News Clubs operating league-sanctioned drug testing program - Harley Balic’s Dad Speaks

[Chief]

AFL Statement

As well as being a signatory to World Anti-Doping Agency (WADA) code via the Australian Football Anti-Doping Code, the AFL has an Illicit Drug Policy which has been in place since 2005, and at the core of the policy is a commitment to player wellbeing and welfare.

The AFL Illicit Drug Policy (IDP) is a policy that specifically deals with the use of illicit substances out of competition and is focussed on player health and well-being. The policy seeks to reduce substance use and drug-related harms for AFL players and aims to inform and rehabilitate players through education and intervention.

It exists alongside and in addition to the Australian Football Anti-Doping Code which covers prohibited substances including some illicit substances in competition as prescribed by the WADA prohibited list.

Urine tests conducted by doctors to determine if a player has used illicit substances are part of the AFL’s Illicit Drug Policy medical model and have been for some time.

Doctors may use those urine tests to obtain an immediate result to determine whether any illicit substance remains in a player’s system. This is normally conducted at the club or in the doctors consulting rooms.

If the test shows a substance is still in the players system, a doctor will take steps to prevent a player from taking part in either training and/or an AFL match both for their own health and welfare and because having illicit substances in your system on match day may be deemed performance enhancing and a breach of the Australian Football Anti-Doping Code (depending on the substance involved).

It is absolutely imperative that no doctor or club official should ever allow or encourage a player to take the field knowing they have recently taken an illicit substance that may be harmful to their health and/or may be deemed performance-enhancing (as many illicit substances are on match day).

We support the WADA code (as it applies to our sport through the Australian Football Anti-Doping Code) and support the fundamental premise on which it is founded that any player who takes the field with a performance-enhancing prohibited substance in their system should be treated in accordance with the Anti-Doping Code and face heavy sanctions.

The AFL observes that AFL players are not immune to the societal issues faced by young people with respect to illicit substances and also acknowledges that illicit drug use problems commonly co-occur with other mental health conditions.

While the AFL’s medical model involves a multidisciplinary healthcare management plan, the monitoring of players is highly confidential. A doctor or healthcare professional generally cannot disclose the nature of the clinical intervention or condition to others unless the player willingly consents.

We understand that the Illicit Drugs Policy can be improved and we are working with the AFLPA and players to improve the policy and the system to ensure we are better able to change the behaviours of players. But we are unapologetic about club and AFL doctors taking the correct steps to ensure that any player who they believe has an illicit substance in their system does not take part in any AFL match and that doctor patient confidentially is upheld and respected.

The AFL will always be required to make decisions which seek to balance competing rights and interests. The medical interests and welfare of players is a priority for the AFL given everything we know about the risks facing young people generally and those who play our game in particular.

 

[raymond35]

A bunch of alcoholic AFL supporters getting super upset about AFL players taking drugs in their free time

What an odd thing to say.

 

[threenewpadlocks]

No.

Right. So the AFL has admitted that it does not apply their own illicit drugs policy in a manner understood by the general public or by SIA itself (as SIA have come out and stated today that they're assessing the allegations), but we're led to believe that they're 100% complying with the WADA code through the AFL Anti-Doping Policy 100% perfectly all the time in doing this? That the AFL has admitted to pulling out of players testing positive, but 100% of the time they have done so at 11.58pm the night before or earlier?

I have a bridge to sell you.

 

[MP_]

Don't be a wowser.

Ok champ

 

[Present Not Past]

I just don’t have a do gooder attitude like you and judge others if they don’t fall in.

A bit of reading on the history of why illegal drugs are illegal would be enlightening for you.

The legal drugs in alcohol and cigarettes are of course totally harmless along with all the gambling that plagues our society.

If all drugs were legalised, could you trust anybody to do anything properly without rigorous drug testing?

 

[speedpeck23]

Because their role as a professional athlete isn't limited to game day. There are a plethora of rules that all athletes have to follow at all times.

The SIA and WADA are allowed to test any athlete at any time and any where. During a game. During the off season. At any time.

So irrespective of whatever the AFL does players can be tested anytime by WADA and SIA. Players are free to get a test of their own volition with any doctor.

