News Clubs operating league-sanctioned drug testing program - Harley Balic’s Dad Speaks

[Chief]

AFL Statement

As well as being a signatory to World Anti-Doping Agency (WADA) code via the Australian Football Anti-Doping Code, the AFL has an Illicit Drug Policy which has been in place since 2005, and at the core of the policy is a commitment to player wellbeing and welfare.

The AFL Illicit Drug Policy (IDP) is a policy that specifically deals with the use of illicit substances out of competition and is focussed on player health and well-being. The policy seeks to reduce substance use and drug-related harms for AFL players and aims to inform and rehabilitate players through education and intervention.

It exists alongside and in addition to the Australian Football Anti-Doping Code which covers prohibited substances including some illicit substances in competition as prescribed by the WADA prohibited list.

Urine tests conducted by doctors to determine if a player has used illicit substances are part of the AFL’s Illicit Drug Policy medical model and have been for some time.

Doctors may use those urine tests to obtain an immediate result to determine whether any illicit substance remains in a player’s system. This is normally conducted at the club or in the doctors consulting rooms.

If the test shows a substance is still in the players system, a doctor will take steps to prevent a player from taking part in either training and/or an AFL match both for their own health and welfare and because having illicit substances in your system on match day may be deemed performance enhancing and a breach of the Australian Football Anti-Doping Code (depending on the substance involved).

It is absolutely imperative that no doctor or club official should ever allow or encourage a player to take the field knowing they have recently taken an illicit substance that may be harmful to their health and/or may be deemed performance-enhancing (as many illicit substances are on match day).

We support the WADA code (as it applies to our sport through the Australian Football Anti-Doping Code) and support the fundamental premise on which it is founded that any player who takes the field with a performance-enhancing prohibited substance in their system should be treated in accordance with the Anti-Doping Code and face heavy sanctions.

The AFL observes that AFL players are not immune to the societal issues faced by young people with respect to illicit substances and also acknowledges that illicit drug use problems commonly co-occur with other mental health conditions.

While the AFL’s medical model involves a multidisciplinary healthcare management plan, the monitoring of players is highly confidential. A doctor or healthcare professional generally cannot disclose the nature of the clinical intervention or condition to others unless the player willingly consents.

We understand that the Illicit Drugs Policy can be improved and we are working with the AFLPA and players to improve the policy and the system to ensure we are better able to change the behaviours of players. But we are unapologetic about club and AFL doctors taking the correct steps to ensure that any player who they believe has an illicit substance in their system does not take part in any AFL match and that doctor patient confidentially is upheld and respected.

The AFL will always be required to make decisions which seek to balance competing rights and interests. The medical interests and welfare of players is a priority for the AFL given everything we know about the risks facing young people generally and those who play our game in particular.

 

[Strange Cat]

There is still WADA testing throughout the week.
Which recreational drugs are used as masking agents? And you get that a masking agent defeats it's purpose if it also gets you banned?

Really I have to list the drugs that can be use as a a masking agents ? Why do think Rioli was banned for weed when it’s clearly not a performance enhancer? Because some recreational drugs can hinder other drug tests.

If the doctors and the AFL can tip off the club/players or just take them out of a drug testing pool what makes you think they cant or haven’t been doing the same for other WADA testing ?

 

[PerthblueGold]

So the AFL has compromised its integrity for a handful of cases. Surely it would be better to confront the handful of cases

AFL and integrity do not belong in the same sentence

 

[CliffMcTainshaw]

Can't wait to hear Mick Malloy's take on this.

 

[Hoops]

Avoiding the test is the crime .. I don't know how else to frame this.

How is that a crime?

 

[garlic munchers]

Easy to simplify this mess.

Just make it the same as many other jobs.... test positive, get sacked.

 

[Hoops]

Listen to the head of the AFL doctors association on 774 for some good insight

 

[Hoops]

Sounds like the afl is trying to circumvent WADA suspensions

The same way me not clocking a guy in the head circumvents an assault charge

 

[Hoops]

No, it’s nothing like a sexual assault example.

The players have abused drugs. They would otherwise be caught. But instead, the AFL steps in and quietly removes them to avoid headlines. It is not hard to see why they do it and it has nothing to do with player wellbeing. That is the story they put out to gain the sympathy of the public.

So your problem is that they have abused drugs and not got caught. That happens >99% of the time with the general public out there using drugs. Maybe we could have random drug checks on people in the street. that may put your mind at ease.

 

[DragoDelph]

A lot getting stuck on the WADA avoidance, not playing with it in the system.
This the narrative the AFL wants told. Yay us. we're doing good not letting drunk drivers behind the wheel.

The real issue, is that the AFL's Drug Policy, is being circumvented, by the AFL. They have 2x separate ways to stop players from getting strikes, having the clubs informed, having proper help given to people.

You either self report by pre-testing, therefore no strike.
Or you get added to "the list" and are exempt from strikes.

The clubs aren't informed. The players get away with it and have no repercussions for ongoing poor behaviour.

