- Joined
- Jan 7, 2005
- Posts
- 59,857
- Likes
- 61,063
- Location
- Down the rabbit hole
- AFL Club
- Essendon
- Other Teams
- Fatebringer
There’s a few parents and junior footy coaches around who might disagree with you there.
It’s not exactly a moral equation for an organisation to be blitzkrieg marketing to kids, whilst simultaneously the very people they use for the marketing (the players) be splashed on the news doing drugs.
Your views are a bit outdated imo. It ain’t a game any more, if it still was I’d hear you better. It’s an entertainment business aimed in no small part at kids.
Personally, I’d prefer EFC players didn’t do drugs, as it’s not exactly conducive to an elite athlete’s lifestyle, and this club has been a failure for far too long. But by the same token, it doesn’t bother me that much. But I get the business point of view.
It’s not exactly a moral equation for an organisation to be blitzkrieg marketing to kids, whilst simultaneously the very people they use for the marketing (the players) be splashed on the news doing drugs.
Your views are a bit outdated imo. It ain’t a game any more, if it still was I’d hear you better. It’s an entertainment business aimed in no small part at kids.
Personally, I’d prefer EFC players didn’t do drugs, as it’s not exactly conducive to an elite athlete’s lifestyle, and this club has been a failure for far too long. But by the same token, it doesn’t bother me that much. But I get the business point of view.
Because if it's marketing as you say, then drug testing is very stupid. If it's about athlete safety, then naming and shaming isn't really appropriate. I understand the theory that it will apparently deter people from doing drugs, unlike now where they are apparently free to, and indeed almost encouraged to, do drugs by the system (lol). But what that actually means is we throw the ones who need the help most under the bus in the interests of stopping the ones who probably aren't that badly affected from experimenting.
Whatever flogs like KB say, it IS a complex issue. It's a high stress job. You have no-one outside the club who really understands what you're going through. You have a lot of militarised routine. Yet paradoxically you have a lot of free time. You work funny hours. You have lots of money and not much to spend it on. Your mates outside footy might do drugs. You might have trouble sleeping after night games. You might use sleeping pills. You might get depressed. As an athlete, you may have a predisposition to risky activity. You might come from a troubled background that only footy has let you escape, and now your idolised. You might get depressed.
In short, you might do drugs, despite the risk. And then what? Named and shamed and if you trangress once or twice more you might be on your arse with no life skills.
That's protecting the health of the most vulnerable footballers???
Nope. The AFL created a monster with this. They gave the moralisers a weapon, and are now trapped in a spiral that moves the policy away from what is was meant to be: a health initiative; into something it never was: a punitive program to appease moralist wankers.
Once again, I look forward to seeing the squealing of the fans of the first bone fida star who gets pinged by this.
