News AFL Drug Scandal (breaking)

Remove this Banner Ad

Dec 18, 2011
898
1,710
QLD
AFL Club
Brisbane Lions
Other Teams
Brisbane Roar,Halifax Town AFC

AFL drugs bombshell: MP tells federal parliament of secret illicit drug tests allegedly authorised by league’s top medico​

Federal parliament has been told of secret tests allegedly authorised by the AFL’s top medico to help players evade detection on match day in what one MP claims could be ‘multi-hundred million dollar fraud’.

Follow

4 min read
March 26, 2024 - 8:32PM
News Corp Australia Sports Newsroom

A former Melbourne Football Club doctor has sensationally admitted to conducting “off the books” illicit drug tests – allegedly authorised by the AFL – to help players evade detection on match days.
The doctor-turned-whistleblower says players who confessed to having taken drugs in the days before AFL games were given secret tests to ensure their systems were clear or were advised to “fake an injury” so they would not risk being tested and suspended for breaches of the World Anti-Doping Agency code.
Federal MP Andrew Wilkie told parliament on Tuesday night he had received a signed statement from former Demons head doctor Zeeshan Arain in which he accused the AFL of facilitating the clandestine drug tests at Dorevitch Pathology in Heidelberg.
Mr Wilkie called on Prime Minister Anthony Albanese to intervene in the scandal.

MP Andrew Wilkie has called on Prime Minister Anthony Albanese to intervene in the scandal.
In a stunning address, Mr Wilkie said: “I rise to bring the house’s attention to deeply troubling allegations of egregious misconduct within the AFL provided by former Melbourne Football Club president Glen Bartlett, former Melbourne Football Club doctor Zeeshan Arain and Shaun Smith, father of Melbourne player and now alleged drug trafficker Joel Smith.
“The allegations include the prevalence of drug abuse and other prohibited behaviour across the AFL, off the books drug-testing of players at Dorevitch Pathology in Heidelberg, facilitated by the former chief medical officer of the AFL Peter Harcourt, the resting of players testing positive in these secret tests, ostensibly on account of injury, wilful inaction by AFL chairman Richard Goyder, and former CEO Gill McLachlan …
“The allegations are credible, detailed and provided in signed statements which have been given to me which clearly identify the sources of the information.
“The allegations are also deeply troubling ... Such appalling behaviour endangers the life, safety and future of players and officials, subverts the official drug testing conducted by Sports Integrity Australia on behalf of the World Anti-Doping Authority and is a fraud on the governments that provide millions of dollars in support to the AFL directly and indirectly through tax-breaks, grants and beneficial capital works, conditional on the AFL being a signatory to and complying with WADA code.
“This is not conjecture, with Dr Arain describing the matter clearly in this signed statement where he states that, and I’ll quote Dr Arain: The off-the-books testing took place at Heidelberg Dorevitch. The former chief health officer of the AFL Peter Harcourt gave me the contact of the guy at Heidelberg who would do the testing.
“Here is what happened as has been described to me (by Dr Arain): The AFL wants the player to play at all costs and so the cover-up begins.
“If there are no illegal drugs in the player’s system they are free to play, and if there are drugs in their system the player is often asked to fake an injury.
“They are advised to lie about a condition, while the results of the off-the-book tests are kept secret and are never shared with Sports Integrity Australia or WADA.
“In other words, hundreds of thousands of Australians will watch the game not knowing that the game has been secretly manipulated by the AFL and thousands of Australians will bet on that game not knowing the game has been secretly manipulated by the AFL.
“So next time you hear a player has a hamstring injury, you could be forgiven for wondering what is really going on.
“But as Dr Arain explains, this isn’t just a Melbourne problem, it is an AFL problem, with multiple players coming to Melbourne from other teams with pre-existing cocaine dependencies, more than suggesting that drug testing workarounds are commonplace elsewhere in the AFL.
“The documents in my possession also indicate a shocking unwillingness of senior AFL executives to address drug abuse by players and executives, particularly in relation to cocaine use.
“For instance here are very detailed notes of a telephone meeting between Gill McLachlan, Richard Goyder and Glen Bartlett.”