 

[memoryofmchale]

So your problem is that they have abused drugs and not got caught. That happens >99% of the time with the general public out there using drugs. Maybe we could have random drug checks on people in the street. that may put your mind at ease.

Random people do face drug tests at work, which is different from the steeets. Idk what your industry is but they’re not uncommon in everything from government work right through to trades. Government workers and ADFA students in Canberra are expected to stay clean, even on weekends and during the week when normally that wouldn’t apply. They face random drug testing and it’s enforced.

And it’s not like they aren’t caught. They’re evading the people who’ll catch them with a system designed to do so to avoid headlines which nobody has argued about.

The AFL aren’t even handing out strikes. It’s just claim mental health, urinate in a cup, hamstring awareness and rinse and repeat because of confidentiality. Can’t dare punish players.

 

[HairyO]

A lot getting stuck on the WADA avoidance, not playing with it in the system.
This the narrative the AFL wants told. Yay us. we're doing good not letting drunk drivers behind the wheel.

The real issue, is that the AFL's Drug Policy, is being circumvented, by the AFL. They have 2x separate ways to stop players from getting strikes, having the clubs informed, having proper help given to people.

You either self report by pre-testing, therefore no strike.
Or you get added to "the list" and are exempt from strikes.

The clubs aren't informed. The players get away with it and have no repercussions for ongoing poor behaviour.

Yep if WADA are ok with it then its fine, but if the AFL arent giving strikes then their policy is a farce.

Also, what are the clubs being told. Bave any clubs made any comments ?

 

[memoryofmchale]

A lot getting stuck on the WADA avoidance, not playing with it in the system.
This the narrative the AFL wants told. Yay us. we're doing good not letting drunk drivers behind the wheel.

The real issue, is that the AFL's Drug Policy, is being circumvented, by the AFL. They have 2x separate ways to stop players from getting strikes, having the clubs informed, having proper help given to people.

You either self report by pre-testing, therefore no strike.
Or you get added to "the list" and are exempt from strikes.

The clubs aren't informed. The players get away with it and have no repercussions for ongoing poor behaviour.

The clubs would know. Not about the list, but who is using. It’s not hard to tell. The rest is all accurate.

The AFL don’t care about wellbeing because if they did, they’d teach players how to learn and stop affirming the behaviour. There is no reason not to be abuse illicit drugs in the AFL.

They circumvent their own policies - supposedly the “best” in the world - to avoid media attention and see the consequences of repeat instances of drug usage. Wouldn’t surprise me if a player should be on strike ten and is still playing because of the “list”. Would only work out to under once a season for a veteran over thirty.

 

[DragoDelph]

Yep if WADA are ok with it then its fine, but if the AFL arent giving strikes then their policy is a farce.

Also, what are the clubs being told. Bave any clubs made any comments ?

JL mentioned it in his presser today. Doctor's just inform the club/coaches, they take it on face value and move on. (basically)

How much of that is true is another story.

Start of this interview.

 

[memoryofmchale]

Yep if WADA are ok with it then its fine, but if the AFL arent giving strikes then their policy is a farce.

Also, what are the clubs being told. Bave any clubs made any comments ?

Simon Goodwin said he had no idea about seems likely rubbish because by all accounts and rumours, he likes to partae with his players and has issues himself.

 

[Muddiemoose]

Yep if WADA are ok with it then its fine, but if the AFL arent giving strikes then their policy is a farce.

Also, what are the clubs being told. Bave any clubs made any comments ?

Dare say we won’t see any clubs make any public comments but it seemed like Eddie was speaking on the behalf of clubs the other night of classified saying clubs aren’t happy with the current system because they believe players are taking advantage of it

 

[memoryofmchale]

JL mentioned it in his presser today. Doctor's just inform the club/coaches, they take it on face value and move on. (basically)

How much of that is true is another story.

All coaches bluffing to defend the AFL.

Doctor: Star player has mysterious hamstring awareness.

Coach: Aight thanks for letting me know. Got this big game but hey, hamstrings are hamstrings. It was fine yesterday but not good now. Life happens I guess.

BS.

 

[DragoDelph]

All coaches bluffing to defend the AFL.

Doctor: Star player has mysterious hamstring awareness.

Coach: Aight thanks for letting me know. Got this big game but hey, hamstrings are hamstrings. It was fine yesterday but not good now. Life happens I guess.

BS.

Very much an outward hand waving, while internally fuming and using Ed as a conduit

 

[questeds]

I must live a very sheltered life, I don't see what is so hard about professional athletes being, I don't know, professional. If they can't stay off the slopes then find another career. I think it should be a complete zero tolerance on drugs. We pay membership fees, they get government (tax) funding and for that I do expect a certain level of professionalism.

 

[FlyHigh18]

I find the whole "game is being manipulated / the viewers deceived / prime minister needs to step in" angles all a bit too much.

Weed will be legal sooner or later and certainly isn't performance enhancing lol.
Coke is tricky and debatable given the high level of level of concentration, coordination and awareness required for aussie rules.

