Channel 7 news to break huge AFL story

[JBMelb]

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.

If it is an open secret how did Seven invade their privacy then? Their privacy had already been invaded.

Saying that 7 players from club x have tested positive, still isn't a breach of privacy laws because from what was broadcast you still can't identify who the 7 are. Yes it taints every player at that club, but they can't be identified, they are more considered "guilty by association".

 

[plugger47]

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.

Their being inverstigated for recieving stolen goods. They broke no law in regard to doctor patient confidentially. Don't be so dense. It wastes time. I'll wait for you to inform me of the law they broke in regard to doctor patient confidentiality.

 

[Bloben]

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.

The clubs are the last ones to know.

As Benny Gale said last night on the footy show, the Illicit Drug Policy was developed with the players in order to address the issue of recreational drugs. Players do not legally have to be tested for these drugs but do so voluntarily. The agreement was made under the condition that if players were found to have used drugs that they are treated and educated instead of named and shamed. The clubs, like us fans, are left out of this loop. You're beloved Sydney could very well have players who have tested positive to drugs and are playing each week and Mr Roos would be none the wiser.

 

[Bloben]

Their being inverstigated for recieving stolen goods. They broke no law in regard to doctor patient confidentially. Don't be so dense. It wastes time. I'll wait for you to inform me of the law they broke in regard to doctor patient confidentiality.

Wow

you are thick

I will not repeat myself but refer you to my earlier post which explains the possible breach in the law by channel 7.

 

[plugger47]

The clubs are the last ones to know.

As Benny Gale said last night on the footy show, the Illicit Drug Policy was developed with the players in order to address the issue of recreational drugs. Players do not legally have to be tested for these drugs but do so voluntarily. The agreement was made under the condition that if players were found to have used drugs that they are treated and educated instead of named and shamed. The clubs, like us fans, are left out of this loop. You're beloved Sydney could very well have players who have tested positive to drugs and are playing each week and Mr Roos would be none the wiser.

Which makes the "policy" the most absurd anti-doping sports policy in the world. The clubs are the employers and have obligations contractually to their members and under the occupational health and safety act. WC knew about Cousins although he didn't test positive. An employers obligation doesn't just rest on a drug test. The point is the club that has been named by the 7 report has a legal obligation to investigate and take action. I want to know what they are doing about it. Have they questioned their players? Its a sackable act to lie to an employer regarding this sort of issue. Will the club play the players on the weekend? Will the club play them in the finals? Or is the AFL policy working to cover up the problem and protect cheats. The public will be the judge finally about all this and the AFL will lose.

 

[plugger47]

Wow

you are thick

I will not repeat myself but refer you to my earlier post which explains the possible breach in the law by channel 7.

Thats the criminal law of theft. I'm asking you about the "law" of doctor patient confidentiality that you apparently think is more important than a clean drug free sport. I'm waiting Rumpole. One more post with personal abuse and I'll take it you haven't got a clue about the issue.

 

[Bloben]

Which makes the "policy" the most absurd anti-doping sports policy in the world. The clubs are the employers and have obligations contractually to their members and under the occupational health and safety act. WC knew about Cousins although he didn't test positive. An employers obligation doesn't just rest on a drug test. The point is the club that has been named by the 7 report has a legal obligation to investigate and take action. I want to know what they are doing about it. Have they questioned their players? Its a sackable act to lie to an employer regarding this sort of issue. Will the club play the players on the weekend? Will the club play them in the finals? Or is the AFL policy working to cover up the problem and protect cheats. The public will be the judge finally about all this and the AFL will lose.

1 - The players decided on the policy
2 - The policy is the only one in Australia that tests for recreational drugs
3 - If the clubs and media pull down the policy then players will no longer be tested for recreational drugs and that will be a step backwards.
4 - I suspect the club that was named are dealing with this issue but obviously this is happening behind closed doors.

 

[JBMelb]

1 - 2 - The policy is the only one in Australia that tests for recreational drugs

Don't the NRL test as well? I know that they have a 2 strike policy for something.

 

[Bloben]

Thats the criminal law of theft. I'm asking you about the "law" of doctor patient confidentiality that you apparently think is more important than a clean drug free sport. I'm waiting Rumpole. One more post with personal abuse and I'll take it you haven't got a clue about the issue.

haha

I'll admit that I am not an expert but I never claimed I was.

I have said this a couple of times now... please go back up this thread and read again as you are obviously confused.

I never claimed channel 7 breached the doctor patient relationship. For the most part what has been breached are the ethics.

