Play Nice Drugs - we're losing

Remove this Banner Ad

blackcat

Brandon at the peachpit
Dec 29, 2003
27,722
13,773
Beverly Hills 90210 Antifa bracket
AFL Club
Richmond
2) Why do the AFL get government support anyway? They make money from the $2.8 billion TV rights deal, plus money from attendance, merchandise, and other sources. I read a few years ago that the AFL is the fifth most profitable venture in Australia. The money they make out of Grand Final tickets alone makes a pretty penny for them. So they can tell the government to get stuffed, because they can survive without one cent of taxpayers' money.

Also, why do they operate under the auspices of WADA? The only reason that the AFL even went under the WADA code was to make themselves "look good" and at the "forefront of sports testing". That was an Andrew Demetriou idea, who cares more about what people outside of football think, than the fan who attends every week. The AFL thought that they would get pats on the back for willingly submitting themselves to the WADA code. Well, they were wrong. The AFL should tell WADA to f... off as well.
was demetriou rent seeking from the australian sports commission government grant from canberra to get the ostensibily hypothecated national australia bank money to run auskick and auslan like medusala will attest cos vlad or the greek was pretty keen on those bonuses from fitzpatrick and the commish to feather his nest so he really need the rent sought grant from bartels or wylie or whomever is heading up the ay ess sea phonetics at this time

/extemporisation ToT
 

Log in to remove this ad.

telsor

Hall of Famer
Aug 29, 2004
33,437
32,579
Here
AFL Club
Richmond
Other Teams
Habs
2) Why do the AFL get government support anyway?
Officially, because encouraging sport at high levels encourages it a lower levels, and keeping people active improves the general health and wellbeing of the people of the country.

Unofficially, there are votes in being associated with popular things.
 

blackcat

Brandon at the peachpit
Dec 29, 2003
27,722
13,773
Beverly Hills 90210 Antifa bracket
AFL Club
Richmond
Officially, because encouraging sport at high levels encourages it a lower levels, and keeping people active improves the general health and wellbeing of the people of the country.

Unofficially, there are votes in being associated with popular things.
upload_2016-8-2_0-8-3.jpeg


aka hammer mclachlan grooming the next generation of consumers.

besides the fact that NAB probably give about 5million a year to the AFL coffers. that is prolly a conservative estimate.
 

Wallaby

Norm Smith Medallist
May 8, 2007
9,839
13,183
vic
AFL Club
Richmond
Interesting to see that a British Cyclist has been cleared to participate in the Olympics after being cleared of missing 3 drug tests in a year.

https://www.theguardian.com/sport/2016/aug/01/rio-2016-lizzie-armitstead-court-appeal-olympics

She argued successfully that the tester did not exactly follow the procedure for contact during on of the tests, and therefore it wasn't her fault that the test was missed. CAS agreed, and wiped the 'missed test' from her record.

Not a word said about the other two missing tests by the British media. They are still outstanding.

The Brits have a terrible record with missing tests - of course Christine Ohurougu famously missed 3 and was only given a 12-month ban (which meant she missed the Comm games, but no Worlds or Olympics. Plenty have missed 2, but avoided the 3 (how lucky is that?).

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/ot...s-missing-drugs-tests-in-last-five-years.html
 

blackcat

Brandon at the peachpit
Dec 29, 2003
27,722
13,773
Beverly Hills 90210 Antifa bracket
AFL Club
Richmond
she's British so definitely not a drug cheat.
the astounding improvements in their cycling and athletics programs over the last few years have all come from hard work and lottery money.
gordonstoun timbertop geelong grammar muscular christianity and chariots of fire. the film. and you need to know the film to unnerstan the #Poe's_law
 

Markfs

Brownlow Medallist
Nov 13, 2008
15,922
12,251
Fremantle
AFL Club
Collingwood
Other Teams
Margot Robbie's Shaving Team...
Get athletes to sign contracts between the olympic body and the athlete that states that if they return a positive drug sample, they will be precluded from competing at the olympics. Unfortunately, the individual sporting federations hold the power. Each controlling body in each country would need to draw up a contract that states that the athlete would never represent their country if they returned a positive sample.

