How does the current drug debate reflect on the Lawrence Angwin issue?

[Didaics]

The boy turned up to training on the gear. Silly yes, but probably a mistake made by somebody (dare I say it) less expierienced in using and hiding the use of drugs than others may be (or have been).

Angwin went for the same offence that this Johns bloke in the ARL was able to get away with his entire career and come out the other end the best player (apparently) their code had seen.

 

[thatswhatimtalkinabout]

The boy turned up to training on the gear. Silly yes, but probably a mistake made by somebody (dare I say it) less expierienced in using and hiding the use of drugs than others may be (or have been).

Angwin went for the same offence that this Johns bloke in the ARL was able to get away with his entire career and come out the other end the best player (apparently) their code had seen.

I think that it actually reflects pretty badly on Carlton now.

At the time it was seen as disciplined by the club, but really they just cut him adrift and he's been drifting ever since.

That said, I don't know whether they offered him support at all - it just doesn't look that way from the outside looking in.

 

[mwalker]

At the time I thought it was a pretty strong stance by Carlton and I agreed with the decision. I thought it sent a pretty strong message to the rest of the players (Carlton and the other teams) and that most other clubs would follow if they found themselves in a similiar situation.

However if would appear it has not turned out that way.

BTW I think Carlton did offer some help but he turned it down, although I am not sure how much Carlton pursued the matter. I could be very wrong though, I can't seem to remember back that far. It must be all the good times I have had between then and now. Thank God I am not a footballer...

 

[XXX KINGS]

I think that it actually reflects pretty badly on Carlton now.

At the time it was seen as disciplined by the club, but really they just cut him adrift and he's been drifting ever since.

That said, I don't know whether they offered him support at all - it just doesn't look that way from the outside looking in.

Mate, Carlton gave him more than one chance and it wasn't like the drug incident with Karl Norman was a one off. The guy was a total nut case and had broken into a couple of houses and stolen stuff, including his best mate Norman. It was the same reason that the Crows got rid of him. The drug incident was the straw that broke the camel's back.

The guy had all the talent in the world and could have been a great player, such a pity he was all over the shop upstairs.

 

[doh its me]

Its easy to critisize Carltom but you should know all the facts before doing so.

Firstly arriving at training still "Buzzing" shows a total lack of respect for teamates and the club.

Secondly Angwin also broke into the home of a teammate and burgaled the joint.

He was becoming a very bad influence on Karl Norman who also came to training under the influence of ecstacy.

All this within 6-7 weeks of joining a club that offered him a 2nd chance after he was booted from Adelaide for attitude problems.

Angwin proved he was not sincere in a commitment to respect his new club and commit to football.

Carlton owed him nothing and needed to remove such an influence from the club

 

[mikeythemoocow]

if I turned up to work on drugs I'd be sacked. Why should afl players get be aloude too.

 

[Mr Lizard]

I don't think Angwin was cut for not being a good role model, I think it was because he was slightly unhinged and not exactly pulling in the same direction as the team.

Carlton wasn't 'taking a stand against drugs', they were removing the bad apple.

 

[The Passenger]

Lawrence Angwin is the player i'm talking about when i say "i dont mind what players do as long as it doesn't effect their performance"

drugs obviousbly effected his performance, and as such he was sacked. rightly so.

With Ben Cousins i don't think it effected his performance, but it effected his ability to train which is why he missed training sessions. As such he was suspended, which is effecting his performance because he can't play.

I'm not a fan at all of players being forcefully suspended by an orgnisation for recreational drugs.

I think it should be up the player to be able to control himself when he is playing, and if he is out of control up to the club to deal with it.

Lawrence Angwin wasn't able to control himself and as such was cut from the club. sacked.

I also don't think Carlton has any responsiblity after that to look after him. they didn't contribute to what he was doing.

If you continue to employ someone knowing he was using drugs regularly than i think you have a responsibility to help him, as Newcastle did with Andrew Johns, and as West Coast have now done with Ben Cousins.

