Remove this Banner Ad

Drug testing results.

  • Thread starter Thread starter Eagle Ant
  • Start date Start date
  • Tagged users Tagged users None

🥰 Love BigFooty? Join now for free.

Eagle Ant

Club Legend
Joined
Nov 17, 2007
Posts
2,983
Reaction score
20
Location
School of hard Knocks
AFL Club
West Coast
Other Teams
SDFC, Kalamunda CC
The AFL today released the results of the Illicit Drug Policy out of competition testing for 2008, which showed the rate of failed tests has dropped by 76 per cent from the first year of testing in 2005.
The AFL again increased the number of Illicit Drug Policy Tests in 2008, to a record 1220 tests, with the rate of failed tests continued its downward trend, falling to 0.98 per cent of all tests carried out – the first time it has dropped below one per cent since the policy began in 2005.
In 2008 a total of 12 failed tests was recorded – a drop on the previous year of 14 per cent.
The number of players that recorded a second failed test in 2008 was two – also down on the 2007 figures.
No AFL player has recorded a third failed test in the four years of the Illicit Drug policy. More than 3330 tests have been conducted since the policy was introduced.
The number of tests that will be conducted in 2009 will rise to 1500, with all AFL players to be tested at least once during the year. Holiday hair testing has also been introduced as a two-year trial in 2009-2010.
The General Manager of Football Operations, Mr Adrian Anderson, said the results were a clear indication that the education programs and the basis to the policy of counseling and treatment was working to change player behaviour.
He said the AFL and AFLPA, in partnership with the players, had developed the policy on the best advice of the country’s leading medical and drug prevention experts. All changes had been evidence-based and the evidence was that the policy was working to reduce drug use and protect the ongoing health and welfare of players.
“In 2008 we tested more than ever before, we target-tested players more than ever before and we tested more players post-season than in any previous year and we have again recorded a significant drop in the number of failed tests recorded,” Mr Anderson said.
“Again this year, as with last year, we ramped up testing in the post-season period and recorded the majority of failed tests in the period immediately following the end of the season.”
“The experience of the doctors was that alcohol was also again a significant factor in most of the failed tests recorded, reinforcing the importance of the AFL’s Responsible Alcohol policy and team leadership groups in setting cultures of responsible drinking.”
The AFL is one of only three sports in the country that currently has an Illicit Drug policy where players have volunteered for testing and is the only sport that publishes its results each year.
AFL Players’ Association President Joel Bowden said the results vindicated the players’ support for out-of-competition testing.
“In 2005 AFL players made a bold and voluntary decision to sign up to a strong regime of testing for illicit drugs outside of competition,” Bowden said. “The motivation for doing this was our genuine commitment to the health and wellbeing of our fellow players. Make no mistake; the use of illicit drugs is incredibly dangerous.
“And it’s pleasing that the policy’s focus on health, education, player welfare and rehabilitation is proving to be effective. The statistics released today provide clear and measurable proof that our policy approach is working.”
Professor Jon Currie, the Director of Addiction Medicine at St Vincent's Hospital and the chairman of the Victorian Drug and Alcohol Prevention Council said the AFL policy was an example of a strong public health and welfare campaign in action.
"Once again the AFL is to be congratulated on the leadership that it continues to show through its Illicit Drug policy,” Professor Currie said.
“The AFL and the players have recognised that the issues related to illicit drug use are a health problem. They are actively addressing them through the medical principles of education, counselling, treatment and ongoing support which sends a vital message to our community that illicit drug use is a serious health risk which must be addressed openly, honestly and with expert knowledge. The AFL is also sending the message that help and treatment are available and effective, and should be sought as early as possible by anyone who is experiencing problems.
“The results released for 2008 confirm the effectiveness of the AFL's Illicit Drug and Responsible Alcohol policies, and the accompanying education and treatment programs that have been put in place, with the rate of failed tests continuing to fall despite the very intense level of testing now being conducted.”
“Importantly this is also a recognition from the players that these policies are acting to protect their health and welfare. The players should be congratulated for their courage and leadership."