Another approach would be for people to stop buying Nike products if that company continues to sponsor druggie athletes like Maria Sharapova.... of course that would require people to refrain from bolsering their self-worth by wearing clothing made in Indonesian and Chinese sweatshops. Sounds too hard to me...
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

blackcat

Brandon at the peachpit
Dec 29, 2003
27,722
13,773
Beverly Hills 90210 Antifa bracket
AFL Club
Richmond
Clyde palmer has kids with gina rheinhart....
is that a portmanteau of clyde packer and clive palmer

an interesting sidenote, the partner of lang hancock the mining prospector was a perth accountant, who had an equal share on those billion dollar Rio leases...

the son of that accountant inherited a few hundred million/billion... and he fathered an illegitimate daughter in Perth, and Lang also fathered an illegitmate aboriginal daughter up in the Pilbara...

HanCOCK qua cock and the accountant never saw any potential in the rubber prophylactic ansell market innit

i prefer Gina to Rose Porteus. You would never know, but Gina was very fetching as a young lass

look how gorgeous the young rinehart was
upload_2016-8-3_15-30-57.jpeg


dont know if i trust Henry Kissinger, he might be doing a little bit of that Trump daughter lust like Zeus and Cenchreis mythology tale(s)

then again, Henry K's aphorism about power's aphrodisiac
perf alumnus Contra Mundum
 
Last edited:

blackcat

Brandon at the peachpit
Dec 29, 2003
27,722
13,773
Beverly Hills 90210 Antifa bracket
AFL Club
Richmond
Get athletes to sign contracts between the olympic body and the athlete that states that if they return a positive drug sample, they will be precluded from competing at the olympics. Unfortunately, the individual sporting federations hold the power. Each controlling body in each country would need to draw up a contract that states that the athlete would never represent their country if they returned a positive sample.

Another approach would be for people to stop buying Nike products if that company continues to sponsor druggie athletes like Maria Sharapova.... of course that would require people to refrain from bolsering their self-worth by wearing clothing made in Indonesian and Chinese sweatshops. Sounds too hard to me...
get stock brokers to refrain from inside trading and vizard. that ill work innit
 

PoopingHindi

Norm Smith Medallist
Jun 27, 2012
6,417
10,978
AFL Club
Hawthorn
Other Teams
Tottenham Hotspur FC
Get athletes to sign contracts between the olympic body and the athlete that states that if they return a positive drug sample, they will be precluded from competing at the olympics. Unfortunately, the individual sporting federations hold the power. Each controlling body in each country would need to draw up a contract that states that the athlete would never represent their country if they returned a positive sample.

Another approach would be for people to stop buying Nike products if that company continues to sponsor druggie athletes like Maria Sharapova.... of course that would require people to refrain from bolsering their self-worth by wearing clothing made in Indonesian and Chinese sweatshops. Sounds too hard to me...
only the extremely stupid, desperate or greedy test positive so athletes could sign any contract you like and it wont make one iota of difference.
 

RussellEbertHandball

Flick pass expert
Nov 16, 2004
69,980
108,330
SE Oz
AFL Club
Port Adelaide
Other Teams
The Mighty Blacks
SBS has gone into the PED info game. Tonight at 9.30pm your local time Dateline looks at
The Betrayal of Kenya's Athletes - More than 40 Kenyan athletes have failed doping tests in the past four years. On the eve of the Olympics, Dateline asks if the country has been able to win the race against cheating and corruption. If you miss it ctach it later On Demand at
http://www.sbs.com.au/ondemand/program/dateline

and last night with the On Demand link below
Sports Doping: Winning At Any Cost?
Dr Xand van Tulleken investigates the world of performance-enhancing drugs: from the athletes seeking the rewards of fame, glory and lucrative sponsorship deals to the hundreds of thousands of people in the UK now regularly taking anabolic steroids to look good and buff up. His investigation reveals the extraordinary gamble dopers take with their health. (From the UK)
http://www.sbs.com.au/ondemand/video/727310403660

This guy has a twin brother Chris, both are doctors and do doco series for the BBC separately and together. Because they are identical twins and genetic copy of each other, they set up their docos where one does one thing and the other does the opposite or nothing and then compare the results.

