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.

 

[ElliottsMaggies]

You’ve missed the point. The players are tested off the books without WADA for the specific purpose of avoiding detection. If they did not have those tests and played, they’d otherwise be suspended. The policy makes no public reference to this. Thag is the problem.

AFL has been conducting its own drug tests since 2005 and will continue to keep results secret. That is the AFL illicit drug policy. It's primarily to detect for recreational drugs...which WADA does not care about.

If players aren't taking the field drug affected...that's a good thing.

You're missing the point of the AFL illicit drug policy.

The only issue I see with this whole saga is that the Dee's were potentially trying to avoid their players being a part of the 3 strike policy.

 

[DragoDelph]

If rumours are true, I’m very surprised certain players never received a strike.

Didn’t Ben Cousins remain strike free throughout his career? That is mind-blowing if true.

Because it counts as self reporting and therefore doesn't constitute a strike.

We need a tap the sign made

 

[HairyO]

If rumours are true, I’m very surprised certain players never received a strike.

Didn’t Ben Cousins remain strike free throughout his career? That is mind-blowing if true.

It was the Wild West before Essendon. But it looks like the only change has been to work very hard at hiding it better.

 

[Carn The Berries]

He understands it and rightly says its a joke.

How many strikes are not being recorded despite players admitting they have had ilicit drugs?

Let's not pretend that the Honourable Member for Clark gives a flying f*** about the AFL's illicit drug policy, or the wellbeing of any players or officials.

 

[Hoops]

Yes its far less than what Dank did when at Geelong.

And what was that? Considering he was never at Geelong

 

[memoryofmchale]

And what was that? Considering he was never at Geelong

He was involved with the club. They sourced a drug from him. You can literally Google it.

He also had links to other clubs outside of Essendon including Melbourne and Gold Coast.

 

[Lavender Bushranger]

what does a game secretly manipulated by the afl mean?

It means that the AFL are making decisions that directly impact the outcome of games and lying about it to their customers and business partners.

It also means that the AFL is lying to their customers and stakeholders to sell an inaccurate image of their brand.


I mean, do fans want to pump hundreds or thousands of their hard earned dollars into a club that is rife with drug addicts posing as professional athletes and role models?

Do they want their donations and membership fees going towards the rehabilition of drug addicts?

Do fans want to take their kids along to cheer for a bunch of drug addicts?


I don't know. Maybe? Maybe not?

But this is not what the AFL are selling to fans - even though they know it's the case.

 

[owen87]

the three strikes policy is a complete sham and the AFL is just posturing.

This

 

[threenewpadlocks]

AFL has been conducting its own drug tests since 2005 and will continue to keep results secret. That is the AFL illicit drug policy. It's primarily to detect for recreational drugs...which WADA does not care about.

If players aren't taking the field drug affected...that's a good thing.

You are missing the point.

The AFL enforces rules and punishment independently, but it does not do sample collection and testing independently.

As such, there is a natural interrelation between the two, where any actions taken in relation to the AFL's illicit drug policy, can, by extension, also be impacting a player's relation to the things that WADA do care about. We know this because of the agreed upon interpretation of events by Lachie Keeffe and Josh Thomas. We know this because the AFL and ASADA conducted negotiations over Lachie Whitfield's actions simultatneously being a potential whereabouts ADV, and the AFL policy of bringing the game into disrepute.

 

[Hoops]

He was involved with the club. They sourced a drug from him. You can literally Google it.

He also had links to other clubs outside of Essendon including Melbourne and Gold Coast.

You mean a legal substance. They also held B&Fs at Crown Casino. That makes them basically the mafia. FMD

 

[Bluelegs]

This is why society has broken down, people just don't care about the laws of the land anymore.

Drugs mess people up big time.

Why is this post pinned lol?

 

[ElliottsMaggies]

You are missing the point.

The AFL enforces rules and punishment independently, but it does not do sample collection and testing independently.

As such, there is a natural interrelation between the two, where any actions taken in relation to the AFL's illicit drug policy, can, by extension, also be impacting a player's relation to the things that WADA do care about. We know this because of the agreed upon interpretation of events by Lachie Keeffe and Josh Thomas. We know this because the AFL and ASADA conducted negotiations over Lachie Whitfield's actions simultatneously being a potential whereabouts ADV, and the AFL policy of bringing the game into disrepute.

The AFL has been conducting its own drug tests since 2005.

 

[HairyO]

Let's not pretend that the Honourable Member for Clark gives a flying f*** about the AFL's illicit drug policy, or the wellbeing of any players or officials.

Which doesnt matter if the AFL is enabling players to subvert their stated drugs policy and avoid WADA's drugs policy.

If the players were getting strikes I would actually be ok with what is happening, assuming WADA are ok with what is happening.