It does seem to me though that the fellas at the top can get away with a lot more than the rookies... but then that's the same in any organisation. If the managing director rocks up hungover 3 times a week then he's gonna be fine. If the second week secretary rocks up hungover, she's looking at the axe. that's just the way life is isn't it??

 

[greennick]

Lawrence Angwin is the player i'm talking about when i say "i dont mind what players do as long as it doesn't effect their performance"

drugs obviousbly effected his performance, and as such he was sacked. rightly so.

With Ben Cousins i don't think it effected his performance, but it effected his ability to train which is why he missed training sessions. As such he was suspended, which is effecting his performance because he can't play.

I'm not a fan at all of players being forcefully suspended by an orgnisation for recreational drugs.

I think it should be up the player to be able to control himself when he is playing, and if he is out of control up to the club to deal with it.

Lawrence Angwin wasn't able to control himself and as such was cut from the club. sacked.

I also don't think Carlton has any responsiblity after that to look after him. they didn't contribute to what he was doing.

If you continue to employ someone knowing he was using drugs regularly than i think you have a responsibility to help him, as Newcastle did with Andrew Johns, and as West Coast have now done with Ben Cousins.

It does seem to me though that the fellas at the top can get away with a lot more than the rookies... but then that's the same in any organisation. If the managing director rocks up hungover 3 times a week then he's gonna be fine. If the second week secretary rocks up hungover, she's looking at the axe. that's just the way life is isn't it??

Exactly.

On the last bit, you get credits for what you have contributed to a club. Angwin had none when he ****ed up. Fair enough he got dumped. The same thing happens in every workplace.

 

[Angus1]

The boy turned up to training on the gear. Silly yes, but probably a mistake made by somebody (dare I say it) less expierienced in using and hiding the use of drugs than others may be (or have been).

Angwin went for the same offence that this Johns bloke in the ARL was able to get away with his entire career and come out the other end the best player (apparently) their code had seen.

This is not accurate at all.
Andrew Johns is one of the greats. He didn't turn up to training on the gear.
He wasn't a total fruitloop.
He was a briliant rugby player who took drugs ocasionally. Big deal.
He has said himself that most times it was during the off season. Only a couple of times it was during the playing season.

No one seems too concerned with the fact that he had a drinking problem but mention that he popped a few pills in the off season and that somehow is big news.

As long as it is not performance enhancing I can't see a real problem. Socially yes I don't like drugs at all but all these cases of recreational drug use just takes the focus off the real issue at hand and that is performance enhancing drugs.
Recreational drugs shouldn't even be tested for by the AFL. It should be kept in house with the club itself. The clubs should do the testing in season but not the AFL.

How can all this publicity be a good thing? Keep it in house FFS.

 

[mikeythemoocow]

If you continue to employ someone knowing he was using drugs regularly than i think you have a responsibility to help him, as Newcastle did with Andrew Johns, and as West Coast have now done with Ben Cousins.

Why does the club/employer have any responsibilty to them. Im sick of this nanny state culture and wish people would take responsibility for their own actions.

 

[Angus1]

Why does the club/employer have any responsibilty to them. Im sick of this nanny state culture and wish people would take responsibility for their own actions.

I would imagine that if a player from a club was using drugs then the club would be concerned that the player is unable to contribute to their full potential. In this case it would be in the clubs best interest to sort out any problems the player may have and get them off drugs immediately.
I should also add that just because a player is using drugs does not mean they think they even have a problem.
Do people you know who pop pills at night clubs do it because they are having problems?

To me it is the clubs problem and no the AFL's problem. The club would be worried that the player can not compete at his potential level.

The AFL should stick to finding substances that make players perform better not things that could potentially make them perform worse.

 

[GoOsH]

Mate, Carlton gave him more than one chance and it wasn't like the drug incident with Karl Norman was a one off. The guy was a total nut case and had broken into a couple of houses and stolen stuff, including his best mate Norman. It was the same reason that the Crows got rid of him. The drug incident was the straw that broke the camel's back.

The guy had all the talent in the world and could have been a great player, such a pity he was all over the shop upstairs.

thats pretty much it, the fact is that the drugs weren't even the main reason, he was just all over the shop