lol there would be virtually nil chance of a conviction.
Wider point: that level of use is below average for the overall population. Though I suspect coke/mdma are over-represented, and cannabis under-represented.
Social AFL Drug Debate
- Thread starter bedford
- Start date
- Tagged users None
lol there would be virtually nil chance of a conviction.
Wider point: that level of use is below average for the overall population. Though I suspect coke/mdma are over-represented, and cannabis under-represented.
I'm sorry but comparing illicit drug use to rape or assault is simply ridiculous.
Personally, i don't give a s**t what the players do in the off season, if they wanna eat a few pingas, have a few puffs on a jay or do a few lines i couldn't care less.
As long as they're not hurting anybody and it they come back in good condition, then how they enjoy themselves in the off season is up to them.
As for Hawthorn, its fair to say they earned it.
Bennell and Humt have left the club. Channel 7 reported North and Suns were in the bottom 4 over the weekend.
CD__
Formerly 1990Swan.
- Nov 2, 2015
- 4,372
- 8,273
- AFL Club
- Sydney
- Other Teams
- Melbourne Stars
For this demographic, the percentage of players taking illicit drugs would be significantly lower than the majority of white-collar jobs. The entire issue has been blown completely out of proportion.
Not that I care what they do during the offseason, but can we stop comparing taking drugs to crossing the street incorrectly? Thanks.
The problem with all of this is that it often comes with changes in behavior for the individuals.
Not for all but for some. Could this then compromise what the club/a club stands for?
I'm not saying it does but the whole thing sits very uncomfortably with me knowing the consequences of what will happen with a certain percentage of these individuals. If we are going to make comparisons with how many everyday people are using these things, then it is only reasonable to suggest that a similar percentage of players will go off the rails with what we know as life!
Yes!
Some one close to my family falls into this category & at 36 YO is now totally dependent on others.
If we want to play percentages, then if 9 is the correct figure, then perhaps 2 or 3 of these guys have f . .k ed up their lives going forward.
From now on, as supporters we are going to question any of our players that suddenly aren't playing or that are suddenly placed on the LTI list.
Who comes to mind right now? It's not AJ!
Not for all but for some. Could this then compromise what the club/a club stands for?
I'm not saying it does but the whole thing sits very uncomfortably with me knowing the consequences of what will happen with a certain percentage of these individuals. If we are going to make comparisons with how many everyday people are using these things, then it is only reasonable to suggest that a similar percentage of players will go off the rails with what we know as life!
Yes!
Some one close to my family falls into this category & at 36 YO is now totally dependent on others.
If we want to play percentages, then if 9 is the correct figure, then perhaps 2 or 3 of these guys have f . .k ed up their lives going forward.
From now on, as supporters we are going to question any of our players that suddenly aren't playing or that are suddenly placed on the LTI list.
Who comes to mind right now? It's not AJ!
swansfan51
Brownlow Medallist
- Jun 3, 2007
- 12,602
- 21,357
- AFL Club
- Sydney
- Other Teams
- The Exers
So in response to my other post, it is you that are the correct judge of morality and which criminal offences can be ignored, and which cannot?
As I said at the very beginning, regardless of your views on the severity of drug use, it is still illegal. For the record, I am a libertarian so I staunchly oppose such laws restricting personal choice, but regardless of my personal views the law is still there. I don't see why clubs have a right to completely ignore it because it suits their narrative.
I can see I'm firmly in the minority on this topic so I will end it here so the thread can move back on topic (damn mods).
MarkP
That guy
I could not give a continental about what they do to be honest. It is there private lives and as such we should all butt out including the AFL.
I only shake my head at men that rely on physical fitness as there once in a lifetime gold ticket, that runs out all too soon for most of them, that want to * themselves up on weird chemicals. Makes little sense to me.
This whole episode, however, is a prime example of Robert Conquests Laws of Politics in action.
1. Everyone is conservative about what he knows best.
2. Any organization not explicitly right-wing sooner or later becomes left-wing.
3. The simplest way to explain the behaviour of any bureaucratic organization is to assume that it is controlled by a cabal of its enemies.
The players and coaches are basically saying to Robbo etc to back off, the story was a non-starter you didn't have the exact facts (Bucks on 360 was nauseating in his deflections along these lines) and it is all your fault. Bucks was explicit in saying Robbo was (nearly) unethical in printing the story because it stopped him (Bucks) helping his players. I wonder if the players actually want Bucks help as an aside...anyway.
Very conservative about their inner circle the coaches and players.
