Chris Yarran speaks out about meth addiction

Remove this Banner Ad

what a waste. A plonker for blowing his opportunity. As for the video, an odd PR exercise it seems.
A great life lesson sentiment but never to be taken 100% when he's clearly reading it from a card.

"it'll either be a great night, or it will ruin me"? WTF Chris?
It's like deciding to drive a car into a wall at 100 k's an hour and hoping for the best.
I think you're off base twice in one short post. A bit of a plodder aren't ya?

Self destructive personalities often know exactly what they are doing and often can predict both immediate and long term ramifications. Then mental rationalisations creep in and they carry out the behaviour. Yarren's interior monologue is something many will relate to.

What if you were told he wrote the teleprompter text, or at least signed off on it as reflecting his position? Like virtually everyone one else who makes speeches. It's called being prepared. Even in candid interviews the interviewees can be given heads up on what they will be asked.
 
If religion has helped him how can anyone knock it?

I know a hell of a lot about this drug, i've tried it, i know how easy some people can become addicted, my brother was addicted real bad (something i've shared before), but one thing i kept hearing was from those in the know was beating the addiction from those who smoked it was one thing, but those who injected it was something else entirely.

The fact something can be beneficial to people in certain ways doesn't mean it isn't problematic and it definitely doesn't render it immune to criticism.
 

Log in to remove this ad.

Good job Chris for speaking out! Not easy to publicly admit your failures, hopefully he sticks around and helps bring some insight to treating the problem and minimsing it in the future. He has lost a lot, but still has a lot to give.
 
i hope this is tongue in cheek, otherwise it's an absurd statement. Meth addiction normally leaves a trail of destruction. Christianity, on balance, is at least harmless

Completely disagree... its very harmful, granted not as harmful as meth but definitely harmful
 
The fact something can be beneficial to people in certain ways doesn't mean it isn't problematic and it definitely doesn't render it immune to criticism.

On a long enough time scale and with enough testing every ideology/belief/system we have is problematic. Unless we discover a theory of everything this will always be the case. Religion did not evolve to explain the world in a flawless perfect way that prevents it from at times being problematic. It evolved to increase group survivability. Eg: How does a fragile organism survive in a dynamic, complex world it cannot model prefectly or even that well. The answer all of our ancestors separately arrived at is religion: be wary or change, the unknown, hedonic behaviour and venerate individual sacrifice for group benefit. Everyone should be thankful for religion, to hate it, you may aswell hate the rest of our civilsation.
 
On a long enough time scale and with enough testing every ideology/belief/system we have is problematic. Unless we discover a theory of everything this will always be the case. Religion did not evolve to explain the world in a flawless perfect way that prevents it from at times being problematic. It evolved to increase group survivability. Eg: How does a fragile organism survive in a dynamic, complex world it cannot model prefectly or even that well. The answer all of our ancestors separately arrived at is religion: be wary or change, the unknown, hedonic behaviour and venerate individual sacrifice for group benefit. Everyone should be thankful for religion, to hate it, you may aswell hate the rest of our civilsation.
Considering whats going on in the World today that about makes your argument invalid. On any F@#ken time scale you like.
 
On a long enough time scale and with enough testing every ideology/belief/system we have is problematic. Unless we discover a theory of everything this will always be the case. Religion did not evolve to explain the world in a flawless perfect way that prevents it from at times being problematic. It evolved to increase group survivability. Eg: How does a fragile organism survive in a dynamic, complex world it cannot model prefectly or even that well. The answer all of our ancestors separately arrived at is religion: be wary or change, the unknown, hedonic behaviour and venerate individual sacrifice for group benefit. Everyone should be thankful for religion, to hate it, you may aswell hate the rest of our civilsation.

Pretty impressive. You managed to patronise me AND make sweeping assumptions on my understanding of religion, to say nothing of my opinions.
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

Piss weak yarran.Cuzzie was squirting twice as much gear AND he got off his arse and got a kick. He should give his wage back to Richmond so they can set up a foundation in honor of their former champion the mighty ben cousins.
r
 
Did Carlton know about this before trading him to Tigers? If so then well played Carlton.
He had plenty of history before Carlton drafted him, and I remember being surprised they took him at pick 6. I'm not sure what passed for due diligence at Carlton, but it was hardly a secret in the West. He also failed to tell them he had to face court on another issue until it was nearly due to take place.
 
Potters House too, more credibility as a meth addict.
it sure is trendy to lay in to religion these days. Strange given I havent seen many christians assaulting paramedics or emergency staff who are trying to help them. Or robbing others so they can afford their next bible study. If Yarran had tried every other avenue and found christianity to be life changing I cant see where the problem is.
 
Good on him for having the courage to speak out and hopefully other young blokes will shy away from the glass barbie.

The AFL on the other hand is a piece of s**t sporting organisation for saying to these young blokes "You can do what you want, but don't get caught more than twice". There needs to be a zero tolerance approach.
 
Good on him for having the courage to speak out and hopefully other young blokes will shy away from the glass barbie.

The AFL on the other hand is a piece of s**t sporting organisation for saying to these young blokes "You can do what you want, but don't get caught more than twice". There needs to be a zero tolerance approach.
keep in mind the AFL employed engaged of an expert panel of authorities in the field to guide their illicit drugs policy, they didnt just come up with it themselves. This policy still has unanimous support from all club medical staff today.
 
keep in mind the AFL employed engaged of an expert panel of authorities in the field to guide their illicit drugs policy, they didnt just come up with it themselves. This policy still has unanimous support from all club medical staff today.
And yet compared to athletic, cycling or Olympic standards, the policy is as toothless as an 80 year old hooker.
 
Good on him for having the courage to speak out and hopefully other young blokes will shy away from the glass barbie.

The AFL on the other hand is a piece of s**t sporting organisation for saying to these young blokes "You can do what you want, but don't get caught more than twice". There needs to be a zero tolerance approach.

I agree totally. The AFL still want us to believe that drugs simply don't exist, and if we ignore the whole thing it will go away. They're not fooling anyone, but they think they are because nobody holds them to account.
 
Good on him for having the courage to speak out and hopefully other young blokes will shy away from the glass barbie.

The AFL on the other hand is a piece of s**t sporting organisation for saying to these young blokes "You can do what you want, but don't get caught more than twice". There needs to be a zero tolerance approach.
Cameron Ling basically admitted on 3AW on Sunday that it is nothing more than a rehab policy. In other words multiple players have had one, two, three or more strikes but it will never be made public as they go into rehab facilities and confidentiality remains the main priority.
How can they explain changing their policy from three strikes to two yet not one player has apparently tested positive to a second strike since this policy was implemented?
Apparently this is the most tested sport of any in the world according to the AFL and yet not one player has had a second strike in the last 12 months ???
 

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top