Integrity of the AFL in question

[BEEG]

It was probably leaked by someone at the AFL who is sick of Collingwood's ongoing failure to systematically deal with issues relating to player behaviour and drug culture.

Anyone genuinely concerned with what happened at Collingwood last year would have unilaterally introduced year-round hair testing to stamp out this scourge, though I suspect the reason it hasn't happened is because it would end up costing the club a lot more personnel than just the two players currently on suspension and we can't have that because apparently the Pies are in a flag window and that equals memberships which equals money.

Haha this guy, how is that bubble going?

 

[kneecapper]

Haha this guy, how is that bubble going?

Did you, or did you not have two players suspended over this issue last year? The message is clearly not getting through to your playing group and, if you actually care about player welfare, that should be your primary concern, not who leaked this information.

 

[didaksrightfoot]

It was probably leaked by someone at the AFL who is sick of Collingwood's ongoing failure to systematically deal with issues relating to player behaviour and drug culture.

Anyone genuinely concerned with what happened at Collingwood last year would have unilaterally introduced year-round hair testing to stamp out this scourge, though I suspect the reason it hasn't happened is because it would end up costing the club a lot more personnel than just the two players currently on suspension and we can't have that because apparently the Pies are in a flag window and that equals memberships which equals money.

lol... ah, good old Sydney fans.

Lets just ignore the rumoured figures that had Collingwood listed as "3rd" in a group of a number of clubs with 8-11 players testing positive, and far behind the "top 2" clubs... one of whom is coming off a 3-peat, and one of whom is trying to market itself as a "family club". Lets also ignore that even Robbo agreed that he can't confirm the actual number and was just talking ranges or thereabouts... and may well just be full of shit.
Lets also ignore that off-season testing is outside of the illicit drugs policy, and one that the players agreed to do voluntarily. Lets also ignore that when Collingwood was in the position of 2 players testing positive to PEDs the club approached it in a very open and upfront manner, and were nothing but transparent with the media, both in the seriousness of the results and consequences, but also in their support of the 2 players as individuals.
And lets ignore the fact that for a number of years Collingwood has been asking that if the AFL wants to target illicit drugs they should do it properly, and clubs should be involved in the process and rehabilitation.

Let's ignore all of that, and yeah, I can see how you think this is a Collingwood issue and not an AFL-wide one.
---

This discussion is not solely about illicit drugs, but more specifically about the integrity of the AFL and who leaked this information, and why only one club was targeted.

 

[didaksrightfoot]

Did you, or did you not have two players suspended over this issue last year? The message is clearly not getting through to your playing group and, if you actually care about player welfare, that should be your primary concern, not who leaked this information.

See my post above for a bit more on this.
But those two guys got suspended for PED Use... very, very different.

Now how it got into the system is another matter, and one that can never be proved one way or another. (Also allegedly, they were far from the only AFL players present +/- partaking at that particular time)... but you are reaching a bit to link that to the leaking of these current results.

 

[Brad Goodman]

Collingwood's name was leaked by an individual inside the AFL with a gripe against Collingwood.

Now if you look at how Eddie throws his weight around and manipulates this league, it's not surprising that there are people who want to knock him down a little.

If Eddie would pull his head in and stop trying to destroy other clubs, I doubt these kind of leaks would happen.

"She shouldn't have been wearing such revealing clothing".

 

[BEEG]

Did you, or did you not have two players suspended over this issue last year? The message is clearly not getting through to your playing group and, if you actually care about player welfare, that should be your primary concern, not who leaked this information.

You lost me at the start very uneducated you are on the topic, two completely different issues.

Performance inhancing can not be put in the same category as illicit drugs, players actually volunteer to be tested in the off season they can easily go stuff it we want nothing to do with it.

Put the Collingwood hate aside, the AFL has a drug issue which is illicit not performance enhancing, If you believe this is just a Collingwood issue you live under a rock it's a society issue.

 

[W.C. Fry]

When we had a drug problem we were slammed, threatened with bringing game into disrepute and had an AFL led investigation by a QC. I'm expecting the same at these clubs with a quarter of their lists testing positive to drugs. Yeah right.

AFL made this an eagles problem 10 years ago. And we were bad, no excuses. But its so obvious it was a league wide problem. AFL let it simmer away for 10 years after getting a few heads to roll from our club. Patting themselves on the back for fixing that horrible club. Reap what they sow.

 

[BEEG]

When we had a drug problem we were slammed, threatened with bringing game into disrepute and had an AFL led investigation by a QC. I'm expecting the same at these clubs with a quarter of their lists testing positive to drugs. Yeah right.

AFL made this an eagles problem 10 years ago. And we were bad, no excuses. But its so obvious it was a league wide problem. AFL let it simmer away for 10 years after getting a few heads to roll from our club. Patting themselves on the back for fixing that horrible club. Reap what they sow.