 

[Tjblues]

It means that the AFL are making decisions that directly impact the outcome of games and lying about it to their customers and business partners.

It also means that the AFL is lying to their customers and stakeholders to sell an inaccurate image of their brand.


I mean, do fans want to pump hundreds or thousands of their hard earned dollars into a club that is rife with drug addicts posing as professional athletes and role models?

Do they want their donations and membership fees going towards the rehabilition of drug addicts?

Do fans want to take their kids along to cheer for a bunch of drug addicts?


I don't know. Maybe? Maybe not?

But this is not what the AFL are selling to fans - even though they know it's the case.

The afl aren’t making decisions that influence games though.

They’re providing players with information, which they can choose to use or not.

I haven’t read anything that suggests the afl mandates this testing or does anything other than make suggestions to players affected.

 

[Tex Danger]

Am I the only one who thinks this is being turned in to a bigger deal than what it actually is?

• AFL permit tests to be performed on players prior to gameday to assess if they have illicit drugs in their system
• Doing so means said player cannot take the field, meaning they also avoid any potential ASADA tests and subsequent ban
• Should illicit drugs have been found in their system, they are withdrawan from the team under the guise of an injury or personal matter
• This is done because the doctor who is performing the test is under doctor/ client confidentiality and cannot divulge to the AFL or club executives as to why the player cannot play (we are all afforded this right - AFL players are no different)

If a player (and the doctor) is lying to their club about why they are unable to play then I’d say that in itself would be a significant breach of contract. There’s a big difference between missing injured and because you couldn’t keep off the gear pre game

It’s different if it’s under the strike policy, but at the point a player needs to miss a game I’m pretty sure club knows?

I think the Dr- patient confidentiality part is the part being overblown. The player isn’t unwell, they’re in potential breach of WADA code so telling the club why they can’t play would be reasonable to expect

If this is in fact being sanctioned by AFL and the clubs don’t know, the clubs woukd have cause to be pissed

If the clubs are in on it, the AFL is lying

 

[Gak Attack]

Oh yeah, I'm sure Dazza at the pub will be outraged that his weekly multi might be impacted by this (even though any player "faking" an injury would already be public knowledge). This is just a horse that Wilkie can hitch his wagon to.

Deadset campaigner.

Bloke has dedicated his life to worrying about what other people do with their own money.

 

[SunshineBoy]

It means that the AFL are making decisions that directly impact the outcome of games and lying about it to their customers and business partners.

It also means that the AFL is lying to their customers and stakeholders to sell an inaccurate image of their brand.


I mean, do fans want to pump hundreds or thousands of their hard earned dollars into a club that is rife with drug addicts posing as professional athletes and role models?

Do they want their donations and membership fees going towards the rehabilition of drug addicts?

Do fans want to take their kids along to cheer for a bunch of drug addicts?


I don't know. Maybe? Maybe not?

But this is not what the AFL are selling to fans - even though they know it's the case.

Smells like match fixing , tastes like match fixing but hey it can’t happen in Straya

 

[Walter H White]

Nothing for the Cats to worry about. Completely Clean. Strong family club with family values, would never touch the white powder or the disco biscuits.

Our players are too busy getting "high on life" - surfing, bushwalking, and just generally loving life.

 

[memoryofmchale]

The AFL has been conducting its own drug tests since 2005.

What has not been known is the nature of it being off the books to avoid detection from WADA.

Surely you can see the associated integrity issues if the AFL is essentially able to boycott the independent authority by performing their own tests and then covering up any undesirable results. That has not been known since 2005!!!

 

[pattymalone00]

 

[memoryofmchale]

Nothing for the Cats to worry about. Completely Clean. Strong family club with family values, would never touch the white powder or the disco biscuits.

Our players are too busy getting "high on life" - surfing, bushwalking, and just generally loving life.

This form of drug testing applies at every single club.

 

[Chief]

But it's in competition isn't it?

 

[memoryofmchale]

Eh, players have not been stood down OOC using this policy … they’ve just made up an injury and skipped a week. The media spin on this is next level.

 

[Sewer de Lance]

you mean, a workplace where heavy machinery is operated and a drug ban is justified in an industrial and workplace safety context?

Fascinating

You’re missing the point. The health & safety aspect is not the main issue here, it’s the dishonesty, deceit, lies, manipulation, hypocrisy, secrecy, unethical conduct, etc etc etc.

The best thing the AFL can do to combat the drug culture is by allowing the players to fail the WADA drug tests. It astounds me how anyone could come to the conclusion that the AFL have done nothin wrong. They have brought the game into disrepute on many different levels & it makes the Essendon saga look like a school picnic in comparison.

 

[DragoDelph]

But it's in competition isn't it?

That's what I thought as well, but the definition of in competition is actually game day.