West Coast Eagles shocking drug culture

Remove this Banner Ad

Log in to remove this ad.

Kwality said:
Certainly be worth a read IF it is not simply a rewrite of earlier media coverage.
What is new here?
Click to expand...
Demetriou was a business partner of WCE chairman in 2007 Dalton Gooding the Dental false teeth import guys Ruthinium Group Pty Ltd both were directors, Demetriou MD, the relationship was never revealed, no conflict of interest was revealed and the AFL never sanctioned the WCE for any poor administration of a decade long slack oversight. Demetriou and AFL commissioned the Gillard report into what happened at WCE and he made sure it was never released. IIRC Warner said on the Footology podcast only 3 copies of the report was ever printed.
 
Last edited:

(Log in to remove this ad.)

Kwality said:
Footy players are human beings.
Click to expand...
I'm not denying that, and we all make mistakes in life, but in my opinion the game has had a drug problem for many years and i say again that's why the 3 strike rule was brought in, and lets never forget that Essendon were tipped off when the testers were in town and all records of what was injected into the players disappeared. So why did the records of what was injected into the players disappear? So the obviously conclusion to me is that somebody at AFL house knew what was going on at the bombers and until the testers were in town and blind eye was turned towards the bombers.
 
Aussie in exile said:
I'm not denying that, and we all make mistakes in life, but in my opinion the game has had a drug problem for many years and i say again that's why the 3 strike rule was brought in, and lets never forget that Essendon were tipped off when the testers were in town and all records of what was injected into the players disappeared. So why did the records of what was injected into the players disappear? So the obviously conclusion to me is that somebody at AFL house knew what was going on at the bombers and until the testers were in town and blind eye was turned towards the bombers.
Click to expand...

Ahem. This is the West Coast thread.
 
Aussie in exile said:
Sometimes we have to digress to make a point and sometimes people don't want to hear the truth
Click to expand...

There's a difference between 'taking drugs' and a 'drug problem'.

I'd take a stab that many, if not the majority, of AFL players dabble in the illicit party drugs category, without a drug problem or a culture of drug taking.
 
owen87 said:
There's a difference between 'taking drugs' and a 'drug problem'.

I'd take a stab that many, if not the majority, of AFL players dabble in the illicit party drugs category, without a drug problem or a culture of drug taking.
Click to expand...
A majority yes, but not all, and you are missing the point about why the AFL brought in the 3 strike rule and why somebody tipped off Essendon when the the testers were and why Essendon destroyed or lost all evidence of what was injected into their players.
Why do you think the AFL brought in the 3 strike rule?
Why do you think Essendon destroyed or lost all evidence as to what was injected into their players?
Why do you think the life long druggie Ben Cousins never tested positive for drugs when he was playing?
 
Aussie in exile said:
A majority yes, but not all, and you are missing the point about why the AFL brought in the 3 strike rule and why somebody tipped off Essendon when the the testers were and why Essendon destroyed or lost all evidence of what was injected into their players.
Why do you think the AFL brought in the 3 strike rule?
Why do you think Essendon destroyed or lost all evidence as to what was injected into their players?
Why do you think the life long druggie Ben Cousins never tested positive for drugs when he was playing?
Click to expand...

What exactly are you trying to argue about in this thread?

The AFL conducts brand management, to the surprise of no one.

EFC was a sports doping issue, vs an illicit drugs issue where the three strikes policy is relevant.

You're trying to conflate a few things together here that are really only peripherally related.
 
owen87 said:
What exactly are you trying to argue about in this thread?

The AFL conducts brand management, to the surprise of no one.

EFC was a sports doping issue, vs an illicit drugs issue where the three strikes policy is relevant.

You're trying to conflate a few things together here that are really only peripherally related.
Click to expand...
What i am saying is the AFL are more concerned with protecting the AFL brand rather the player welfare
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

A
This is the way to treat drug cheats
2
Replies
25
Views
1K
PoppedCorn
PoppedCorn

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top