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.

 

[Demonic Ascent]

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.

You're right I think fun should be one of the first things to be outlawed, not just in the AFL but in society as a whole. We can't have people having fun, life is serious business!

 

[Demonic Ascent]

Because I am not commenting on the morality of taking drugs. Grow your own and take yourself to whatever stupor you want. But if you purchase some of South American's finest, you are participating in a dreadful crime that only brings pain and suffering to anyone in its orbit from over there to our own streets.

And if you own an iPad or iPhone or wear Nike etc etc you are participating in a capitalist economy that is built on the blood, sweat and tears of people in other countries. So you'll forgive me if I don't buy your feigned morality.

 

[Demonic Ascent]

What would happen if one of the players tested was positive for a PED? Would that also result in an 'injury'? It's a slippery slope.

That player can still be subject to WADA testing out of competition and be found guilty of using a banned substance. Pulling them from a match won't stop that, it will only stop them being found guilty of using specific banned substances like coke in competition. It's not a circumvention of the anti-doping code that some seem to think it is.

 

[memoryofmchale]

Ok, I'm going to give this one more go, and them I'm out.

A player with coke in his system who pulls out of a match is avoiding a breach of the WADA code. I suppose you could say that he's "circumventing testing" in much the way that I'm circumventing the booze bus by getting a taxi home instead.


Sorry, what? No, I'm sure they test for PEDs etc on match days, midweek, whenever they want to. WTF is your point?


It's certainly a your club problem. We can agree on that.

If you avoid it by having a test off the books, that’s nothing like a taxi. That’s like having the keys to drive, putting them in and asking your boss to cover you. He has a breatho, tests you, then realises you’re over. He’s got this deal in place where if you are, he’ll quietly drive you away to avoid nasty headlines.

But if you weren’t in his company car, he wouldn’t have driven or stepped in.

And it’s a bit different because the “cops” are WADA and shouldn’t be circumvented to protect players.

 

[Freshwater]

And if you own an iPad or iPhone or wear Nike etc etc you are participating in a capitalist economy that is built on the blood, sweat and tears of people in other countries. So you'll forgive me if I don't buy your feigned morality.

This is all legal, we know some countries don’t have as good work place practices that we do, but we have to take them in good faith and not be patronising. And as the world goes hopefully it is in the direction that it’s always has been and we are all getting freer and wealthier. As for cocaine production and trafficking, this should even be compared, the misery is unbearable for millions of people because of the crime syndicates involved.

 

[The Tilt]

That’s like having the keys to drive, putting them in and asking your boss to cover you. He has a breatho, tests you, then realises you’re over. He’s got this deal in place where if you are, he’ll quietly drive you away to avoid nasty headlines.

So wait, the boss has a breatho that he uses to determine whether his employees are in a fit state to drive home? Sounds great: it’s a good thing the boss intervened, otherwise someone might have broken the law by driving over the limit.

That boss is a hero.

 

[Bluelegs]

Even though the spectacle of the AFL making up injuries to hide drug bans sounds bad, I think they're stuck between a rock and a hard place here. I get the feeling that now that it's been blown wide open any change in policy will likely be draconian and unhelpful.

The game will never be free of drugs and historically harsh penalties have only made drug issues worse and more secretive.

 

[HirdsTheWord]

Even though the spectacle of the AFL making up injuries to hide drug bans sounds bad, I think they're stuck between a rock and a hard place here. I get the feeling that now that it's been blown wide open any change in policy will likely be draconian and unhelpful.

The game will never be free of drugs and historically harsh penalties have only made drug issues worse and more secretive.

what's the hard place exactly?

players being held accountable for their actions? Like any other person who makes up society?

3 strike policy is more than fair. Frankly if you havent learned after the 2nd strike, you dont deserve to play. No other job I am aware of will give you 3 chances to take illegal drugs. You are usually sacked after the first.

 

[Bluelegs]

what's the hard place exactly?

someone being accountable for their actions?

3 strike policy is more than fair. Frankly if you havent learned after the 2nd strike, you dont deserve to play.

Imo the punishment doesn't fit the crime.

Don't see a need to end a players career because they had a couple of big nights out.

 

[mcgrath_truther]

Imo the punishment doesn't fit the crime.

Don't see a need to end a players career because they had a couple of big nights out.

do they get tested during the off season? i'd be more inclined to agree with you if that's the case, but if not, just save it for after the grand final.

 

[Obeanie1]

Geez the apologists defending professional athletes breaking the law and also breaching WADA rules is beyond a joke.

Taking drugs is fine, just having a bit of fun. Until it isnt.

AFL just proved they are corrupt and cannot be trusted. The culture at AFL House is toxic. They have installed a policy and system that covers up illegal activity and asks players and staff to lie to coaches, team mates and club officials not to mention fans.

How do we think all that plays out in the players mental health stakes. They know they are cheating, they know that the behaviour is not professional or legal. And the governing body who are more interested in brand image instruct them and enable them to cheat the WADA system. They ask the player and doctor to lie to people they work with and respect. Really?

This ongoing lie will slowly eat them up internally over time. So instead of helping the player improve behaviour they empower the player to use a loop hole and live a secret life.