The Doctor is legally required to maintain confidentiality at all times for all patients. It is a legal requirement that the release of any medical information by a doctor to another person or persons has to be authorized in writing by the player.

It is deemed that taking some drugs may enhance or compromise a players on field performance and may adversely effect their health.

It may or may not be by design but from a medico-legal point of view the AFL look safe.

 

[Demonic Ascent]

I’m so sorry I have morals and ethics.

Have your morals and ethics, don't impose them on everyone else. You're not the nation's nanny.

It's hilarious you think you are the only one with morals and ethics. Everyone has morals and ethics, they just differ to yours. Self righteousness is unbecoming.

 

[threenewpadlocks]

So irrespective of whatever the AFL does players can be tested anytime by WADA and SIA. Players are free to get a test of their own volition with any doctor. The Doctor is legally required to maintain confidentiality at all times for all patients. It is a legal requirement that the release of any medical information by a doctor to another person or persons has to be authorized in writing by the player.
It is deemed that taking some drugs may enhance or compromise a players on field performance and may adversely effect their health. It may or may not be by design but from a medico-legal point of view the AFL look safe.

Confidentiality requirements doesn't prevent a doctor from potentially being in breach of an anti-doping code, that's the point. Michele Ferrari who doped Lance Armstrong can't claim confidentiality as to the reason why he's no longer allowed to be a doctor.

Of course that the players are allowed to get a test of their own volition. If the doctor learns of that test of that volition that they're breaching anti-doping codes they're required to report it otherwise be in breach of the code themself.

 

[MP_]

Have your morals and ethics, don't impose them on everyone else. You're not the nation's nanny.

It's hilarious you think you are the only one with morals and ethics. Everyone has morals and ethics, they just differ to yours. Self righteousness is unbecoming.

What’s hilarious is my stance is living rent free in your head and you hate that.

 

[Demonic Ascent]

Gotta say though when I drink a beer watching the footy, the team that made that beer at the factory haven’t been kidnapping, murdering and torturing others at the factory in the process of making that beer.

Big difference between consuming and supporting alcohol from regulated companies and supporting these other “entities”.

Accepting its use is also accepting and promoting these events. Just because they don’t occur on our doorstop in plain sight doesn’t mean we just allow it.

Easy solution, decriminalise and regulate.

 

[Demonic Ascent]

They clearly do and it’s quite grim that anyone would advocate for such a blatant invasion of privacy

To quote a great man, "I hate to advocate drugs, alcohol, violence, or insanity to anyone, but they've always worked for me."

 

[RAPPA]

And we wait until the mental health card is used for the new player who is outed with the dubious hammy

 

[Demonic Ascent]

What’s hilarious is my stance is living rent free in your head and you hate that.

Whats hilarious is your stance is indefensible.

 

[mighty_lions]

Have your morals and ethics, don't impose them on everyone else. You're not the nation's nanny.

It's hilarious you think you are the only one with morals and ethics. Everyone has morals and ethics, they just differ to yours. Self righteousness is unbecoming.

ahh its the law but you seem to be some sort of druggy sympathiser

 

[Demonic Ascent]

But then by your definition they did have PED's in their system and therefore broke rules by the fact they theoretically could have benefitted from it. If you're claiming it wasn't intentional, then that's the basis for the 24 to 18 month discount. Obviously it's not the reason why players are racking up, but the sequence of events has already happened - they were tested in the off-season and simultaneously got both a 'strike' each and a anti-doping suspension

That was my point though, people in here commenting that it is used as a masking agent ie players using drugs like cocaine to mask PED use.

 

[Demonic Ascent]

ahh its the law but you seem to be some sort of druggy sympathesiser

ahh yeah, you couldn't tell from my avatar

"it's the law" - the AFL are not the executive arm of government, it is not their role to enforce the criminal code.

 

[mighty_lions]

ahh yeah, you couldn't tell from my avatar

"it's the law" - the AFL are not the executive arm of government, it is not their role to enforce the criminal code.

you were talking about morals and ethics, we have laws to help society function, but sure if you're advocating drugs are fine then good for you

 

[memoryofmchale]

No, most of them are probably just getting on the bags on a night out. But, is that the only drug testing that’s being done, or is there other drugs they are self reporting for.

