusive 

18 hours ago, Ethan Tremblay said:

You’re not wrong, placing stickers on apples can be more dangerous than people think. 

I got one with 3 stickers on it the other day...should have known !!

Edited February 26, 20196 yr by Wadda We Sing

2 hours ago, Petraccattack said:

Nick Riewoldt  denies recreational drug use at St Kilda in his time there.   He probably also denies their documented dwarf tossing and their issue with school girls.

The bloke is full of [censored].

Gotta love this one. In my news feed yesterday were 2 articles in a row from Nick.

1. Drug use is out of control.

2. Drugs use not an issue when I was captain

1 hour ago, Wadda We Sing said:

I got one with 3 stickers on it the other day...should have known !!

Do you subscribe to the "3 stickers and you're out" rule?

3 hours ago, daisycutter said:

problem is many "illicit" drugs are performance (potentially) enhancing such as meth and coke which are commonly consumed as "party" drugs

not a problem that I can see.  if any performance enhancing drugs (including coke/meth on game day) found - suspension.  if none, no action.

get rid of the ridiculous 3 strike policy that does noone any favours

1 hour ago, BAMF said:

Gotta love this one. In my news feed yesterday were 2 articles in a row from Nick.

1. Drug use is out of control.

2. Drugs use not an issue when I was captain

yeah he has lost all credibility there.  he is trying to protect his mates

Like the saying...  "the fish rots from the head".

 

Stop the blood tests for illicit drugs all-together.

And take up hair testing,  every 3 months,  on all players for drug use.

 

Further,  as the 1st line suggests...   "fish and heads".

Let the hair tests begin...  from the top down.   Starting with  Gillon,  and the commissions themselves...  then all the way down thru club CEO's,  and administrations,  and onto staff,  and then players.

 

Test them all,  if they want things to change.