MATTHEW PAVLICH: Our drug policy works

[quotemokc]

https://au.news.yahoo.com/thewest/sport/afl/a/31218405/matthew-pavlich-our-drug-policy-works/

The AFL has had one of the most exciting opening rounds that most can remember.

The roar and energy of footy being back should have dominated the media coverage of our great game. Except it didn’t.

The headlines were dominated by speculation on perceived illicit drug use within the AFL playing group, and very unfairly, at one club in particular.

Unfortunately, over the past few years illicit drug use has become a routine headline. Five years ago it may have shocked us.

So why are we seeing so many provocative headlines?

Quite simply, it’s because the players as a collective have signed up to a voluntary code that enables the AFL to go above and beyond in testing for illicit substances. There is no requirement for players to sign up for this voluntary testing.

But the AFL players do, and it’s a policy in which we have led the way in world sport.

This means that in addition to testing players under the WADA code for performance- enhancing substances, every player subjects themselves to illicit drug testing.

This extends all the way to our off-season break while we’re enjoying some quality time with our family or friends.

This workplace policy makes the AFL one of only a handful of industries that test employees — the players only — for illicit drugs.
Most other industries that test for illicit drug use are primarily based on workplace safety for people performing roles with heavy-duty equipment.

And ours is the only one I am aware of that tests when employees are away on holiday.

By agreeing to this, players have opened themselves up to extensive media coverage of their perceived drug use, and whether we are doing enough on the issue of stamping out illicit drugs.

The players should be commended for committing to an illicit drugs policy, not condemned and shamed as seems flavour of the month.

Since the introduction of the IDP in 2005, drug use in society has become a lot more prevalent.

That’s why as a playing group we committed to reviewing the IDP last year, and are in the process of rolling out an updated policy.

The new policy has moved away from the one implemented over a decade ago, which was purely a medical model with wellbeing at heart, and now acts additionally as a deterrent for players by reducing the old three-strikes framework to two detections before being publicly named and suspended.

Confidentiality and medical assistance has always been a critical aspect of the model.

In addition to this, hair testing out of season has increased so that the AFL, AFL Players’ Association and clubs can get a better indication of any illicit drug use in a period where players are perceived to be most at risk.

This testing then informs the medical officers for targeted testing in-season.

An overview of out-of-season test results is also provided to the clubs, who were all demanding more oversight on their players, to enable them to gain a better understanding of whether drug use in their clubs was a cultural or educational issue.

Which leads to the situation we’ve seen this week — where a journalist decided to approach the clubs in an attempt to uncover what the out-of-season results were.

The results are provided so that experts, and by experts I am talking about leading medical and drug experts, not those who think they are experts of our game, can put the appropriate measures in place to address a drug issue and provide the requisite solutions.

There have been calls from the media and public to take away the confidentiality of the testing, and to publish all results.

I am absolutely bewildered as to why.

What does putting this information in the hands of journalists and the public achieve, that the drug experts cannot?

This is not a policy we simply made up. It’s been developed, reviewed, and updated based on sound knowledge and experience.

From the real experts on the topic, not the pretenders. Both for medical reasons and as a deterrent.

The answer is that it would achieve nothing. It just feeds the voyeuristic nature of people who have nothing better to do than talk about others.

It also creates false perceptions. Would they be happy to submit to testing and have their results published?

And while illicit substance use continues to make the headlines, AFL testing results show that drug use amongst AFL players is under the levels of use by the men in our community of similar age (18-34).

That’s not to say we shouldn’t aim for zero positive results in this space. This is a goal to which we should continually aspire. But the reality is we’re dealing with an issue that is much bigger than football, and that no one within society is close to solving.

Many people have called for a zero-tolerance policy, saying that if we suspended or banned any player caught using, then we would have a clean competition. Maybe. But what would that really achieve? What unintended consequences would that have?

My sense is that we’d have created a false environment because of fear and rule, rather than one based on leadership, education and the ability to make good decisions.

