Channel 7 news to break huge AFL story

[royalsfan]

Truth is that no one on this forum knows the truth. Just looking at the last few posts, there have been conflicting stories from various forms of the media.

We are all guessing from heresay and innuendo.

Sadly, out of all this mess, a bunch of innocent players have had their reputations and character tarnished because of the actions of a few, and the rumour mongering of idiots in the media and on internet forums.

Welcome to the Eagles world.

 

[peternorth]

dylan howards been caught out telling porky pies. oh dear....

 

[krustyman]

dylan howard is doing a good job in exposing the druggies.

 

[cefalu_instinct]

How can Brendan Gale say that the drug taking is not the news? Surely they can't have it both ways? Don't hear anybody complaining when the huge media contracts are being handed out. Or when the players salaries increase because of the TV rights.

Sure the medical records was overstepping the mark but there's a simple answer to not being revealed: don't take drugs in the first place.

Typical the Footy show getting stuck into Dylan Howard, jealously at its finest.

 

[TuskenRaider]

How can Brendan Gale say that the drug taking is not the news? Surely they can't have it both ways? Don't hear anybody complaining when the huge media contracts are being handed out. Or when the players salaries increase because of the TV rights.

Typical the Footy show getting stuck into Dylan Howard, jealously at its finest.

That statement Gale made was ridiculous as it is in fact the news. 7 obviously shouldn't have named the club and still would have had a huge story and the AFLPA is right to back up their members but to dismiss it as "not the story" is wrong.

I'm sure when this illicit drugs policy was implemented the clubs were not happy with the way it was structured as they wanted to know which players were testing positive. As it stands they have no idea (other than the club doctor who is bound to confidentiality).

I believe they are playing with the meaning of "out of season testing" versus "in season testing" as it relates to the AFL because out of season is any day other than match days (correct me if I'm wrong). A lot of posters are possibly of the belief that out of season means in January/December etc. when that is not really the case.

It is an important issue in relation to elite athletes as most of these illicit drugs are going to have a negative impact on players recovery and training into the next week and clubs do not want their investment struggling because of a down couple of days when it is hard enough as it is to play AFL week after week. Ben Cousins is an exceptional case if he could perform the way he did last year whilst allegedly going pretty hard at it away from footy.

It's also very hard listening to C9 and our mate Hutchy taking the high moral ground on this issue.

 

[Brasil2007]

That statement Gale made was ridiculous as it is in fact the news. 7 obviously shouldn't have named the club and still would have had a huge story and the AFLPA is right to back up their members but to dismiss it as "not the story" is wrong.

I'm sure when this illicit drugs policy was implemented the clubs were not happy with the way it was structured as they wanted to know which players were testing positive. As it stands they have no idea (other than the club doctor who is bound to confidentiality).

I believe they are playing with the meaning of "out of season testing" versus "in season testing" as it relates to the AFL because out of season is any day other than match days (correct me if I'm wrong). A lot of posters are possibly of the belief that out of season means in January/December etc. when that is not really the case.

It is an important issue in relation to elite athletes as most of these illicit drugs are going to have a negative impact on players recovery and training into the next week and clubs do not want their investment struggling because of a down couple of days when it is hard enough as it is to play AFL week after week. Ben Cousins is an exceptional case if he could perform the way he did last year whilst allegedly going pretty hard at it away from footy.

It's also very hard listening to C9 and our mate Hutchy taking the high moral ground on this issue.

The AFL deliberately built a system which would ensure no one would ever be found out, and they only did that under extraordinary pressure from the Federal government. If they were serious about the issue they'd be like pretty much every other major sport in the world and sign up to the WADA code. If they did that, we wouldn't be having this debate and we could actually get on with talking about football.

 

[Frederlick]

That statement Gale made was ridiculous as it is in fact the news. 7 obviously shouldn't have named the club and still would have had a huge story and the AFLPA is right to back up their members but to dismiss it as "not the story" is wrong.