How do you know Eagles players still haven't failed drug testing in the off season, are you blokes completely drug free now?

 

[the PILL]

fascinating...

 

[ConcreteWaters]

How do you know Eagles players still haven't failed drug testing in the off season, are you blokes completely drug free now?

They have. All clubs have players that have positive tests, so nobody can point fingers. It was the Eagles that copped the brunt of it 10 years ago because of our d*&$head ex-captain. I'm sure the AFL was aware of it being a league-wide problem then (certainly not just the Eagles..*injunction club*), but probably tried to make an example of us to deter other clubs/players from doing the same thing. Hasn't worked obviously.

Why bother with the off-season testing? Either have a zero tolerance policy and kick players out that fail tests, or just accept that it's a part of society and don't make such a song and dance about it.

 

[ThirtyThr33]

I agree with Bucks on 360 that in a sense it's not just a Collingwood problem - it's an AFL problem.

I also think that the illicit drug policy needs to change. It's stuck in no mans land with clubs not knowing who the players are, and can't do anything about it (education, suspension or rehab?).

So IMO it either needs to change that we either have no illicit drug testing during the offseason or clubs know which players test positive. If that brings up privacy or confidentiality issues, well I'm not really too sure how to deal with that.

 

[PieNSauce]

Look you are probably correct. Just got the impression eddie and pert were at their wits end with players illicit drug use

The reality when you think about it is that both Eddie and Pert would be all over the issue of how they would like to deal with this issue. They have not been the most vocal about it without understanding it as well as they can so the notion that they would believe that throwing the entire playing list under a bus in order to get the message across to a handful I'm sure you'll agree is pretty fanciful.

 

[The 747]

perhaps the AFL is best served not responding publicly thus meaning any leak is merely hearsay. internally though, one would hope they are scrambling to change procedures, identify sources of the leaks and improve confidentiality and data security.

Haha, I doubt it. IMO they leaked it on purpose, to put pressure on the players, and to give round 1 a big story for everyone to talk about. If the media aren't talking about your product they are talking about someone else's product. Anyway, thats what I would be doing if I was doing tactics for the AFL.

 

[PieNSauce]

It was probably leaked by someone at the AFL who is sick of Collingwood's ongoing failure to systematically deal with issues relating to player behaviour and drug culture.

Anyone genuinely concerned with what happened at Collingwood last year would have unilaterally introduced year-round hair testing to stamp out this scourge, though I suspect the reason it hasn't happened is because it would end up costing the club a lot more personnel than just the two players currently on suspension and we can't have that because apparently the Pies are in a flag window and that equals memberships which equals money.

Edit: this doesn't just apply to Collingwood, by the way. There are other clubs who would prefer not to know what their players are doing and keep them on the list, rather than take strong action and risk suffering suspensions.

That's just a bizarre comment. Given that the clubs are prevented by the league from addressing the issue directly and knowing that Gary Pert and Eddie have been screaming from the rooftops about it for a number of years I have to question the sanity of someone who would make a statement like this.

 

[PieNSauce]

perhaps the AFL is best served not responding publicly thus meaning any leak is merely hearsay. internally though, one would hope they are scrambling to change procedures, identify sources of the leaks and improve confidentiality and data security.

Unfortunately, because of the way this has played out, the precise numbers may be hearsay but the damage has been done. I'm not specifically here to talk about Collingwood having been thrown under a bus but more so the fact that this leak has very wide ranging implications for the AFL down the track. Just imagine how the AFL will now approach the AFLPA for assistance in addressing future issues. I can tell you the laughter will be heard from a very long way away.

 

[telsor]

Incorrect. They have an Integrity Unit.

Who sits at the back of the marketing department and makes them coffee.

 

[didaksrightfoot]

When we had a drug problem we were slammed, threatened with bringing game into disrepute and had an AFL led investigation by a QC. I'm expecting the same at these clubs with a quarter of their lists testing positive to drugs. Yeah right.

AFL made this an eagles problem 10 years ago. And we were bad, no excuses. But its so obvious it was a league wide problem. AFL let it simmer away for 10 years after getting a few heads to roll from our club. Patting themselves on the back for fixing that horrible club. Reap what they sow.

I agree with your 2nd paragraph, not the 1st.

Your club was unfairly targeted - True. The AFL tried to make it out as being a one-club problem, rather than an AFL-wide one.
BUT the reason your club was targeted was obvious. After years of nothing being done, the problems of some players were being played out very publicly, and drugs were a bit part of that. It was unfair that the immediate response only targeted your club, but at least it caused the AFL to finally pull it's head out of the sand and acknowledge there was a problem. (Although they have been pretty ineffectual since then).

