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.

 

[moses]

The only logical solution to this whole issue is to reinstate training on Tuesday and Thursday nights only, make the players get jobs and bring back State of Origin.

 

[Darksidepoints]

So the Melborne flag is tainted and will be handed back?

Someone didnt read the entire article

 

[Priddis Is Done]

Someone didnt read the entire article

I read it

 

[Darksidepoints]

I read it

Highlight where it mentions specific clubs, ie MFC?

 

[Crankyhawk]

Yeah, a player who self reports is assisted to avoid game day detection. That’s it.

Means that every player can choose to access it (so similar to having the in car breathos they can choose to use or not)

 

[CliffMcTainshaw]

That would be a fantastic result. The quicker the AFL are done with those idiots the better.

But it won't happen. There's nothing conflicting in the AFL's voluntary illicit drug policy with WADA match day code for cocaine.

As long as players aren't dodging drug tests or taking other substances there's no reason I'm aware of that they can't have all the coke in the world and test to make sure they're clean by match days.

Ie. this story is junk.

Isn't whole point of what the AFL are sanctioning, is to dodge drug tests?
While most people suspect cocaine, there are a lot of other drugs prohibited on game day, cannabis is one and lots of things found in cough mixtures. You can see random testing coming in and conducted by WADA, not the AFL, both in and out of season, just the same as for Olympic athletes, with the AFL footing the bill. Another likely outcome could be that every injured player will required to be available for testing on the day of the game and will be tested.
If Parliament won't allow Andrew Wilkie to submit his evidence, then he should simply submit it to WADA.

 

[RAPPA]

Just listened to Paul Marsh on SEN trying to justify the position. Such a laugh.

 

[Sphynx]

The reporting on this has been pretty disgraceful, I've even heard some sections of the media start commending the AFL on a "progressive" welfare policy


I see it as a pretty simple solution.

1. The Illicit drugs policy moves from a "voluntary" policy to a mandated one. The AFLPA can * off tbh if they don't like it, there's the integrity of the sport and it's stake holders (i.e the fans and the combined 1.5m club members who fund this sport). It's no different to the gambling policy. We wouldn't let a player continue betting on games, not report them, not penalise them, just because they have a gambling addicition and mental health problems.

2. The entire model remains the same regarding anonymity and mid week testing, with one tweak. When a player is placed in the "medical model" after a self positive test, they receive a strike. They receive further strikes for any future positive test. The pay off of the self testing is not testing positive on game day (i.e a 2 year performance enhancing drug ban from WADA). End of. You get 2 chances, you don't get a third.

Racking up 20-30 positive tests with no form of accountability is over.

3. Strike 3 within the self reporting system = you are named publicly and suspended for 20 weeks. 4 strikes is a 12 month ban. 5 strikes is de-registration.

AFL football isn't for everyone and if you can't prevent yourself from taking illicit drugs 2-3 days out from match day, and it doesn't sink in after the "welfare model" kicks in, then you lose the privilege.



Let's see how many players want to get on the bags on a Friday night before a Sunday game with the above system.


If you see 20-30 players suspended a year, at least it's completely out in the open how bad the social issue is and the AFL isn't defrauding it's stakeholders and sponsors. At the moment they 100% are if the reports are true that there a 100+ players within the medical model immune to strikes from positive drug tests.

 

[Percel]

Only 100.

Just a lazy 5 teams on match day

 

[garlic munchers]

I suspect the Demon hierarchy and AFL officials who kneecapped the club President slept a tad uneasily last night.

Glen much better.

Yet to see any of the Demon posters who steadfastly potted him admit they may have been wrong. When they do, it will be good win.

 

[Corkintheocean]

The reporting on this has been pretty disgraceful, I've even heard some sections of the media start commending the AFL on a "progressive" welfare policy


I see it as a pretty simple solution.

1. The Illicit drugs policy moves from a "voluntary" policy to a mandated one. The AFLPA can * off tbh if they don't like it, there's the integrity of the sport and it's stake holders (i.e the fans and the combined 1.5m club members who fund this sport). It's no different to the gambling policy. We wouldn't let a player continue betting on games, not report them, not penalise them, just because they have a gambling addicition and mental health problems.