Former AFL CEO Gillion McLachlan and AFL chairman Richard Goyder. Picture: David Crosling
The AFL has a longstanding contract with Dorevitch Pathology to conduct testing for its controversial out-of-competition illicit drugs code.
Match-day drug tests are conducted by SIA officers under the world anti-doping code.
The stunning claims are likely to draw the interest of WADA chiefs, SIA and the Albanese government, which has responsibilities under the global anti-doping code.
Mr Wilkie said the allegations were deeply troubling and called on Mr Albanese to review the signed statements and “personally intervene in this matter”.
“It is not an exaggeration to say the off-the-books testing scheme I’ve described sees the AFL effectively involved in a multi-hundred-million-dollar fraud on governments and taxpayers,” he said.
“Aussie rules football is far too important to our nation. I call for intervention at the highest level and ask the Prime Minister to personally intervene in this matter … because right now, Deputy Speaker, the term white-line fever has taken on a different and sinister meaning at the AFL.”
Joel Smith failed an anti-doping drugs test last August after traces of cocaine were detected in his system from a urine sample taken by SIA testers on match day.
He has since been accused by SIA of cocaine trafficking and faces a lifetime ban from sport.
In Shaun Smith’s statement, detailed by Mr Wilkie, he said: “If I had known of a massive drug problem in the AFL when my son was 14, I would have said you’re playing baseball, you’re playing something else.
“Something is not right when you get so many broken players.”

Former Demons head doctor Zeeshan Arain. Picture: Tony Gough

Former chief medical officer of the AFL Peter Harcourt. Picture: Andy Buchanan / AFP
Cocaine is considered to be a performance-enhancing substance if detected on game day.
Dr Arain was sacked by the Demons in October 2020 after eight years as head doctor – just days after raising serious concerns about the club’s culture with chief executive Gary Pert.
Lawyers for Dr Arain hit the club with an unlawful dismissal claim, which led to a significant settlement.
Mr Bartlett was also forced out of the club shortly after raising concerns about alleged drug use at Melbourne.
Mr Bartlett is suing current president Kate Roffey and three other directors in the Federal Court, for misleading and deceptive conduct and defamation.
 

Log in to remove this ad.

The testing and hiding send the message that we are ok with what you are doing, irrespective of whatever words they use.

Best description of addiction I've heard is that humans are drawn to numbing our emotions and escaping our problems. Drugs and alcohol facilitate this. The addiction is once we start numbing, we just want to stay numb.

The pressure on elite athletes is immense, especially in such a visible spot as Afl. Cocaine might start as fun, but it takes that pressure away so addiction is always knocking.

Had a family member who was in advertising in London and it was mad men all the way. He moved to Singapore to break the cocaine addiction - the risk of death penalty was what he needed to break it. 15 years later doesn't even do alcohol. Though he still says cocaine is the best fun you'll ever have.
 
Last edited:
Nothing to seeLooking forward to the AFL’s spin mostly who really are the best at shifting blame and turning whatever issue onto someone or something else. What their PR department go into overdrive on this.

Explosion Reaction GIF
 
Cocaine might start as fun, but it takes that pressure away so addiction is always knocking.

Had a family member who was in advertising in London and it was mad men all the way. He moved to Singapore to break the cocaine addiction - the risk of death penalty was what he needed to break it. 15 years later doesn't even do alcohol. Though he still says cocaine is the best fun you'll ever have.

 
I'm with Sean Smith - the Afl have aided and abetted drug use. You're taking drugs? Just let us know and we will make sure you don't get caught. Great news, your test was negative so you can play this week.

Problem? What problem?

Maybe our low level of injury-missed games is nothing to do with our strength and conditioning coaches, and a lot to do with our culture.

I believe in fagan on this - he would never put playing ahead of else. I sincerely hope.

Maybe that's a reason legends leave clubs and move away from Melbourne.

I'm obviously very anti drug use. Destroys lives and families.
 
So long as it’s all legally above board I don’t see much of an issue.

The best news to come out of this is that Simon Goodwin is ALLEGEDLY a complete degenerate.
 
Young people are going to experiment. Most people are not found out taking illicit drugs unless it starts to impact their ability to perform their jobs/lives. Most people are not drug tested as a matter of course as part of their lives - I've never been drug tested in my 47 years.

For me this policy is helping to prevent young men (and now women) from ruining their careers from a positive drug test from mandatory in-competition testing.

As long as there is an education that goes with it, then I've got no issue. It means that if a player develops a drug problem, then there is observance and can be helped.

Not everyone who does drugs develops a drug problem. My 47-year old self would rather young people don't do drugs at all. I would like to think that there's a professionalism that makes players think twice about doing drugs in season... but I've never been a professional athlete so I can't comment on the pressures. I'm sure some of the players don't even think on it. Look at the people who get filmed doing drugs - zero thought process going on.

The "Say no to drugs" rhetoric of Nancy Reagan's era didn't work back then, and it won't work now. The best we can do is encourage young people to make smart choices, and when they don't make smart choices, encourage them to make bad choices safely.
 
Last edited:

(Log in to remove this ad.)

Young people are going to experiment. Most people are not found out taking illicit drugs unless it starts to impact their ability to perform their jobs/lives. Most people are not drug tested as a matter of course as part of their lives - I've never been drug tested in my 47 years.

