No Oppo Supporters Non Bulldog Footy Talk - Bulldogs only - Part 3

[_M_16_]

So, apparently one club has had SIXTEEN players currently on its list declared as having a mental illness, thus cannot be drug tested.

Sorry, but this is clear as day exploitation of drugs rules, and also a slap in the face of those who are genuinely suffering mental illnesses, by faking it to avoid drug tests. Clearly they have something to hide if they have to resort to drug tactics. And you cannot tell me that the club itself isn't aware of it, or in some way involved.

I don't care if its us, the AFL needs to come clean and name this club involved.

 

[dogwatch]

So, apparently one club has had SIXTEEN players currently on its list declared as having a mental illness, thus cannot be drug tested.

Sorry, but this is clear as day exploitation of drugs rules, and also a slap in the face of those who are genuinely suffering mental illnesses, by faking it to avoid drug tests. Clearly they have something to hide if they have to resort to drug tactics. And you cannot tell me that the club itself isn't aware of it, or in some way involved.

I don't care if its us, the AFL needs to come clean and name this club involved.

Sorry M16 - not having a go at you - but this just sounds implausible. Where was it reported?

Unbelievable if true and totally fails the pub test. Even the drunkest and most gullible bloke at the bar would see through that one.

Also why can't someone with "mental illness" be subject to drug testing? I can't see the rationale for excusing them. Perhaps it would make more sense to deny any player the right to take the field until they undergo regular routine drug tests? I thought that was the rule anyway. There might be a sudden burst of spontaneous recoveries if they enforced it.

Finally if it really were true, how many days (or minutes) until WADA/ASADA call shenanigans? I can't see them tolerating it. The entire Tour de France field would suddenly be suffering mental illness. It sounds more like a poorly thought out facebook hoax than a genuine news report.

 

[_M_16_]

Sorry M16 - not having a go at you - but this just sounds implausible. Where was it reported?

Unbelievable if true and totally fails the pub test. Even the drunkest and most gullible bloke at the bar would see through that one.

Also why can't someone with "mental illness" be subject to drug testing? I can't see the rationale for excusing them. Perhaps it would make more sense to deny any player the right to take the field until they undergo regular routine drug tests? I thought that was the rule anyway. There might be a sudden burst of spontaneous recoveries if they enforced it.

Finally if it really were true, how many days (or minutes) until WADA/ASADA call shenanigans? I can't see them tolerating it. The entire Tour de France field would suddenly be suffering mental illness. It sounds more like a poorly thought out facebook hoax than a genuine news report.

Keyword - Apparently

Was posted on foxsports and SEN, doing the rounds at the moment. Never suggested its true, but IF its true, then its piss poor and a bad look on the players and club and should be dealt with accordingly. You are right though, it is very weak and a few things do not add up. But none the less, the talk is out there.

 

[TempletonTheRat]

Finally if it really were true, how many days (or minutes) until WADA/ASADA call shenanigans? I can't see them tolerating it. The entire Tour de France field would suddenly be suffering mental illness.

The difference here is Illicit drugs v Performance enhancing.
I very much doubt that WADA wouldn't drug test due to mental illness (although I don't know for sure)

 

[dogwatch]

The difference here is Illicit drugs v Performance enhancing.
I very much doubt that WADA wouldn't drug test due to mental illness (although I don't know for sure)

That's why I was looking for a source, as it doesn't really add up. (M16's post didn't specify only recreational drugs.)
Not sure it makes that much difference anyway but, yes I can imagine WADA being less interested if it's just recreational drug testing they are talking about.

 

[Bont2Bruce]

Sorry M16 - not having a go at you - but this just sounds implausible. Where was it reported?

https://www.heraldsun.com.au/sport/...s/news-story/484b37677e187cd6c07852e3d5f98a44

3AW host Ross Stevenson claimed he had been told 16 players from one AFL club had been made exempt from drug testing because of a mental health diagnosis.
“I had confirmed to me by someone that should know that there is indeed one AFL club that has 16 players on its list who have registered as having mental health issues, which means that they cannot be randomly drug tested for illicit drugs,” Stevenson said.

 

[Bont2Bruce]

The difference here is Illicit drugs v Performance enhancing.
I very much doubt that WADA wouldn't drug test due to mental illness (although I don't know for sure)

What currently changes when mental illness comes up is that the club doctor is able to effectively "outrank" WADA and take responsibility for the player's welfare.