The issue of drugs and the issue of channel 7s behaviour are seperate. The issue of drugs needs to be addressed but this must be done seperately to the 7 fiasco

 

[plugger47]

1 - The players decided on the policy
2 - The policy is the only one in Australia that tests for recreational drugs
3 - If the clubs and media pull down the policy then players will no longer be tested for recreational drugs and that will be a step backwards.
4 - I suspect the club that was named are dealing with this issue but obviously this is happening behind closed doors.

1. Irrelevant
2. Wrong. Many employers and industries now test for illicit drugs.
3. The clubs will conduct the tests under their OH&S obligations, as employers in many industries now do.
4. Unfortunate expression "dealing". Looking at the team sheets and the fact that biggest mouth in the game has said not a word I suspect that they are in the bunker hoping it will blow over. Well welcome to the big city. If you reckon 7 is tough wait to till the sin city media finishes with them, whoever they are (free speech is alive and well in this country)

 

[mick]

Thats the criminal law of theft. I'm asking you about the "law" of doctor patient confidentiality that you apparently think is more important than a clean drug free sport. I'm waiting Rumpole. One more post with personal abuse and I'll take it you haven't got a clue about the issue.

Doctor patient confidentiality is legislated for in NSW I would assume it is the same in Victoria.

PUBLIC HEALTH ACT 1991 - SECT 75
Disclosure of information
75 Disclosure of information

(1) A person who discloses information obtained in connection with the administration of this Act is guilty of an offence unless the court is satisfied that there was a lawful excuse for the disclosure.

50 penalty units.

 

[Bloben]

Don't the NRL test as well? I know that they have a 2 strike policy for something.

Thinking about it you are probably correct.

I was going off what Brendon Gale was saying last night on the footy show when he said that this policy was the only one in Australia... serves me right to listen to the AFLPA

I do recollect the NRL bringing out a 2 strike policy though

 

[JBMelb]

I was going off what Brendon Gale was saying last night on the footy show when he said that this policy was the only one in Australia... serves me right to listen to the AFLPA

Thats what they want everyone to believe, trying to make themselves look so good and so hard done by.

 

[samthemanlonergan]

Well I can't be bothered sifting through 91 pages to find my answer.

Could someone plese tell me who the players were?

 

[plugger47]

Doctor patient confidentiality is legislated for in NSW I would assume it is the same in Victoria.

PUBLIC HEALTH ACT 1991 - SECT 75
Disclosure of information
75 Disclosure of information

(1) A person who discloses information obtained in connection with the administration of this Act is guilty of an offence unless the court is satisfied that there was a lawful excuse for the disclosure.

50 penalty units.

Nice try but no cigar. The NSW Act relates to public health issues and conditions listed in the Schedules. Unless of course the protected players had infectious diseases such as the plague, gonerrea or avian flu. Or were having a pap smear test. And then we would all want to know wouldn't we?

 

[mick]

Nice try but no cigar. The NSW Act relates to public health issues and conditions listed in the Schedules. Unless of course the protected players had infectious diseases such as the plague, gonerrea or avian flu. Or were having a pap smear test. And then we would all want to know wouldn't we?

Fair call,

What about the principles of the Privacy ammendment Act 2000. http://www.privacy.gov.au/publications/npps01.html#b

 

[Grunty]

Hardly the biggest story ever ! (Probably should be).
The AFL, AFLPA and the Vic media doing everything in their power to make this THE BIGGEST COVER UP IN AFL HISTORY..

This cover up started when the powers magically transformed the seven players into two.

It's not the biggest cover up though. Far worse things have been swept under the carpet as we all know, but are not allowed to mention.

 

[Peerless Pete]

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.

Your post is a complete farce on so many levels it's not funny.

 

[HAWKS HEROES]

I wonder if it was Channel 9 that got hold of the information where Eddie would of stood on this. Which hat would he have worn?

channel 9 and 2 and i think 10 refused to buy the papers as they knew they had to be stolen ! 7 could still have done a story with out naming said club which can not be said any more unless you want to be sued or close this site down !

anyway the afl are the only ones who test in the off season for illict druds no other sports do that the only reason they the players said yes to doing that was for education and rehabilitate the ones caught and if they did get caught after the 2nd offense and it was their 3rd then it was bye byes maybe we should go back to not testing them like it used to be !

 

[Crankitup]

Don't the NRL test as well? I know that they have a 2 strike policy for something.

Yes they do. The difference is the AFL is the only sport in Australia that tests for recreational drugs in the off-season.

 

[HitEmHardFreo]

Yes they (NRL) do. The difference is the AFL is the only sport in Australia that tests for recreational drugs in the off-season.

They also let the clubs do in-house testing