A couple of years ago one ate a lot of sugar and the other a lot of fat. One drank a lot the other abstained. They are different mentally which makes some of their docos so great to watch.

Chris is more sporty than Xand, but Xand starts off like a typical sports fan in the above linked doco as not believing most of his sporting heros are doping, especially footballers and tennis players. Despite his medical background he doesn't want to believe until the facts are too great.

He talks to ex Marion Jones partner and ex World Record 100m runner Tim Montgomery, who was trained by Trevor Graham and used Victor Conte of BALCO Labs famous TGH "the clear" and many other drugs. Xand trains with him and Montgomery openly says the drugs allowed him reach his full potential. Montgomery now is a sprinting coach for up and coming sprinters. What do you reckon he advises them re PED's????

He goes and buys a Whizzinator over the net and tests it out. Its a bit of a laugh but he comes to the conclusion its a great doping tool. Mike Tyson has admitted to using one to pass a drug test. Don't know what a Whizzinator is?? Check it out at
http://www.thewhizzinator.com/
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Whizzinator

He talks to a steroid user whose kidney failed and needed a transplant from his wife.

He talks to the professor in Florida who along with colleagues invented what became known in the press as the Schwarzenegger mouse. After it was made public he was getting calls from people involved in sports from all around the world including a college football coach who wanted to inject his team with the stuff eventhough he had no idea what it was.

Watch when they try out Brain Training - which along with genetic doping is supposed to be the future of sports medicine/doping/improvements. It isn't illegal or banned at the moment but Xand who isn't the sporty type like Chris, beats Chris in a physical exercise after being "Brain Trained"

"Its called transcranial direct current stimulation and the prof passes a very mild electrical current over an area of the brain called the dorsolateral prefrontal cortex, and the intention of that is to try to reduce the pain that you feel during exercise and we expect the effect of that is to improve your endurance performance. So you're running an electrical current through our brains? -Essentially, yes." Read transcript at

http://subsaga.com/bbc/documentarie...016/12-sports-doping-winning-at-any-cost.html

Info on the brothers
http://www.vantullekenbrothers.com
Chris and Xand have worked on a variety of projects together, including Operation Ouch, a 2x BAFTA winning children's health show on Children's BBC, now in its fourth season.

Xand van Tulleken is the Helen Hamlyn Senior Fellow at Fordham University's Institute of International Humanitarian Affairs. He has a diploma in Tropical Medicine, a Diploma in International Humanitarian Assistance and a Master's in Public Health from Harvard, where he was a Fulbright Scholar. He is a registered Doctor with the General Medical Council of the UK without a licence to practice. Xand is a contributing editor to the first edition of the Oxford Handbook of Humanitarian Medicine and has worked for Doctors of the World, Merlin and the World Health Organization in humanitarian crises around the world. Xand has presented numerous shows for the BBC and Channel 4 including: Operation Ouch, Blow Your Mind, Horizon, Secret Life of Twins, and Medicine Men Gone Wild.
Chris trained in medicine at Oxford and is a Member of the Royal College of Physicians. He has a diploma in Tropical Medicine from the London School of Tropical Medicine and after more than a decade working in the NHS he is now doing a PhD in Molecular Virology under the supervision of Greg Towers at UCL. He is one of the BBC’s leading science presenters and has worked on many programs including: Trust Me, I'm a Doctor, Horizon,The Truth About..., Operation Iceberg, Cloud Lab, Museum of Life, andBlizzard: Race to the Pole, among others.
 
Last edited:

GTOA

Club Legend
Oct 24, 2014
1,377
1,484
AFL Club
Geelong
Let me ask people here a question.