AFL ILLICIT DRUG POLICY RESULTS – YEAR BY YEAR


[*]Does not include holiday hair tests.



http://www.afl.com.au/news/newsarticle/tabid/208/newsid/77745/default.aspx

Still 12 players in the AFL have been caught!!! and 2 were still on it the second time around.
And how many were caught with the holiday tests as they arnt mentioned.
Think its time for the 3 strike policy to be thrown out and the 1 chance rule brought in. ie you F*#K up once and get a warning you do it again and we Name you in the Media and to Club officials and you get a Suspension for 1 season.
If you caught a 3rd time you face a 3 year ban from the sport and a deregistration from the AFL and all afl affiliated Codes.

Its the only way we will cut this SH!T out.
Also I would like a rule where if say 12 players tested positive the first time the club gets Named and then the club gets informed of which player it is so they can stop the problem immediatly. This will show where the main problem is.
I mean if WCE had 3 players test positive I think they would like to know that our programes arnt working and maybe try somthing else rather then wait till we get penalised.
 
Thats all well and good EA but your forgetting that the AFLPA are the major sayers in this argument. If the rules are going to change the players all have to agree to it.
 

Log in to remove this Banner Ad

You guys have been doing acid suppositories. It's none of the AFL's business what players do in their own time. I'm miffed at how these sporting agencies think this is in their jurisdiction, especially since it does not have the backing of the vast majority of drug experts.

How about they spend their money making sure our sport is free of performance enhancing drugs. Cycling, athletics, and to a lesser extent swimming etc are full of doping. Let's make sure our sport never gets to that stage. If player X plays on Friday and takes cocaine on Saturday night, how is that the AFL's business?
 
You guys have been doing acid suppositories. It's none of the AFL's business what players do in their own time. I'm miffed at how these sporting agencies think this is in their jurisdiction, especially since it does not have the backing of the vast majority of drug experts.

How about they spend their money making our sport is free of performance enhancing drugs. Cycling, athletics, and to a lesser extent swimming etc are full of doping. Let's make sure our sport never gets to that stage. If player X plays on Friday and takes cocaine on Saturday night, how is that the AFL's business?

You're exactly right. But to be fair on the AFL, they don't try very hard to root out the druggies with this policy, I think it's more of a way to placate the public(with the media being the driving force).

I'd love to see newspapers and tv/radio corporations bring in the same rules for the media that AFL players have to put up with:D
 
Just heard on the News that the seven players who have tested positive TWICE:confused: so far will be named if they fail another AND wait for it,..... be suspended for between six and eighteen weeks. What a joke when you think of what happened to Cousins:mad:
 
Non-issue for mine. What have we got, 38 players per list x 16 teams = 608 players (aged from their late teens to early 30s) undergoing a total of 1220 tests and only 12 postive results.

I would be amazed if anyone conducted a similar test for that demographic for any other profession and got a better result.
 

Remove this Banner Ad

Non-issue for mine. What have we got, 38 players per list x 16 teams = 608 players (aged from their late teens to early 30s) undergoing a total of 1220 tests and only 12 postive results.

I would be amazed if anyone conducted a similar test for that demographic for any other profession and got a better result.

Very true and often overlooked fact. Statistically things are remarkably clean.
 
The results are pretty low but the thing that is wrong is that those culprits who are found out are not punished or 'outed' until the 3rd indiscretion! sounds like a limp wristed policy to me:D
 
Just heard on the News that the seven players who have tested positive TWICE:confused: so far will be named if they fail another AND wait for it,..... be suspended for between six and eighteen weeks. What a joke when you think of what happened to Cousins:mad:
Yeah i couldn't believe that either. 6 - 18 weeks, thats the sentence for a guy who is done 3 times! How pissweak is that. Not even a year out of the game, whereas in other sports the split second you are found out you're named, shamed and banned for a long time (at least 2 years+). Even if you only took something your mummy told you to have :D
 
Yeah i couldn't believe that either. 6 - 18 weeks, thats the sentence for a guy who is done 3 times! How pissweak is that.
What next, banning players for speeding in their car? It's not really the AFL's business outside work hours. And just because they are "role models" 24/7 does not mean they are working 24/7.