The AFL is just a sporting organisation. It is not political. But of course it has taken on various left wing crusades like Pride round, Indigenous round etc etc. And now it is out there testing players for recreational drugs in the off season as some kind of big nanny to "help" them and look after themselves or something. How is that working out? They intruded into the private sphere for all the "good" reasons which are not really so good anyway. They are men and adults and have more support structure around them than the average Joe by a factor of over 9,000 - what mor ehelp do they need. Always intrusion from the nanny state.
Which of course leads us to the last point.
If you were an enemy of the AFL could you conceivable think of anything more damaging than getting your players to voluntarily test for illegal substances AND then leak the results? It would be hard to envisage wouldn't it? Like all those "betting" scandals involving $20 multi's and what not. Who cares if
If they had left it alone none of this would be an issue. And what purpose has it served? I could not care less what players do when they are off the clock, that is their business.
And all for feelings and seeming and righteousness. And "branding" - never forget the impossible standards of the brand.
Idiots.
I only shake my head at men that rely on physical fitness as there once in a lifetime gold ticket, that runs out all too soon for most of them, that want to * themselves up on weird chemicals. Makes little sense to me.
This whole episode, however, is a prime example of Robert Conquests Laws of Politics in action.
1. Everyone is conservative about what he knows best.
2. Any organization not explicitly right-wing sooner or later becomes left-wing.
3. The simplest way to explain the behaviour of any bureaucratic organization is to assume that it is controlled by a cabal of its enemies.
The players and coaches are basically saying to Robbo etc to back off, the story was a non-starter you didn't have the exact facts (Bucks on 360 was nauseating in his deflections along these lines) and it is all your fault. Bucks was explicit in saying Robbo was (nearly) unethical in printing the story because it stopped him (Bucks) helping his players. I wonder if the players actually want Bucks help as an aside...anyway.
Very conservative about their inner circle the coaches and players.
The AFL is just a sporting organisation. It is not political. But of course it has taken on various left wing crusades like Pride round, Indigenous round etc etc. And now it is out there testing players for recreational drugs in the off season as some kind of big nanny to "help" them and look after themselves or something. How is that working out? They intruded into the private sphere for all the "good" reasons which are not really so good anyway. They are men and adults and have more support structure around them than the average Joe by a factor of over 9,000 - what mor ehelp do they need. Always intrusion from the nanny state.
Which of course leads us to the last point.
If you were an enemy of the AFL could you conceivable think of anything more damaging than getting your players to voluntarily test for illegal substances AND then leak the results? It would be hard to envisage wouldn't it? Like all those "betting" scandals involving $20 multi's and what not. Who cares if
If they had left it alone none of this would be an issue. And what purpose has it served? I could not care less what players do when they are off the clock, that is their business.
And all for feelings and seeming and righteousness. And "branding" - never forget the impossible standards of the brand.
Idiots.
I've no problem with people doing whatever the hell they want.....................
..................until a later date when a guaranteed percentage of these people become a burden on those who love them & need to care for them because at an earlier time of their life, it was their right to do whatever the hell they wanted.
Take the health system. Can of worms I know. People smoke. Smoking causes many illnesses. The health system needs to help these people. Money & funding comes from taxes on cigs.
Health system struggling to cover for the growing number of smoking related illnesses. People keep smoking. Taxes on cigs go up.
Extra funding from increase in cigs tax helps alleviate the problem temporarily. People continue to smoke & get sick.
Life is full of choices!
Do whatever the hell you want.
Then sort yourself out!
..................until a later date when a guaranteed percentage of these people become a burden on those who love them & need to care for them because at an earlier time of their life, it was their right to do whatever the hell they wanted.
Take the health system. Can of worms I know. People smoke. Smoking causes many illnesses. The health system needs to help these people. Money & funding comes from taxes on cigs.
Health system struggling to cover for the growing number of smoking related illnesses. People keep smoking. Taxes on cigs go up.
Extra funding from increase in cigs tax helps alleviate the problem temporarily. People continue to smoke & get sick.
Life is full of choices!
Do whatever the hell you want.
Then sort yourself out!
Millky95
Starchild > You
Am I surprised we have 9 players on positive tests? No
Am I disappointed? Yes.
I have one of those "zero tolerance" on illegal because you never know what it'll do to you. In a career where your body is your lively hood, I can't believe they risked it.
Fully expected to have players on the list but was hoping it'd be 1-2 but 9. Still 13 less than another club which is somewhat promising.
Am I disappointed? Yes.
I have one of those "zero tolerance" on illegal because you never know what it'll do to you. In a career where your body is your lively hood, I can't believe they risked it.
Fully expected to have players on the list but was hoping it'd be 1-2 but 9. Still 13 less than another club which is somewhat promising.
replicant
Premiership Player
I think a little perspective is needed.
9 tests for meth... that would be terrible.
9 tests for ecstacy or pot... could not give a toss.