I'm sure when this illicit drugs policy was implemented the clubs were not happy with the way it was structured as they wanted to know which players were testing positive. As it stands they have no idea (other than the club doctor who is bound to confidentiality).

I believe they are playing with the meaning of "out of season testing" versus "in season testing" as it relates to the AFL because out of season is any day other than match days (correct me if I'm wrong). A lot of posters are possibly of the belief that out of season means in January/December etc. when that is not really the case.

It is an important issue in relation to elite athletes as most of these illicit drugs are going to have a negative impact on players recovery and training into the next week and clubs do not want their investment struggling because of a down couple of days when it is hard enough as it is to play AFL week after week. Ben Cousins is an exceptional case if he could perform the way he did last year whilst allegedly going pretty hard at it away from footy.

It's also very hard listening to C9 and our mate Hutchy taking the high moral ground on this issue.

Yep people don't don't realise this awesome in comp testing is for 22 days a year, talk about selling a pup. Should be from Round 1 till GF day, that is the competitive season. And that is the way all the other sports are tested, ie cycling etc (another drug ridden joke of a comp that one). The rot set in when they accepted the Lynch 'defence' back in the day.

 

[cefalu_instinct]

Yep people don't don't realise this awesome in comp testing is for 22 days a year, talk about selling a pup. Should be from Round 1 till GF day, that is the competitive season. And that is the way all the other sports are tested, ie cycling etc (another drug ridden joke of a comp that one). The rot set in when they accepted the Lynch 'defence' back in the day.

Thats a good effort. Getting a dig into the Lions from this far left field. Well Done

 

[Adelaide Hawk]

currently of the 42 individual players in the afl to ever test positive, 12 have allegedly been from 1 club. Not all 12 still play at this club allegedly. Wonder which club? Wonder if there is a drug problem at this club?

I don't know. Why don't you go to the Collingwood Football Club and ask them?

 

[FIGJAM]

I think the thread title should be changed to "Channel 7 news to make huge AFL story".

 

[littleTree]

How can Brendan Gale say that the drug taking is not the news? Surely they can't have it both ways? Don't hear anybody complaining when the huge media contracts are being handed out. Or when the players salaries increase because of the TV rights.

Sure the medical records was overstepping the mark but there's a simple answer to not being revealed: don't take drugs in the first place.

Typical the Footy show getting stuck into Dylan Howard, jealously at its finest.

Actually, Brendan corrected himself as soon as he said it... something like; thats not the story, well it is a story, but I'm addressing etc.

As for the rest of your post....

 

[Rowie09]

Actually, Brendan corrected himself as soon as he said it... something like; thats not the story, well it is a story, but I'm addressing etc.

As for the rest of your post....

Gale was right anyway IMO. Drug taking is not the big news scoop. We already knew this through Ben Cousins, West Coast etc. The story was that Channel 7 have breached privacy laws and federal laws for that matter for purchasing stolen medical records of AFL players.

This is the crux of the issue. While drug taking does feature, it does not play the lead role.

 

[andypie]

Can someone who saw the story tell me, did ch 7 name the club and players or just the club?

 

[Dude Lebowski]

Pretty funny that the front page of the Mercury newspaper in Tasmania has the club in question plastered across it with the said allegations. So if you don't know who the club in question is, go to their homepage and you soon will.

 

[eros]

Typical the Footy show getting stuck into Dylan Howard, jealously at its finest.

Oh come on - Dylan cooked his own goose when he blatantly lied in front of the cameras about the AFL supporting his story.

He then buttered up on Monday or Tuesday (once again recorded) by blantantly lying and saying that he never said they supported him.

Channel 9 didn't need to do anything but role the tape for us to see him damage his credibility all on his own.

 

[Frederlick]

Can someone who saw the story tell me, did ch 7 name the club and players or just the club?

I saw the news friday night and it was just the club, so what is the big deal? This whole 'you stole our medical records' is a smokescreen from AFL and players because they are seeing their cosy little set up for non PED drug use fall apart in front of them.