Not even a year out of the game, whereas in other sports the split second you are found out you're named, shamed and banned for a long time (at least 2 years+). Even if you only took something your mummy told you to have :D
You know there is a difference between PED and NPED, right?
 
Theres 3-4 months a year for them to f*** around for all i care. During the regular season while they have games they shouldn't be on the shit.

Im fully aware of the difference between PED and NPED. If any player is on PED they should be banned 1st time. The NPED imo can have a lighter 3 strikes penalty, pending on the seriousness of the substance.

Considering that your first example has happened already yes. Its like the severity of the speeding, if hes caught doing under 10ks over no of course not. If hes wasted doing 30ks over crashes and hits an innocent individual then he should be axed.
 
During the regular season while they have games they shouldn't be on the shit.
No alcohol as well, or is that not a drug in your eyes?



Considering that your first example has happened already yes. Its like the severity of the speeding, if hes caught doing under 10ks over no of course not. If hes wasted doing 30ks over crashes and hits an innocent individual then he should be axed.
Isn't that a legal and judicial matter? Why should the AFL be monitoring, passing judgement, and handing out penalties for this? We do actually have a police force and law courts.
 

🥰 Love BigFooty? Join now for free.

Surely you can see theres levels of severity in cases. Having a few drinks and taking ice are two completely different ends of the spectrum. If any other regular person was to do 'said' actions, we'd be counselled and confronted on the issue and the like. A breach of any rules, be it legal or team wise, should be disciplined.

A footy player should not be held in any higher regard than the average worker upholding a contract. They are not to be perceived as 'role models' however they are expected to abide to the same principles as any normal human is. Any breach should be dealt with in some manner and not swept under the rug until (X) number of times.

It is unprofessional for a guy to go out before a game, some lenience should be applied between after the game and recovery time for them to 'muck around' so to speak, provided they arent breaking any serious laws.
 
Surely you can see theres levels of severity in cases. Having a few drinks and taking ice are two completely different ends of the spectrum.
What about snorting a line of coke or smoking a joint vs getting drunk until 5am?


If any other regular person was to do 'said' actions, we'd be counselled and confronted on the issue and the like.
So your work drug tests you on the weekends?

A breach of any rules, be it legal or team wise, should be disciplined.
Are you saying the police and courts aren't doing their jobs well enough? Bit unfair that an employed person gets extra punishment than an unemployed person don't you think?

A footy player should not be held in any higher regard than the average worker upholding a contract. They are not to be perceived as 'role models' however they are expected to abide to the same principles as any normal human is.
So why do you advocate they be drug tested on weekends and on holidays. Apart from pilots and a few other jobs, the general population aren't treated like this.


It is unprofessional for a guy to go out before a game, some lenience should be applied between after the game and recovery time for them to 'muck around' so to speak, provided they arent breaking any serious laws.
Just contradicted yourself here. Have you thought this through?
 
I didnt explain it too well in the first post i made.

PED i perceive as cheating and therefore the first strike they're out. Recreational drugs, so long as its not conflicting with their footballing career is ok. EG. Kerr having a "big weekend" and not rocking up to training Monday morning like has occurred in the past is not on. As long as the stuff isn't still in their system while they've got training then theres no issue.

The players need to live their lives and what they do in their personal lives is their own business provided it doesn't negatively impact the job they're employed to do. Isn't that a reasonable assumption? Theres a time and place to do what they want. 5am certainly isnt the time and the day before a game certainly isn't either. I know the players go out the night of the game if they played during the day, i have absolutely no problem with that.

At no point did i advocate the testing during the holidays. The first point i made is that they should be allowed the freedom during their time off. They shouldn't be tested on the weekend, as all jobs are basically entitled to a day off every week. If anything i believe they should be tested prior to a game, and at a couple of randomly selected training dates. If the drugs are negatively impacting their football career, causing them to be unable to perform at their best, then i believe its an issue for the club and AFL.
 

Remove this Banner Ad

Remove this Banner Ad

🥰 Love BigFooty? Join now for free.

Back
Top Bottom