Not saying drugs are ok but as a fan of the sport i certainly don't feel cheated bc a few players partied too hard. Nor do i think someone should lose their job bc they smoked weed a week ago. So long as it's not performance enhancing then i really don't care.

...the prime minister... lol!

 

[Osho]

So the AFL has compromised its integrity for a handful of cases. Surely it would be better to confront the handful of cases

It seems from other info the handful of cases is an underestimate.

 

[Scythe94]

I must live a very sheltered life, I don't see what is so hard about professional athletes being, I don't know, professional. If they can't stay off the slopes then find another career. I think it should be a complete zero tolerance on drugs. We pay membership fees, they get government (tax) funding and for that I do expect a certain level of professionalism.

Respect your perspective; however, that is entirely unrealistic.

According to the 2022–2023 National Drug Strategy Household Survey (NDSHS), an estimated 10.2 million (47%) people aged 14 and over in Australia had illicitly used a drug at some point in their lifetime (including the non-medical use of pharmaceuticals), and an estimated 3.9 million (18%) had used an illicit drug in the previous 12 months.

At the end of the day, time and time again it has been proven that blanket drug elimination strategies just do not work. Education and harm minimisation are effective on the other hand.

These are young people aged 18-35 who kick a ball for a living – the idea that they should be held to a higher standard than the rest of society is inherently flawed. Now, if they're doing drugs on the job (i.e. a matchday positive test), or are taking performance enhancers in order to cheat, it's a different story.

"They should be better role models to young people" is the common rebuttal to the above, but at the end of the day, they're hardly showing up to footy clinics off their faces (as far as I'm aware). The role model argument becomes an issue too when fans think it's their business to find out about a player's out-of-competition drug use via their face being plastered over all the major media outlets – hence the non-disclosure of OOC positive tests.

Drug use is a societal issue, not an AFL one.

 

[memoryofmchale]

I find the whole "game is being manipulated / the viewers deceived / prime minister needs to step in" angles all a bit too much.

Weed will be legal sooner or later and certainly isn't performance enhancing lol.
Coke is tricky and debatable given the high level of level of concentration, coordination and awareness required for aussie rules.

Not saying drugs are ok but as a fan of the sport i certainly don't feel cheated bc a few players partied too hard. Nor do i think someone should lose their job bc they smoked weed a week ago. So long as it's not performance enhancing then i really don't care.

...the prime minister... lol!

That’s not the part that’s manipulative. It’s the hiding from WADA and the fact that these players are breaking their own rules with special ones design to save the AFL’s face. That’s the integrity issue. As well as asking doctors to lie.

 

[powerrrrrrrrrrrr]

These are young people aged 18-35 who kick a ball for a living – the idea that they should be held to a higher standard than the rest of society is inherently flawed. Now, if they're doing drugs on the job (i.e. a matchday positive test), or are taking performance enhancers in order to cheat, it's a different story.

Don’t agree with this. They are role models and should be held to higher standards whether they like it or not.

State and Federal government injects 100s of millions of $$ into them and the sport, members injured millions of $$ every year, sponsors inject hundreds of millions, the tv networks and everyday fans.

This isn’t Joe blow down at Kmart. These are individuals who have huge amounts of investment poured into them. That money and particularly government money could be spent elsewhere which would hugely impact the sport.

They are held to a higher regard because they should be. They are paid for it and what comes with that is a level of responsibility.

They don’t have to play if it doesn’t suit their lifestyle. It’s a career for them just as it is everyone else. They choose to play, they should also have to abide by the expectations of those funding the league.

They don’t like that pressure, they can take that option of another career.

 

[Gazza Greatness]

My take on this and I could be wrong as I have not gone into this in any depth but I've gotta say that the minority of AFL players that are involved in illicit drugs, it does seem apparent that it's in their best interests to take up the AFL voluntary testing as there's currently little or no retribution, as well as they are less of a chance of being picked up by Wada and being banned for a considerable amount of time out of the game. So it's my understanding, the reason that both the players and AFL want this policy is to prevent having players banned from the game for long periods but unfortunately it seems to have little to do with getting these young and for some, not so young footballers off using illicit drugs, in fact with the present system I don't see as a deterrent at all, with many players under the current system just taking the piss literally and getting away with it, with no one being any the wiser including the AFL coaches. This medical privacy issue just seems a farce, taking the mickey and masking the real issue..... for these guys are on hundreds of thousands of dollars and just having a good time by 'breaking the law' with no retribution in fines or penalties and for the very rare few that actually do suffer from heavy drug addiction then they should be treated with professional help and guidance accordingly.

 

[Crankyhawk]

It’s a bit different when you have a system that has mandatory drug test that is actively being avoided with the aid of the doctors…what’s stopping doped up players towards the finals taking a PED cycle and then self reporting for drug use and sitting out a few games for peak fitness and the benefit of a good cycle?

It’s not an issue that medical doctors would give a flying tossbag about. It’s not our job.