The big difference here - there is absolutely no legitimate reason why Collingwood is the club being targeted right now. If the alleged numbers are to be believed then we are the 3rd club, and amongst a group of clubs with very similar numbers. We are also well behind the 2 clubs with more players, and the rumoured club on top has double the number of players, and is coming off 3 premierships - surely if you want to make an example of a particular club there's a more accurate one to target.

But the point is - a single club should not be targeted. It must be a league-wide approach, and it must be one that maintains intengrity in order to have any chance of being effective... the AFL have been useless on both fronts.

They have. All clubs have players that have positive tests, so nobody can point fingers. It was the Eagles that copped the brunt of it 10 years ago because of our d*&$head ex-captain. I'm sure the AFL was aware of it being a league-wide problem then (certainly not just the Eagles..*injunction club*), but probably tried to make an example of us to deter other clubs/players from doing the same thing. Hasn't worked obviously.

Why bother with the off-season testing? Either have a zero tolerance policy and kick players out that fail tests, or just accept that it's a part of society and don't make such a song and dance about it.

There is clearly a natural middle ground somewhere in there.
Everything has shown that a blanket zero tolerance policy does not work. Equally, throwing your hands up and just accepting it, is useless.

It is a society-wide problem, but the AFL is part of that society. Many industries have drug-related policies... most surrounding safety, but also many around integrity and character. Now some may use zero tolerance (particularly when safety is an issue) but the majority try to take on a treatment/rehabilitation approach... you are upfront with someone that they have a problem, and that they must deal with it, and are up front with them about the likely consequences if they don't change. But you also get them involved (or at least offer them) available treatments, and put supports in place - largely in the form of having supervisors/managers aware - primarily to play a supportive role, but also to having a view on safety/risk management.
I am probably biased, but I am fully behind Eddie and others that that 2nd part is something that has been sorely missed in the AFL approach. Individuals are not going to take this seriously if there is no real follow-up involving those around you.

 

[Tedeski]

Two scenarios for mine!

1. The leak came from Collingwood itself.
2. Payback to the fat controller for sticking his head into everything that isn't his business. Eddie continuously mouths off about any other club (Swans especially) on his many media outlets. Wouldn't be surprised at all if someone has tried to stick it to Eddie & Pert so that they pull their heads in & worry about tending to their own garden.

 

[The 747]

Unfortunately, because of the way this has played out, the precise numbers may be hearsay but the damage has been done. I'm not specifically here to talk about Collingwood having been thrown under a bus but more so the fact that this leak has very wide ranging implications for the AFL down the track. Just imagine how the AFL will now approach the AFLPA for assistance in addressing future issues. I can tell you the laughter will be heard from a very long way away.

Who funds the AFLPA? The AFL. The AFLPA will do as their masters bid.

 

[The 747]

Two scenarios for mine!

1. The leak came from Collingwood itself.
2. Payback to the fat controller for sticking his head into everything that isn't his business. Eddie continuously mouths off about any other club (Swans especially) on his many media outlets. Wouldn't be surprised at all if someone has tried to stick it to Eddie & Pert so that they pull their heads in & worry about tending to their own garden.

Swans are really bitter about losing their leg ups over the rest of the competition hey?

 

[didaksrightfoot]

Who funds the AFLPA? The AFL. The AFLPA will do as their masters bid.

As any union surely it's largely by the players?

(at least that's my understanding of unions... may be wrong)

 

[kneecapper]

See my post above for a bit more on this.
But those two guys got suspended for PED Use... very, very different.

They claimed it was the result of taking illicit drugs (probably cocaine or ecstasy) on a night out which was cut with the banned substance clenbuterol. It's directly related to this issue.

 

[didaksrightfoot]

They claimed it was the result of taking illicit drugs (probably cocaine or ecstasy) on a night out which was cut with the banned substance clenbuterol. It's directly related to this issue.

But it was not the illicit drug that got them suspended... Nor did they ever test positive to it.
There was also nothing about the way Collingwood aproached that situation that can be faulted. (except maybe being too supportive in keeping the guys on the rookie list and giving them a chance to restart their careers when the ban ends).

But you are making quite the stretch to somehow link that to the leaking of this information about just one club, and the media just targetting one club.

 

[PieNSauce]

Who funds the AFLPA? The AFL. The AFLPA will do as their masters bid.

I think you'll find the response you'd get through coercion would be very different to the one garnered through cooperation. I think that it's fair to suggest that about now the relationship between the AFL and the players would be at a fairly low ebb and the damage done might be felt for quite some time especially if the AFL does not show some leadership and integrity on this issue.

 

[The 747]

As any union surely it's largely by the players?

(at least that's my understanding of unions... may be wrong)

If it was a real union yes but it isn't. It's funded by the AFL and looks after the interests of the AFL (see Essendon saga as an example).