I recently failed a drug test. I tested positive for opiates. Turns out it was the poppy seeds in the bread my wife buys. Stopped eating it, re-tested, all clear. So these tests can be very sensitive. I don't know how sensitive. Does one puff on a joint result in a positive? One pill? But under this system, i would be recorded as a positive test. Should my name have been published? Under this system, people would think i'm a dug user, rather than a guy who likes fancy toast with his tea.
We need to keep this in context. If someone has tested positive for meth, i want the club doctor to know so they can get help. I don't want them vilified and prosecuted.
If someone has tested positive for pot, and they say, "Yeah i was on a European holiday and we had a joint in a cafe in Amsterdam", then they don't have a problem, it's not going to affect them, and the whole incident can be forgotten and we can move on.
Without knowing the level which is tested for, and the level of use by the people who tested positive, all we are doing is making people think "We've got 9 drug addicts on our team". It is better if the results are not publicised, and the club should not know (except the doctor) unless it is problem drug use.
We don't know enough. Hold fire until a problem actually occurs, like a player testing positive on game day.
9 tests for meth... that would be terrible.
9 tests for ecstacy or pot... could not give a toss.
I recently failed a drug test. I tested positive for opiates. Turns out it was the poppy seeds in the bread my wife buys. Stopped eating it, re-tested, all clear. So these tests can be very sensitive. I don't know how sensitive. Does one puff on a joint result in a positive? One pill? But under this system, i would be recorded as a positive test. Should my name have been published? Under this system, people would think i'm a dug user, rather than a guy who likes fancy toast with his tea.
We need to keep this in context. If someone has tested positive for meth, i want the club doctor to know so they can get help. I don't want them vilified and prosecuted.
If someone has tested positive for pot, and they say, "Yeah i was on a European holiday and we had a joint in a cafe in Amsterdam", then they don't have a problem, it's not going to affect them, and the whole incident can be forgotten and we can move on.
Without knowing the level which is tested for, and the level of use by the people who tested positive, all we are doing is making people think "We've got 9 drug addicts on our team". It is better if the results are not publicised, and the club should not know (except the doctor) unless it is problem drug use.
We don't know enough. Hold fire until a problem actually occurs, like a player testing positive on game day.
If it were up to me if any player tested positive for any drug above the level of cannabis (so cocaine and up) would get counseling, second offense is a 4 week ban, third offence is 8 week ban, 4th offence is 12 week ban.
Lakeside Swan
Premiership Player
- Banned
- #39
Well said. Society's issue with drugs is a result of lack of enforcement caused by pressure from the politically correct. Had we implemented a zero tolerance policy back in the 80's we could have got on top of this. Now the genie is out of the bottle and there is no way you'll ever get him back in.
Millky95
Starchild > You
The thing is, it's voluntary on the condition it's anonymous. Maybe the club knows who but you'd assume only the doctors would know
I personally don't believe drug taking should be criminalised (drug dealing would definitely be criminalised) but there are some professions where taking illegal drugs is a sackable offence, and I think the AFL should be one of those professions. I am not for zero tolerance, where the first offence they are sacked, but I am for punishments by the second offence and if it keeps happening then a player can have their contract ripped up.
Lakeside Swan
Premiership Player
- Banned
- #43
That's not entirely correct. Use of a prohibited substance, although rarely enforced, is still an offence and a positive drug test is evidence of that. The problem is that it's probably inadmissible.
Millky95
Starchild > You
Apparently, those who tested positive in the off-season are the number 1 targets for random testing during the season
As it should be. I wish though along with a strike system by the second strike players do get bans and those bans are made public so player X does not have a 4 week hamstring injury they did at training, player X has a second offence for using cocaine and is now suspended for 4 games.
MarkP
That guy
Lakeside Swan
Premiership Player
- Banned
- #48
The trouble is that drug use does hurt other people. It's supporting the drug manufacturers and helps to fund their crimes. Drug use also places a huge burden on our healthcare system which is why we have to spend 12 hours in the emergency department when we hurt ourselves. It hurts the loved ones of the users that die.
I for one expect better from my team, especially when I contribute to their wages. I expect them to be cleaner than any other AFL team. I expect them to not bring my club into disrepute. I expect my club to hold a higher moral standard than other clubs and the general community.
AFL players are paid extremely well for their work. Surely having a restraint on them using illegal drugs isn't too much to ask? Many other jobs have this requirement so why not the AFL?
Last edited:
swansfan51
Brownlow Medallist
- Jun 3, 2007
- 12,602
- 21,357
- AFL Club
- Sydney
- Other Teams
- The Exers
No I didn't, I said they are both criminal offences. That is an absolute statement of fact and cannot be disputed.