2. The entire model remains the same regarding anonymity and mid week testing, with one tweak. When a player is placed in the "medical model" after a self positive test, they receive a strike. They receive further strikes for any future positive test. The pay off of the self testing is not testing positive on game day (i.e a 2 year performance enhancing drug ban from WADA). End of. You get 2 chances, you don't get a third.

Racking up 20-30 positive tests with no form of accountability is over.

3. Strike 3 within the self reporting system = you are named publicly and suspended for 20 weeks. 4 strikes is a 12 month ban. 5 strikes is de-registration.

AFL football isn't for everyone and if you can't prevent yourself from taking illicit drugs 2-3 days out from match day, and it doesn't sink in after the "welfare model" kicks in, then you lose the privilege.



Let's see how many players want to get on the bags on a Friday night before a Sunday game with the above system.


If you see 20-30 players suspended a year, at least it's completely out in the open how bad the social issue is and the AFL isn't defrauding it's stakeholders and sponsors. At the moment they 100% are if the reports are true that there a 100+ players within the medical model immune to strikes from positive drug tests.

Exactly this. It's a symptom of the times where individual protectionism and focus on 'self care' trumps what is best for the majority of the community/society. It's an even more damning indictment when those individuals are affluent and educated enough to take responsibility for their own actions but instead want to have their cake and eat it to.

If players want to continue to consume recreational drugs en masse, any emotional ongoing support and assistance should come from the AFLPA's own pocket rather than the pocket of other stakeholders, of which includes paying members and the federal government.

No other sport in the world that I am aware of complicity allows their participants to consume A class drugs and then assists in the masking of this consumption. Ponder that for a moment.

 

[Coops93]

Get the feeling we won't see many late outs due to "tightness" or "awareness" for a while.

 

[pattymalone00]

 

[memoryofmchale]

And who is forking up the billions of dollars it will cost to build purpose built facilities to produce and regulate it then?

They’re not just going to say it’s now regulated but the source remains the same and it’s free rein to fund these groups.

Decriminalisation doesn’t mean it’s legal. It still remains illegal based on the source but is dealt with differently.

When 70-80% of the world’s supply comes out of Columbia, that’s a massive production facility you are asking to be funded to replace that supply to regulate its supply ethically.

It’s a huge contradiction from the AFL and people here who continue to act like they care about player welfare, concussion, mental health etc but then are giving players free rein to take drugs. When those drugs are associated with contributing towards depression, heart inflammation, lung damage, brain function and a whole range of other health issues. That doesn’t sound like something the AFL should be allowing amongst professional athletes or supports should promote.

The most sensible take here. It’s not a matter of legalisation to fix everything. There are a plethora of consequences - intended or unintended.

 

[Eshay187]

I honestly think this is good, and more inline with society.

Young risk taking people living away from home for the first time with high salaries are going to take drugs.

If they are going to test positive for a gameday, they don’t play.

Ridiculous that a 21 year old could get a 4 year ban for still having cocaine in their system on game day.

This protects the game by ensuring people on drugs aren’t playing, and accepts the reality that some young men are going to get high.

 

[Dazb86]

He didn't happen to come to Melbourne did he?

Yeah he did.

 

[sosos]

Ask yourself: would the AFL rather deal with something publicly and face headlines or keep it all quiet?

If there were genuine journalists covering the sport and not just sycophants suckling from the teat of league headquarters we may find out.

Will take a Nick McKenzie type to come in and go scorched earth to outlay to the public just how insidious the league is.

When the AFL drove the bus over Carlton early this century for salary cap cheating, they soon learned they had actually self-inflicted a bigger penalty on themselves, by nearly killing one of the bigger money earners in the competition.

And the lesson was well learnt.

Then we saw the tanking/not tanking punishment handed out to Melbourne to avoid affecting the new cash cow of gambling advertising and sponsorship. Revenue protected, and club cushioned.

Then we saw how they did their utmost to help Essendon, another high value customer, through their performance enhancing drugs issues, and air brush any other club from scrutiny. And again, both revenue and club protected.

They own the aflpa, and the media and they employ peerless PR spin doctors and expensive lawyers.

One could maybe say they are essentially white collar criminals, running a sporting code.