For me this policy is helping to prevent young men (and now women) from ruining their careers from a positive drug test from mandatory in-competition testing.

As long as there is an education that goes with it, then I've got no issue. It means that if a player develops a drug problem, then there is observance and can be helped.

Not everyone who does drugs develops a drug problem. My 47-year old self would rather young people don't do drugs at all. I would like to think that there's a professionalism that makes players think twice about doing drugs in season... but I've never been a professional athlete so I can't comment on the pressures. I'm sure some of the players don't even think on it. Look at the people who get filmed doing drugs - zero thought process going on.

The "Say no to drugs" rhetoric of Nancy Reagans era didn't work back then, and it won't work now. The best we can do is encourage young people to make smart choices, and when they don't make smart choices, encourage them to make bad choices safely.

Totally agree. Obviously, its a bad 'look' for the league, but the AFL's drugs policy should focus on harm minimisation, not punitive measures.

Young people will do drugs - having a harsh punishment in the workplace totally out of proportion with them doing it would be bad policy.
 


It’s a great juicy headline for the news outlets which will suck a lot of people in who only read the headline / byline - ‘secret’ ’off the books’ etc. But ultimately, until there is an issue with the legality of the program, it is an issue which simply turns on your views about societal drug use.
 
It’s a great juicy headline for the news outlets which will suck a lot of people in who only read the headline / byline - ‘secret’ ’off the books’ etc. But ultimately, until there is an issue with the legality of the program, it is an issue which simply turns on your views about societal drug use.
Absolutely. There's a reason they went to parliament (via Wilkie), not to ASADA. The controversy is ethical, not legal. The AFL identified a loophole and started bussing players through it but I've only seen speculation that there's been any rule breaking, which I'm willing to discard until there's actual evidence of that because that'd be a lot bigger deal.

An interesting wrinkle is the AFL's own edict around accuracy of injury lists, which now looks decidedly laughable.
 
Absolutely. There's a reason they went to parliament (via Wilkie), not to ASADA. The controversy is ethical, not legal. The AFL identified a loophole and started bussing players through it but I've only seen speculation that there's been any rule breaking, which I'm willing to discard until there's actual evidence of that because that'd be a lot bigger deal.

An interesting wrinkle is the AFL's own edict around accuracy of injury lists, which now looks decidedly laughable.

Clarrys 6 month calf injury was real ok.
 
Absolutely. There's a reason they went to parliament (via Wilkie), not to ASADA. The controversy is ethical, not legal. The AFL identified a loophole and started bussing players through it but I've only seen speculation that there's been any rule breaking, which I'm willing to discard until there's actual evidence of that because that'd be a lot bigger deal.

An interesting wrinkle is the AFL's own edict around accuracy of injury lists, which now looks decidedly laughable.
I still see can of worms integrity issues arising about the way it's been handled and of course one thing we don't know is the extent and scope of whatever they've been doing.

So still many questions to be answered.
 
Collective Bargaining Agreement
Illicit Drugs Policy

In the "2017-2022" CBA Imcould not find any mention of "Illicit drugs Policy"

in the "2023-2027" CBA it is included sort of.
See below.

21. Illicit Drugs Policy
(a) The Parties will review and agree on a revised Illicit Drugs Policy within 12 months of execution of this Agreement

(b) The Parties will consider the recommendations of the AFL Illicit Drugs Policy Review and Position Development Report and, where agreed, include such recommendations in the revised policy.
................................................................................................................................

Nothing is straight forward.
This link may not work for some so i will include some of the long article.

The AFL Players’ Association agreed to the AFL’s move as long as it was designed to protect the health and well-being of players rather than to be used as a punitive measure. The policy was based on a medical model that prioritised treatment over suspension, with an acknowledgment that players may be susceptible to drug issues due to their age, income and how their time was spent outside the game.

How does the policy work?​

The illicit drug policy is different to the AFL’s anti-doping code, which focuses on match-day testing that players randomly undergo for performance-enhancing drugs. Illicit drug testing focuses on recreational drug use, although a player testing positive to an illicit substance on a match day also triggers a violation under the AFL’s anti-doping code, and they may be subject to a three-month ban under revised WADA rules introduced in 2021. Testing under the AFL’s illicit drugs policy has focused on substances including cocaine, ecstasy and amphetamines such as ice, and sedatives such as ketamine and GHB. Both kinds of test are administered by Sport Integrity Australia under the auspices of the AFL.

Under the illicit drug policy, AFL medical directors and the player’s club doctor – but not club management – are told of a positive first test. (More on that below.) It gets referred by the AFL medical officer to the club doctor to determine the best course of action, including what treatment the player should be referred to. What happens next is case by case: between player and doctor, and depending on all the circumstances and diagnosis.