Regarding doctor patient confidentiality thats BS. Thats the AFL setting up a system to cover up whats happening.

Been mentioned many times if you fail a test at work your employer is informed. Not by a doctor but by the process and officers who conduct the tests. No doctor patient confidentiality breached. Club Presidents and the head coach should be informed. Then they can help and also the player privately sits in front of the coach eye to eye and have a discussion. Not ducking and hiding from your coach and President.

Maybe if that happened we would have players supported to make better choices and they can stop lying to people they respect and actually win the mental health battle. The current AFL policy is harmful to long term mental health because brand image $$$ is more important to them.

 

[Obeanie1]

Honestly what people do in their spare time is up to them. It’s not illegal/banned to consume drugs (unless of course it’s performance enhancing in sports)

I think the media has unfairly made AFL players compulsory role models. They shouldn’t have to be.

It’s why every player in media is a boring robot saying the same crap every game post match. Just bag the other team a little bit when you smash them or something ffs.

Cocaine is now legal is it?

Did I miss something?

 

[HirdsTheWord]

Imo the punishment doesn't fit the crime.

Don't see a need to end a players career because they had a couple of big nights out.

that's why they get 3 chances. 3. Not 1, or 2 but 3 or at least it used to be3, now i think its 2. i'd say even 2 chances is enough.

Thats more than an Olympic athlete gets, and more than anyone else in their job gets if they rock up with drugs in their system.

They are kicking a ball around for something like an avg salary of 400k, for like 6 months of a year. Surely they can understand they need to sacrifice a night on drugs for that. Go for your life in the offseason. But during the season? give me a break.

 

[mcgrath_truther]

Cocaine is now legal is it?

Did I miss something?

it's only illegal if you get busted

 

[Muddiemoose]

Imo the punishment doesn't fit the crime.

Don't see a need to end a players career because they had a couple of big nights out.

Little bit more complex
Because it puts the afl brand at risk and ultimately the AFL makes its money through corporate advertising

If players have drug issues brands won’t want themselves associated with the league ultimately hurting the leagues bottom line

 

[Hap Hapablap]

seems what is planning to be proposed now is quite stringent treating the entire season as a "gameday"

 

[Corleone]

There is no "crime" if they don't play. They're preventing it. There are no long term benefits for illicit drug use.

It's the same as preventing them in engaging in sexual assault. Or would you rather that they do it so they can be held to account?

Avoiding the test is the crime .. I don't know how else to frame this.

 

[Muddiemoose]

Honestly what people do in their spare time is up to them. It’s not illegal/banned to consume drugs (unless of course it’s performance enhancing in sports)

I think the media has unfairly made AFL players compulsory role models. They shouldn’t have to be.

It’s why every player in media is a boring robot saying the same crap every game post match. Just bag the other team a little bit when you smash them or something ffs.

You fine with AFL players gambling on games?
After all it’s not illegal

 

[Elixuh]

Are the Demons going to be sanctioned for consistently bringing the game into disrepute over the past little while?

 

[Crankyhawk]

seems what is planning to be proposed now is quite stringent treating the entire season as a "gameday"

well, that would close the loophole. Would it also apply for finals when the team is no longer in the finals (ie is in competition the entire length of competition or just on individual teams - and if the latter would it also apply while your VFL/ reserves side was still in, for those eligible to play in both?)

 

[HirdsTheWord]

Honestly what people do in their spare time is up to them. It’s not illegal/banned to consume drugs (unless of course it’s performance enhancing in sports)

I think the media has unfairly made AFL players compulsory role models. They shouldn’t have to be.

It’s why every player in media is a boring robot saying the same crap every game post match. Just bag the other team a little bit when you smash them or something ffs.

There are most certainly recreational drugs that are illegal and in the case of ASADA are also banned. IE cocaine.

 

[Stamos]

Geez the apologists defending professional athletes breaking the law and also breaching WADA rules is beyond a joke.

They're not breaching WADA rules though.
This whole story is about not breaching the rules.

 

[owen87]

well, that would close the loophole. Would it also apply for finals when the team is no longer in the finals (ie is in competition the entire length of competition or just on individual teams - and if the latter would it also apply while your VFL/ reserves side was still in, for those eligible to play in both?)

I'd assume so long as your team (VFL or AFL) is active you're 'in competition'.

So if the AFL season is over but you're eligible for VFL finals, no nose beers.

 

[HirdsTheWord]

They're not breaching WADA rules though.
This whole story is about not breaching the rules.

No, it's about circumventing the process and then lying about it.

 

[CliffMcTainshaw]

Honestly what people do in their spare time is up to them. It’s not illegal/banned to consume drugs (unless of course it’s performance enhancing in sports)

Try using that argument to a policeman when you get arrested. Of course it is against the law to use, possess, cultivate or traffic a drug of dependence, including marijuana, heroin, amphetamines, cocaine, LSD and ecstasy. Look up the Commonwealth laws.
As far as the argument, "what people do in their spare time is up to them", it's a poor one. People like Ivan Milat and Gerald Ridsdale probably thought the same thing.