The reality is that athletes are human just like everyone else, and as such are fallible. We, too, may succumb to society’s pitfalls.

We make mistakes just like every other human being that walks down the street alongside us.

Players are not immune to the same difficult circumstances, anxiety and lifestyle choices that are constantly bubbling away in the community. At times societal pressures are amplified due to the scrutiny, demands and expectation of professional sport.

As an industry, we owe it to the young men of our game to ensure they leave the game as better people than when they walked in. This includes teaching them how to make good decisions.

If we don’t do this and take a zero-tolerance approach, then I can guarantee the problem will be a much bigger one when they eventually leave the game.

These young men would exit the industry and be put in an environment where for the first time in their life they are without structure and schedule, while dealing with the stress and pressure of transitioning from a career and life they lived and breathed, into the unknown.

Which means that a zero-tolerance policy is reduced to being a short-term brand fix or reputational management tool, and without one thought to a player’s welfare and long-term health.

The new policy has only just been introduced.

The main focus remains on identifying problems and assisting any players who may be battling habitual use and associated mental health issues, but also acts as a strong deterrent to those who foolishly may be continually experimenting with drugs; those who put their health at risk and who may potentially bring the game into disrepute.

The increased media, perceived lack of anonymity and scrutiny around rumour and innuendo only makes players, who up until now have been overwhelming in their support for a policy, question why they voluntarily subject themselves to something that only tarnishes their collective reputations.

And that’s the last thing any of us wants. Because we believe it works.

- Matthew Pavlich is the president of the AFL Players’ Association.

 

[Bluez Rule]

Might be simplistic but why not use a model similar to other workforces - ie mining, police etc. If you are caught with illegal substance in your body you no longer have a job.
I have certain limitations within my job that I am more than aware of will terminate my employment if I breach them - why not same for footballers. You want to hit the coke? Your call. We test you and you're positive = bye bye.

 

[Bluez Rule]

Oh and FWIW I think the whole expose has stunk to high heaven - reveal Collingwood but no one else? Weak, sensationalist headline hunting journalism (no shock there). Collingwood sells so name them. Eddie being a flog/threat to someone? get Pies in paper.
Players have right to feel aggrieved - confidentiality and all that but for god sake blokes get off the crap and enjoy playing footy for big big $$ while you can. It will be gone so soon - age, form catch's up with all. Don't blow (sniff) the opportunity you have been given to be a professional athlete - beats 'working' for a living.

 

[Slartibartfast]

My workplace can request a golden shower at anytime.
If found positive, they are called into the office, counselled, then forced to participate in a drug rehab program at the companies expense.
To this day no one has been sacked, it is like another quiver in there bow for just in case.
If you are a problem worker this is when it would be used against you. They can dismiss you. But generally don't.

 

[Percel]

My workplace can request a golden shower at anytime.
If found positive, they are called into the office, counselled, then forced to participate in a drug rehab program at the companies expense.
To this day no one has been sacked, it is like another quiver in there bow for just in case.
If you are a problem worker this is when it would be used against you. They can dismiss you. But generally don't.

I think yoiu need a haircut and a beard trim before a golden shower.

 

[RUNVS]

Sounds like Pavlich is one of the Freo players who was caught

 

[Slartibartfast]

Why start now!

 

[CLUBMEDhurst]

Might be simplistic but why not use a model similar to other workforces - ie mining, police etc. If you are caught with illegal substance in your body you no longer have a job.
I have certain limitations within my job that I am more than aware of will terminate my employment if I breach them - why not same for footballers. You want to hit the coke? Your call. We test you and you're positive = bye bye.

Are you tested on your holiday break?

 

[Randomizor]

Sounds like Pavlich is one of the Freo players who was caught

Or, you know, he's the president of the AFLPA

 

[Slartibartfast]

Or, you know, he's the president of the AFLPA

Wonderful statement from Pav.. Where's the paid incumbent , Marsh??