 

[dogwatch]

What currently changes when mental illness comes up is that the club doctor is able to effectively "outrank" WADA and take responsibility for the player's welfare.

Thanks B2B. Still sounds pretty dodgy but at least we know now that it's only for illicit drugs.
That changes things ... slightly.

 

[Dogs_r_barking]

There is a strong correlation between poor mental health and drug use though, often an attempt to self medicate for the illness.

 

[timtamWB]

They're not banned from drug testing them completely, they just can't randomly test them. Because a random drug test is "too stressful".

Honestly it's stupid. You know whether or not you're going to fail the test, and the only reason you'd be stressed for a random drug test is if you knew you'd fail.

 

[Sentinel]

Looks like Shane Mumford's white line fever is affecting him both on and off the field.

Who throws a punch in a scratch match?

 

[Norm De Guerre]

Looks like Shane Mumford's white line fever is affecting him both on and off the field.

Who throws a punch in a scratch match?

I can only presume that he punched Toby Greene.

 

[Dogs_R_Us]

I can only presume hope that he punched Toby Greene.

EFA

 

[Lindsay_Gilbee]

Mumford is a campaigner. A sniping, piece of s**t. Afl was better without him.

 

[Mattdougie]

Get rid of the illicit drug testing all together and stop pretending they are actually prepared to enforce it.

Personally don’t care what players take its their life and if other sports don’t test and enforce why should we? And the players are role models blah blah crap doesn’t hold for me. If they don’t test they don’t fail so no reputations are hurt.

There are so many loop holes in the testing it’s made to not catch people. Poor Travis Tuck just got thrown under the bus.

Anyone that thinks a real illicit drug testing scheme wouldn’t ruin the game in a year is naive. I could name 50 players I know for a fact take drugs and where to find them most weekends if you want the proof yourself.

 

[Lindsay_Gilbee]

I know this is a very much taboo thing to think, but I just can’t help but laugh that’s Adams is injured at Brisbane. I hope he never plays a game for them.

 

[Virgin Dog]

Get rid of the illicit drug testing all together and stop pretending they are actually prepared to enforce it.

Personally don’t care what players take its their life and if other sports don’t test and enforce why should we? And the players are role models blah blah crap doesn’t hold for me. If they don’t test they don’t fail so no reputations are hurt.

There are so many loop holes in the testing it’s made to not catch people. Poor Travis Tuck just got thrown under the bus.

Anyone that thinks a real illicit drug testing scheme wouldn’t ruin the game in a year is naive. I could name 50 players I know for a fact take drugs and where to find them most weekends if you want the proof yourself.

Agree. How are illicit drugs in any way relevant to the game of footy? It's a no brainer to obviously test for performance enhancing drugs (including any party drugs that can somehow "enhance" performance) but if a player wants to get on the gear on the weekend, who gives a *. It's their lives, their decisions. If it starts to affect their footy, that's on them, but the AFL should not be policing this.

I can tell you I personally saw multiple Eagles player in the past few weeks consuming decent amounts of alcohol when they technically aren't supposed to - this is not some big scandal to me because I can tell you that the 3 I saw were arguably among the Eagles' top 5 players in the GF, so obviously this is not affecting their footy

 

[Libba39]

I see Gold Coast have named David Swallow and Jarod Witts as co-captains..

Very indecisive these dual captaincy set-ups, so much so that I'm forced to quote the great Austin Powers, "what is it baby, Witts or Swallows...."

 

[paulveed]

If the drugs they are taking, are 'illegal', even if possession of itself is not an offence under the law, certainly producing and or trafficking/ dealing are. So if players are purchasing illicit substance from criminals, mightn't that come under the heading of 'consorting with criminals', and unless each player does his own individual purchasing, and they buy some on behalf of their mates as well, I'm reasonably sure that would constitute an offence. I'm sure it would be hard to imagine a line of players waiting in turn to buy off a dealer, without them being noticed, and eventually caught out. Whether prohibition is right, wrong, or indifferent is not really relevant, the fact is that at this point in time, these substances are 'illegal', and so is consorting with criminals. So I jut don't see how we can merely say that "what player does in their own time is not a problem", the situation is clearly more complicated than that.

 

[Mattdougie]

I see Gold Coast have named David Swallow and Jarod Witts as co-captains..

Very indecisive these dual captaincy set-ups, so much so that I'm forced to quote the great Austin Powers, "what is it baby, Witts or Swallows...."