First, I have no problems with drug cheating being an issue. I never have. There is no room in sport for people who do the wrong thing there.

However, my concern has not been what WADA does, but their methods of doing it.

Do I trust WADA? Yes. But anyone can make mistakes.

I just feel that this blind pursuit of "cleaning up sport" is going to have some unfair casualities.

Now, if you cheat, you deserve four years. If you fail a drug test, no problem. But to convict sportspeople without solid evidence, based on one or two people, who may have their own interests in mind, isn't a big enough burden of proof to wipe someone out for four years, strip them of achievements, tarnish their name, and effectively end their career.

So, the questions are these. What if WADA gets it wrong one time? What if, in their pursuit of getting guilty drug cheats, they get someone who gets convicted on flimsy evidence, only for later more evidence comes to light that clears them?

Doesn't that bother anyone here? Doesn't it concern you if a sportsperson, one day, gets rubbed out for four years, only, down the track, for new evidence to emerge, which makes it that the person is, in fact, innocent?

There are people in prison, and who, in the US, have got the death penalty, only for later it be shown that they were innocent after all. Lindy Chamberlain went to prison for something she has since been cleared of. If the police and the courts can make mistakes, when they have a higher burden of proof, then WADA definitely can.

This is why there is "innocent until proven guilty", because, as a society, while we want the guilty to pay, a good society also doesn't want the wrong person convicted. We should not be so bent on hate and revenge, that it doesn't matter who pays, as long as someone does.

Not needing positive tests as evidence bothers me. It is lazy investigating to just go by someone else's word for it. Remember, neither Lance Armstrong nor Cadel Evans have ever failed a drug test, so why does that make Armstrong guilty or Evans innocent?

Suggestions of rubbing out the entire Russian team is dumb. There might be 14 year old gymnasts, or 18 year old swimmers for Russia, at their first Olympics, who weren't even part of that regime. Why should they miss their Olympic dream, because of laziness or sloppiness in trying to investigate and capture ONLY the guilty and suspending them. Condemning a whole country is an easy way, but is it the right way?

Don't believe everything the media tell you. I hear many people on talkback and who write letters and even post here, who just swallow whatever the media tell them. They parrot what they have read or heard. Newspapers, radio and TV care about selling papers and ratings, so they have reason to want to make this a bigger deal.

Don't tell me it could never happen that an innocent sportsperson could get rubbed out one day. It only has to happen once, and once is one time too many.

Who do WADA answer to anyway? Who does their checks and balances, and decides whether they have a case or not? This worries me too, if they are some rogue operation, who are deciding the fate of sportspeople and ending their careers. They have to get it 100% right, 100% of the time, or mistakes will be made, and the ramifications are too big to fix the damage to someone's career, once done.

Yes, we need to stamp out drugs in sport. But is it worth costing someone's career, who may not have done it after all? It may not have happened yet, but I predict, one day, WADA will get too sure of themselves, and that person will turn around and sue for millions. How will you feel then? Or are innocent sportspeople who lose their careers just collateral damage for the "greater good" of wiping out drugs in sport?
 
Last edited:

GreyCrow

TheBrownDog
Mar 21, 2016
60,995
93,644
Down South Corvus Tristis
AFL Club
Adelaide
Other Teams
Sturt, Redskins , White Sox
So, the questions are these. What is WADA gets it wrong one time? What if, in their pursuit of getting guilty drug cheats, they get someone who gets convicted on flimsy evidence, only for later more evidence comes to light that clears them?
I actually wouldn't be too fussed. Not because of any lack of care but the opposite. Currently the IOC and WADA have consistently stripped athletes/sportspeople YEARS after an event. Once better testing and samples are re-analysed. Ironically I then feel anyone innocent , in the short term will feel the wrath , but will ultimately be found not guilty and reinstated.
 

GTOA

Club Legend
Oct 24, 2014
1,377
1,484
AFL Club
Geelong
Officially, because encouraging sport at high levels encourages it a lower levels, and keeping people active improves the general health and wellbeing of the people of the country.