Hypothetically, would the AFL rather a player self-report about steroids or deal with the headline when caught?

 

[Demonic Ascent]

Isn't pulling them out of a game to avoid testing the same as Lachie Whitfield hiding out to avoid testing? Didn't he get dragged through the mud.

WADA can still test them. They just can't be done for cocaine because they didn't play that weekend and it's only illegal "in competition" which is the day of the game. WADA can test out of competition for PEDs is my understanding.

 

[Visions]

I was wondering how the AFL would respond to this after being caught with their pants down, have to say doubling down on the issue wasn’t one of them.

Using the good old player welfare angle. Yes, I’m sure helping players get away with testing positive to drugs and escaping punishment will lead to same players taking a good hard look at themselves instead of making them feel untouchable knowing full well they can continue to circumnavigate the system.

AFL are enablers in this case, plain and simple.

Every day they get closer to reaching FIFA levels of integrity.

 

[Demonic Ascent]

you were talking about morals and ethics, we have laws to help society function, but sure if you're advocating drugs are fine then good for you

Yes I would advocate for the legalisation of some drugs and the decriminalisation of others. Laws are not set in stone, they can evolve.

 

[Demonic Ascent]

Because their role as a professional athlete isn't limited to game day. There are a plethora of rules that all athletes have to follow at all times.

The SIA and WADA are allowed to test any athlete at any time and any where. During a game. During the off season. At any time.

There are several points listed in the WADA code that describe in detail that players are not allowed to avoid being tested. Just recently Willie Rioli was punished for tampering with a test. To be clear; you cannot avoid being tested by WADA or the SIA - that in itself is a breach.

The league have developed an entire practice to avoid being tested.

Read what Wilkie said. This is the issue.

If WADA are allowed to test anywhere, anytime then they are not circumventing the test at all. The player can still be subject to testing it's just that it won't be deemed "in competition" so a positive coke test won't see them spend 2-4 years on the sidelines.

Right. So the AFL has admitted that it does not apply their own illicit drugs policy in a manner understood by the general public or by SIA itself (as SIA have come out and stated today that they're assessing the allegations), but we're led to believe that they're 100% complying with the WADA code through the AFL Anti-Doping Policy 100% perfectly all the time in doing this? That the AFL has admitted to pulling out of players testing positive, but 100% of the time they have done so at 11.58pm the night before or earlier?

I have a bridge to sell you.

Which dot point does it circumvent?

 

[mighty_lions]

Yes I would advocate for the legalisation of some drugs and the decriminalisation of others. Laws are not set in stone, they can evolve.

Ohhhh so now you are preaching your morals and ethics that are not even the current laws, makes sense


Sent from my iPhone using BigFooty.com

 

[greatwhiteshark]

Got to love how the AFL think they are helping players. Most players that do take recreational drugs do it only for fun. They are not addicted, they don’t need rehab and they don’t have drug issues. It’s just a bit of fun. They are pro athletes.
The one in a million like Ben Cousins are addicts.
The AFL need to simply go to a zero tolerance policy and until they do then nothing will ever change.

 

[Demonic Ascent]

Ohhhh so now you are preaching your morals and ethics that are not even the current laws, makes sense


Sent from my iPhone using BigFooty.com

Funny that you would take my response to your post as "preaching", I was just reaffirming your assessment of my view. I'm not suggesting people should take drugs, just that if they do they shouldn't be locked up. Each to their own, if kumbuya on a Sunday morning is how you get your rocks off no skin off my nose.

 

[Corkintheocean]

Because it's absolutely p*** weak and opportunistic by a bloke who has form in this regard. You've got evidence that the AFL covered up drug use (at my team or anyone else's), then have some balls and air those documents in public.

I take an active interest in politics, using PP for such petty/benign things (in the grand scheme of what government exists for) is a coward's way out.

Also, the bloke has several axes to grind with major sporting bodies, do you know what his major policy platform is by any chance?

Potting the bloke on an anonymous forum is hardly the height of chivalry.