A first strike sparks a suspended $5000 fine, counselling and target testing (where a player identified as a potential user is tested more often) but the player remains anonymous.

When a video circulates of a player allegedly taking illicit drugs such as occurred when footage appeared in 2018 of former Giant Shane Mumford out in 2015 it is assumed a strike is recorded, but the information is not made public. Mumford expressed remorse, apologised, was suspended for two matches and committed to rehabilitation and counselling through the club and league’s programs after the incident.

Upon a second strike, a player’s name is made public, and he serves a four-match suspension.

A third strike incurs a 12-match suspension. Strikes must be given within four years of each other to be considered second, third or subsequent strikes.

No player has been suspended or named publicly after recording a second strike since the revised policy was introduced in 2015.

There are now no official testing results released to the public, which means supporters are unaware of the prevalence of drug use among players.

The most controversial component of the policy is the clause allowing players who receive a strike to enter a medical program that sees them receive counselling and be target-tested. This means they do not record further strikes if they test positive again while in the program. To enter the program, players must prove to an independent doctor that they have a mental health or other medical issue that led to their drug use.

The program was introduced to protect players with mental health issues, but some in the industry feel it allows those issues to be used as a shield for illicit drug use. “I’ve been criticised for saying this in the past, that players that take drugs take them because they can,” Riewoldt said.

There’s another potential one-off loophole under the policy: players are allowed to self-report, and thus not record a strike, once in their career.

The illicit drug policy was revised in 2015 so that more information was given to clubs about the extent of drug use in their team. But club CEOs and football managers don’t receive the names of players who test positive. Instead, they are provided with a de-identified report of the amount of drug use at their club. They are told the total number of positives; the number of players within the club receiving treatment after testing positive as a result of underlying mental health issues; and a breakdown, in percentage terms, of what substances have been detected. They are also provided with a comparison of the club’s situation over the past five years.
Clubs can organise extra testing if required, but they still will not be privy to individual information.

Data from both hair testing (which can show if an individual has used illicit drugs in the past three months) and urine testing identifying individuals who test positive is provided to the club’s doctor throughout the year, so they can monitor an individual’s situation and work with players when issues arise.
An AFL source claimed the testing was so extensive it was impossible for a player to avoid eventually being caught. However, this was disputed by several sources, particularly with COVID-19 impacting testing and limited testing of players while they were in hubs.

How prevalent is drug taking then?

It depends on who you ask – and believe. One well-placed industry source said it was consistent with the amount of drug use in the same age demographic as AFL players, although players’ disposable incomes and ability to access illicit drugs is higher than the average person in their 20s.
 
Personally, I feel illegal drugs being kept out of the AFL is impossible. People in their 20-30s are going to take drugs recreationally. When it becomes more then that, its a welfare issue that would be the same in any friendship circle you would be a part of.

The question really lies in how performance enhancing do we consider illegal drugs to be? I certainly know a lot of swans supporters were pretty angry that Cousins and Co were allowed to go ham in the mid 00s, not sure it's ever been "proven" that they boosted themselves on game days but just how performance enchanting are they.

We saw that other west coast player get done for taking weed, when in reality there is a very strong correlation to THC and CBD being great as an anti-inflammatory and you can legally get a prescription for that now. Would that still be banned in the AFL if you had a prescription? Is this already being used in the sporting community to recover for elite sports players?

Similar can be said about mental health and the treatment with LSD, Mushrooms and even MD. There is even trials going on at the moment to use Ketamine as a replacement for pain relief in day surgeries because it wears off quickly and allows you to drive home (potentially) a few hours later.
 
Absolutely. There's a reason they went to parliament (via Wilkie), not to ASADA. The controversy is ethical, not legal. The AFL identified a loophole and started bussing players through it but I've only seen speculation that there's been any rule breaking, which I'm willing to discard until there's actual evidence of that because that'd be a lot bigger deal.

An interesting wrinkle is the AFL's own edict around accuracy of injury lists, which now looks decidedly laughable.

I'm not expecting to see evidence of any of these allegations.

What I am expecting to see is the reputation of whoever is making these allegations, to be dragged through the mud and sullied in the press etc.....with the AFL looking squeaky clean as the outcome.

Cannot allow our biggest sport to be seen in such a bad light.

Get out the popcorn peeps, will be an interesting next few weeks....or more.
 
It’s a great juicy headline for the news outlets which will suck a lot of people in who only read the headline / byline - ‘secret’ ’off the books’ etc. But ultimately, until there is an issue with the legality of the program, it is an issue which simply turns on your views about societal drug use.
Yeah who doesn’t enjoy a weekend rampage as high as a kite, but the issue I see is every one week hamstring or player managed is now going draw suspicion.
 

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top