Unofficially, there are votes in being associated with popular things.

So, it seems that the govt get more out of it than the AFL.

So then, why doesn't the AFL tell the government to shove their drugs testing program, since the AFL has nothing to lose (except their "reputation" by media commentators who, if it wasn't this, would criticise something else the AFL do instead)? This money can be used on better things, and the AFL will go along making money on its own, and running the competition its own way.
 

GTOA

Club Legend
Oct 24, 2014
1,377
1,484
AFL Club
Geelong
I actually wouldn't be too fussed. Not because of any lack of care but the opposite. Currently the IOC and WADA have consistently stripped athletes/sportspeople YEARS after an event. Once better testing and samples are re-analysed. Ironically I then feel anyone innocent , in the short term will feel the wrath , but will ultimately be found not guilty and reinstated.

Reinstated? But years later, their career might be over.

In sport, you have ten, maybe fifteen good years. Well, most do. If someone is found not guilty, it's not much good if they are now too old to go back to that sport, and they have missed out on whatever they could have achieved.

If there are clean Russian athletes who are denied the Games this time, that might be a Gold Medal that that person could have legitimately won, and deserved to win, which would be denied to them if they are rubbed out because they were born Russian.

Also, mud sticks. Once an allegation is out there, there will always be people who still think you are guilty. I bet there are people who still say that Lindy Chamberlain killed Aazaria, no matter that the court has ruled otherwise. People believe what they want to believe, and a tarnished reputation will never fully be repaired.

What does it say about you that you aren't too fussed if a clean athlete gets rubbed out accidentally? If you were this sportspeople, I bet you would be singing a different tune. Hypothetically, I know if this happened to me, I would sue WADA for every cent, and send them broke. Then I would sue media outlets and commentators who besmirched my reputation as well, to make back the money I was denied during my sporting career.

If someone gets a medal, only to be stripped years later, then that can be dealt with easily, and any damage can be repaired. Who cares if the now-guilty athlete loses their medal and gets their reputation ruined, and the person they beat will get their medal instead. For example, Jared Tallent.

But if it is the other way, a clean athlete being banned, because of a WADA error, then that is a lot harder to repair the damage. Just like executing someone on death row who is later found to be innocent, in the same way a sportsperson later found to be completely innocent of doping will find it a lot harder to put their life back together. He or she can't ever get the medal they might have one, if they had been able to compete in the contests that they missed out on. The person who won instead won't be stripped of it, because they didn't do anything wrong either. They may have missed out on employment opportunites, because they were a supposed "drug cheat", their marriage might break down because of it, and some may even suffer depression or other problems because of it.

This "mob mentality" needs to stop. Just cool your jets, and find out more first, before going along with the crowd and believing that everything you get told is how it actually is. Too many people drink the "Kool-Aid' and never question whether WADA get it right, all the time. I would hope that we are a smarter society than that.
 

telsor

Hall of Famer
Aug 29, 2004
33,437
32,579
Here
AFL Club
Richmond
Other Teams
Habs
So, it seems that the govt get more out of it than the AFL.

So then, why doesn't the AFL tell the government to shove their drugs testing program, since the AFL has nothing to lose (except their "reputation" by media commentators who, if it wasn't this, would criticise something else the AFL do instead)? This money can be used on better things, and the AFL will go along making money on its own, and running the competition its own way.
Because the AFL still needs to deal with the government on a great many issues regardless and pissing them off is a really bad move? Especially when they'd lose the PR fight that came from it, meaning they'd be portrayed as the bad guys. (and politicians love being strongly 'against' bad guys..not least because it helps hide all the other bad guys they're mates with).

There is also the not insubstantial issue of player health and safety, and dumping PED prevention programs would give them lots of problems on that front (from worksafe initially, but also down the line you can expect a lot of players to end up suing them).
 

Remove this Banner Ad

Remove this Banner Ad