 

[WCErevival]

Work places are no different. We used to have a no drug policy yet half of the place were heavy users. The company knew this and if they were to do any testing would probably lose most of their work force. Its more of a case that they make it look like they are doing something with policies in place but not do much at all. Maybe make an example of someone every now and then and that's it. The AFL is no different. They would know that half of the players are taking recreational drugs. I really doubt they would want to kick out some of the big stars out because of it though. It would effect their money making power.

 

[Aussie in exile]

The players union and the players themselves keep playing the victim card, when in my eyes its the players who are the perpetrators.
Nobody I'm aware of has held a gun to the players heads and told them they must take illicit substances.

 

[pablo668]

If you can't get your fair share of Cocaine and Hookers, why would you bother being an AFL player?

 

[Adelaide Hawk]

Players are not immune to the same difficult circumstances, anxiety and lifestyle choices that are constantly bubbling away in the community. At times societal pressures are amplified due to the scrutiny, demands and expectation of professional sport.

Most in society are not the recipients of the massive benefits and pay packets AFL players are. Hence the scrutiny, demands and expectation. As usual, the players' union can only see things one way.

 

[van peebles]

My workplace can request a golden shower at anytime.
If found positive, they are called into the office, counselled, then forced to participate in a drug rehab program at the companies expense.
To this day no one has been sacked, it is like another quiver in there bow for just in case.
If you are a problem worker this is when it would be used against you. They can dismiss you. But generally don't.

Not sure if your office can ask for the "golden shower"{your words}when you are on holidays?

 

[The Hopper]

Most in society are not the recipients of the massive benefits and pay packets AFL players are. Hence the scrutiny, demands and expectation. As usual, the players' union can only see things one way.

I sometimes think that the scrutiny and expectation is over the top. I'm more inclined to side with Pav's sentiments on this. Can we really expect AFL players to exhibit substantially less drug use than the general populace?

 

[RegHickeyStand]

Might be simplistic but why not use a model similar to other workforces - ie mining, police etc. If you are caught with illegal substance in your body you no longer have a job.
I have certain limitations within my job that I am more than aware of will terminate my employment if I breach them - why not same for footballers. You want to hit the coke? Your call. We test you and you're positive = bye bye.

Do your employers knock on your door when you are at you holiday in Bali?

 

[marty36]

I sometimes think that the scrutiny and expectation is over the top. I'm more inclined to side with Pav's sentiments on this. Can we really expect AFL players to exhibit substantially less drug use than the general populace?

Do you think breaking the law is a high expectation!

 

[marty36]

Do your employers knock on your door when you are at you holiday in Bali?

At least they get paid well, not like other sports that have out of season testing and they are pure amateurs!

 

[Slartibartfast]

What other sport has out of season testing for illicit drugs?

 

[Muggs]

Do your employers knock on your door when you are at you holiday in Bali?

The AFL does not either, they just say here have a hair cut on us when you get back...

If the policy stays for next year can see most the league coming back with shaved heads.

 

[marty36]

What other sport has out of season testing for illicit drugs?

Aren't you aware, I find this amazing how so many on this board think the afl on the only sport doing out of season testing and whinge about it, but aren't aware of the facts!

 

[van peebles]

The AFL does not either, they just say here have a hair cut on us when you get back...

If the policy stays for next year can see most the league coming back with shaved heads.

The afl doesnt say have a haircut.
Its the players policy for medical evaluation.
They dont have to do it out of season and probably wont now that thier private medical records have been released.
This is a voluntary medical plan,not a drugs catchall policy.

 

[carloss]

I wonder what the AFL sponsors think? I'm sure they wouldn't mind being associated with illegal drugs.

 

[Muggs]

What other sport has out of season testing for illicit drugs?

The NFL does, and goes further than the AFL they can test a player during the off season with 24 hours notice, not only upon their return like the AFL.

Football leagues in the UK, like the NFL just have a drugs policy, i.e not a separate illicit drugs policy and anti doping, thus when players are tested its all substances not just PEDs. Players have the same warning as any WADA complaint organisation, 365 days a year.