 

[hawker11]

Can someone who saw the story tell me, did ch 7 name the club and players or just the club?

They named the club, so in effect they have named every player in that playing group.

 

[JBMelb]

Gale was right anyway IMO. Drug taking is not the big news scoop. We already knew this through Ben Cousins, West Coast etc. The story was that Channel 7 have breached privacy laws and federal laws for that matter for purchasing stolen medical records of AFL players.

This is the crux of the issue. While drug taking does feature, it does not play the lead role.

They didn't breach privacy laws as they did NOT name the players or broadcast any details that could be used to identify the players concerned.

The ones that have breached privacy laws is the doctor/clinic for failing to adequately secure the records and allowing them to fall into the wrong hands, however that happened.

 

[Bloben]

They didn't breach privacy laws as they did NOT name the players or broadcast any details that could be used to identify the players concerned.

The ones that have breached privacy laws is the doctor/clinic for failing to adequately secure the records and allowing them to fall into the wrong hands, however that happened.

I disagree

When saying that 7 players of a particular club have tested positive they in affect taint every player in that group.

And as has been said it is an open secret who these players are so the actions of 7 have definately invaded their privacy.

 

[plugger47]

I disagree

When saying that 7 players of a particular club have tested positive they in affect taint every player in that group.

And as has been said it is an open secret who these players are so the actions of 7 have definately invaded their privacy.

They have no right of privacy in terms of a contracted player playing AFL AND DRUGS. I am going to pay and watch my team play Hawthorn. I confident with the Bloods zero tolerance policy that no player is alloowed to take the field either in their own interests, the fairness of the game or the credibility of the game, while using illicit substances. What about your club? Whats its policy? If the AFL or a club knowingly allows illicit drug users to continue to play whilst using thats a disgrace. We are the only sport in the world that allows illicit drug users to compete in the interests of doctor patient confidentiality and a so-called player right of "privacy'. Which neither exists legally or morally in this country. Its a complete farce and the AFL is just a sick joke.

 

[plugger47]

I disagree

When saying that 7 players of a particular club have tested positive they in affect taint every player in that group.

And as has been said it is an open secret who these players are so the actions of 7 have definately invaded their privacy.

Name the law and its section that Ch 7 breached when it published the name of the club and the players? I'll give you time to google

 

[Rowie09]

Name the law and its section that Ch 7 breached when it published the name of the club and the players? I'll give you time to google

Receiving stolen goods for one.

 

[Bloben]

Name the law and its section that Ch 7 breached when it published the name of the club and the players? I'll give you time to google

Don't be a tool!

The actions of 7 are currently being investigated for criminal behaviour. The people that "found" the information have been charged for theft by finding as they sold something that was not their own for profit. Channel 7 knew that this information was not owned by the seller but was conveniently "found". If they bought the information knowing that then they too are liable.

And as for the other post about Sydneys policy and Collingwoods policy I am not even going to bother with as I have a sneaking suspicion you may not understand my reply.

 

[littleTree]

They have no right of privacy in terms of a contracted player playing AFL AND DRUGS. I am going to pay and watch my team play Hawthorn. I confident with the Bloods zero tolerance policy that no player is alloowed to take the field either in their own interests, the fairness of the game or the credibility of the game, while using illicit substances. What about your club? Whats its policy? If the AFL or a club knowingly allows illicit drug users to continue to play whilst using thats a disgrace. We are the only sport in the world that allows illicit drug users to compete in the interests of doctor patient confidentiality and a so-called player right of "privacy'. Which neither exists legally or morally in this country. Its a complete farce and the AFL is just a sick joke.

Do you actually believe this? or are you just dribbling for attention?

 

[plugger47]

Do you actually believe this? or are you just dribbling for attention?

Your club has a moral and legal obligation, as my club does to prevent illicit drug users from playing AFL. Speak up Kennet I'm waiting. If you don't reckon your mob with its reputation playing in Sydney on the weekend isn't going to damage the interests of the code in a growth market youre more than dribbling - youre mentally comotose.