 

[Obeanie1]

Gameday only though, WADA couldn’t give a s**t about coke out of competition.
Media has been looking for an angle on the joke that is the AFL drug policy, this will blow it to smithereens.
I think it’s safe to say Clarry didn’t have a 10 week hamstring last year, you can try all you like to convince me I’m talking bollocks but you’ll be wasting your time.
AFL endorsed corruption, who woulda thunk it….Glenn Bartlett is an animal


Sent from my iPhone using BigFooty.com

Didnt Buddy have a long "injury layoff" after side swiping was it 9 parked cars one night in some quiet residential street?

Wonder why the NSW cops didnt drug test him at the scene of an accident?

noted the report mentions an alarming number of players with a cocaine habit moving from interstate. None leaves Melbourne the city with a drug habit? Wow. We should just move the entire comp to Victoria, problem solved!

 

[memoryofmchale]

Isn't whole point of what the AFL are sanctioning, is to dodge drug tests?
While most people suspect cocaine, there are a lot of other drugs prohibited on game day, cannabis is one and lots of things found in cough mixtures. You can see random testing coming in and conducted by WADA, not the AFL, both in and out of season, just the same as for Olympic athletes, with the AFL footing the bill. Another likely outcome could be that every injured player will required to be available for testing on the day of the game and will be tested.
If Parliament won't allow Andrew Wilkie to submit his evidence, then he should simply submit it to WADA.

Whilst cocaine is the only one talked about, statistics from the general population almost certainly would say that players are using and addicted to other banned substances.

It’s easy to rattle off the excuses for cocaine but the process for PEDs or other illicit substances is the same.

Nothing about this is for player welfare - it’s to stop the ugly newspaper headings and media attention that is crippling for the game’s image.

 

[memoryofmchale]

When the AFL drove the bus over Carlton early this century for salary cap cheating, they soon learned they had actually self-inflicted a bigger penalty on themselves, by nearly killing one of the bigger money earners in the competition.

And the lesson was well learnt.

Then we saw the tanking/not tanking punishment handed out to Melbourne to avoid affecting the new cash cow of gambling advertising and sponsorship. Revenue protected, and club cushioned.

Then we saw how they did their utmost to help Essendon, another high value customer, through their performance enhancing drugs issues, and air brush any other club from scrutiny. And again, both revenue and club protected.

They own the aflpa, and the media and they employ peerless PR spin doctors and expensive lawyers.

One could maybe say they are essentially white collar criminals, running a sporting code.

Don’t forget Whitfield at the GIANTS and how that was hidden away and the Gold Coast Suns fiasco. Once upon a time, the Suns change room was rumoured to be split down the middle with players who prayed on one side and players who were up to all sorts of trouble. They were never killing those clubs and shielded them.

You are so right about them controlling the amount they do. The AFL answers to nobody and does not ever stand in court. Silence is worth every cent.

 

[memoryofmchale]

Highlight where it mentions specific clubs, ie MFC?

Didn’t Wilkie specifically name the Melbourne Demons doctor?

 

[Obeanie1]

Workers on a large mining site with heavy machinery and high risk of death or serious injury if something goes wrong vs some blokes chasing a pigskin around a park for a couple of hours. Yeah I see the comparison.

So AFL players taking coke or other drugs arent putting themselves and others at risk?

 

[BomberManU]

I honestly think this is good, and more inline with society.

Young risk taking people living away from home for the first time with high salaries are going to take drugs.

If they are going to test positive for a gameday, they don’t play.

Ridiculous that a 21 year old could get a 4 year ban for still having cocaine in their system on game day.

This protects the game by ensuring people on drugs aren’t playing, and accepts the reality that some young men are going to get high.

They live a charmed life, with many, many opportunities that aren't available to others. While earning very, very good coin. Asking them to refrain from taking illegal drugs, during the season, doesn't seem to be too much to ask.

 

[SunshineBoy]

Bad week for Oliver and sidebottom to be managed

 

[Hoops]

But no one is asking the AFL to ban anyone ... The AFL are circumventing WADA.

The AFL aren't being asked to be the police here, they are being asked why are they guiding players on how to avoid the police (WADA) and still be able to commit the "crime" so that they don't get caught.

I hope they are also running classes on how to coerce women into not reporting sexual assault because the last thing anyone wants is for a swarth of players being banned for doing what hundreds of young men do every year. Be reasonable.

There is no "crime" if they don't play. They're preventing it. There are no long term benefits for illicit drug use.

It's the same as preventing them in engaging in sexual assault. Or would you rather that they do it so they can be held to account?