I’m not sure whether to laugh and shake my head and face palm

 

[Mattdougie]

If the drugs they are taking, are 'illegal', even if possession of itself is not an offence under the law, certainly producing and or trafficking/ dealing are. So if players are purchasing illicit substance from criminals, mightn't that come under the heading of 'consorting with criminals', and unless each player does his own individual purchasing, and they buy some on behalf of their mates as well, I'm reasonably sure that would constitute an offence. I'm sure it would be hard to imagine a line of players waiting in turn to buy off a dealer, without them being noticed, and eventually caught out. Whether prohibition is right, wrong, or indifferent is not really relevant, the fact is that at this point in time, these substances are 'illegal', and so is consorting with criminals. So I jut don't see how we can merely say that "what player does in their own time is not a problem", the situation is clearly more complicated than that.

Yes it’s a criminal issue as it should be with all individuals.

How is it possible to have a safe infecting room that is built to house an illegal substance use and no one that uses it be arrested?

I have a real issue with people being placed under different rules unless they actually serve the community ie police ambos and such

 

[paulveed]

As I pointed out Matt, possession is technically not an offence under the law, unless you have a "commercial quantity". Personally I am not sure if that amount is strictly quantified in the legislation, or it's volume is left to the discretion of the police and courts. While addicts are permitted personal use in the injecting room, if they came in with a commercial quantity, and or tried to sell any to others in the facility, that would constitute an offence. So here we are talking about possession which a I said, isn't strictly illegal, so it isn't seen a a legal problem.

 

[Mattdougie]

As I pointed out Matt, possession is technically not an offence under the law, unless you have a "commercial quantity". Personally I am not sure if that amount is strictly quantified in the legislation, or it's volume is left to the discretion of the police and courts. While addicts are permitted personal use in the injecting room, if they came in with a commercial quantity, and or tried to sell any to others in the facility, that would constitute an offence. So here we are talking about possession which a I said, isn't strictly illegal, so it isn't seen a a legal problem.

As I pointed out Matt, possession is technically not an offence under the law, unless you have a "commercial quantity". Personally I am not sure if that amount is strictly quantified in the legislation, or it's volume is left to the discretion of the police and courts. While addicts are permitted personal use in the injecting room, if they came in with a commercial quantity, and or tried to sell any to others in the facility, that would constitute an offence. So here we are talking about possession which a I said, isn't strictly illegal, so it isn't seen a a legal problem.

Then that is the problem isn’t it because if something is illegal and I possess it how can that not be a crime?

Again I’m not judging peole I’m just pointing out the hypocrisy of AFL players being judged by different rules. Wages should not be a deciding point on who and who shouldn’t be tested. I’d bet my a$$ half the CEOS of big corps would run for the hills if they had to be tested.

Illicit drugs are not performance enhancing and anyone that has done them will know this. I could imagine trying to play footy on some of the sh!t going around it would be impossible

 

[paulveed]

Matt, I'm not arguing whether the law as it stands is right or wrong [ and given laws are the work of lawyers and politicians, more often than not it will live up to the classic definition : "the law is an ass"]. Personally I think all players should be regularly and routinely tested, not just for performance enhancing, but also 'recreational' drugs, and the clubs and the league should automatically be given all results. They could then make an informed decision if the player should or shouldn't remain a part of their group/club. Given all clubs have a lot of very young and probably impressionable kids that look up to, and are likely to be influenced by the more senior players, clubs should have the right to decide if an individual is potentially a good or bad influence. They could also then counsel the player, hopefully before their drug use becomes a problem for the club or player himself.

 

[BrisDog]

Get rid of the illicit drug testing all together and stop pretending they are actually prepared to enforce it.

Personally don’t care what players take its their life and if other sports don’t test and enforce why should we? And the players are role models blah blah crap doesn’t hold for me. If they don’t test they don’t fail so no reputations are hurt.

There are so many loop holes in the testing it’s made to not catch people. Poor Travis Tuck just got thrown under the bus.

Anyone that thinks a real illicit drug testing scheme wouldn’t ruin the game in a year is naive. I could name 50 players I know for a fact take drugs and where to find them most weekends if you want the proof yourself.

MD, I kind of agree with you but I have personally trained using ritalin, a form of amphetamine. I lifted more, for longer, even cardio improved. I was a bottomless pit of energy. I would assume goey would be pretty similar let alone meth. Used properly these ‘recreational’ drugs enhance athletic ability no doubt in my mind.

On the other hand if GWS want to smoke cones or inject heroin before playing us I would have no problem.