Thread starter
#1
The AFL's claim it is the only code to test for illicit drugs on non-match days is manifestly untrue, according to the NRL chief, David Gallop, who will inform his clubs today of the sanctions applying to a two-strikes policy.
Reacting to persistent and provocative claims by the AFL chief executive, Andrew Demetriou, that his code is a pioneer in anti-doping and the only tester outside competition, Gallop said: "It is completely incorrect to suggest that rugby league players have not been tested.
"There seems to be a bit of reinventing history going on as people try to claim some high moral ground. There was a time when rugby league was suspending players over these issues, as other sports wanted to say it wasn't a problem they had - when they themselves were not testing."
Demetriou, under siege for a three-strikes drug policy which did not expose the substance abuse problem of the West Coast Eagles' Brownlow medallist, Ben Cousins, wrote in a column in The Sunday Age: "So where does the AFL differ from other sporting codes? We differ because we are the only sport that tests players for illicit drugs on non-match days.
"If you are a player in another code, we don't know if there is a problem with illicit drug use because there is no testing outside of match day."
Gallop said Demetriou was deliberately ignoring the vigilance of clubs such as the Broncos who conducted 280 tests last year. The entire AFL administered 500 tests.
Because the AFL controls the testing, rather than the clubs, Demetriou is being deceitfully clever, claiming his sport is the only one with a uniform, central body-administered protocol.
However, from today all NRL clubs will abide by a "one-chance" policy where a second positive will produce a 12-match ban, a 15 per cent fine of net income, public naming, compulsory counselling, targeted testing, plus the right of the club to terminate the player's contract and the option of the NRL to review the terms and conditions of a contract if a player signs with another club.
Even the first positive could result in a player being forced out of a club, assuming he had incurred two earlier warnings for other disciplinary breaches.
Unlike the AFL, which does not test players on their rostered day off - despite cocaine, ecstasy and ice leaving the body within 24 hours - the NRL will demand clubs swab players at random, particularly at recovery sessions.
Even before today's uniform policy, Gallop said NRL clubs conducted more tests and had more severe sanctions.
"NRL clubs individually conduct tests on as many as 300 players a year, with some maintaining a zero-tolerance approach as evidenced by North Queensland's sacking of Mitchell Sargent," he said.
Gallop said Demetriou's boast the AFL was the only code to have a separate illicit drugs policy was both a fallacy and a semantic exercise because the NRL once had a single policy.
"The NRL was the first sport to integrate a performance-enhancing [drugs] policy with an illicit substances policy," he said.
"The NRL action in relation to Matthew Spence, Craig Field and Kevin McGuinness, all of whom were suspended for illicit substances taken out of competition, is evidence of this fact.
"But for its commitment to the WADA code which, by the nature of its templates did not provide for such flexibility, it would have maintained this approach."
In the post-WADA era, when the NRL allowed testing of illicit drugs to devolve to clubs, Newcastle and Penrith were the only clubs not to test.
"We have a long history of ensuring that players are subjected to testing for illicit substances," Gallop said.
"It is unhelpful for sports to brag about who is doing the most in this area but it is disappointing to see claims made about us that are simply incorrect."
Historically, the NRL has also had more ASADA tests done for performance enhancers than the AFL.
Demetriou's centralised drugs policy, where clubs are not permitted to test, was criticised recently by West Coast coach John Worsfold who claimed supplementary tests might have shed more light on what is an almost epidemic problem in Perth.
The AFL policy of keeping the name of a player testing positive a secret from everyone at his club, except the medical officer, has been criticised by Geelong club doctor Chris Bradshaw, who said it would assist a player's rehabilitation if non-medical officials were also informed.
"The important thing now is not the bragging but recognising we all need to continue to work harder in finding solutions," Gallop said.
http://www.leaguehq.com.au/news/new...s/2007/04/03/1175366244064.html?page=fullpage#
Lets see what Andy says, I bet all we get are tumbleweeds.
Reacting to persistent and provocative claims by the AFL chief executive, Andrew Demetriou, that his code is a pioneer in anti-doping and the only tester outside competition, Gallop said: "It is completely incorrect to suggest that rugby league players have not been tested.
"There seems to be a bit of reinventing history going on as people try to claim some high moral ground. There was a time when rugby league was suspending players over these issues, as other sports wanted to say it wasn't a problem they had - when they themselves were not testing."
Demetriou, under siege for a three-strikes drug policy which did not expose the substance abuse problem of the West Coast Eagles' Brownlow medallist, Ben Cousins, wrote in a column in The Sunday Age: "So where does the AFL differ from other sporting codes? We differ because we are the only sport that tests players for illicit drugs on non-match days.
"If you are a player in another code, we don't know if there is a problem with illicit drug use because there is no testing outside of match day."
Gallop said Demetriou was deliberately ignoring the vigilance of clubs such as the Broncos who conducted 280 tests last year. The entire AFL administered 500 tests.
Because the AFL controls the testing, rather than the clubs, Demetriou is being deceitfully clever, claiming his sport is the only one with a uniform, central body-administered protocol.
However, from today all NRL clubs will abide by a "one-chance" policy where a second positive will produce a 12-match ban, a 15 per cent fine of net income, public naming, compulsory counselling, targeted testing, plus the right of the club to terminate the player's contract and the option of the NRL to review the terms and conditions of a contract if a player signs with another club.
Even the first positive could result in a player being forced out of a club, assuming he had incurred two earlier warnings for other disciplinary breaches.
Unlike the AFL, which does not test players on their rostered day off - despite cocaine, ecstasy and ice leaving the body within 24 hours - the NRL will demand clubs swab players at random, particularly at recovery sessions.
Even before today's uniform policy, Gallop said NRL clubs conducted more tests and had more severe sanctions.
"NRL clubs individually conduct tests on as many as 300 players a year, with some maintaining a zero-tolerance approach as evidenced by North Queensland's sacking of Mitchell Sargent," he said.
Gallop said Demetriou's boast the AFL was the only code to have a separate illicit drugs policy was both a fallacy and a semantic exercise because the NRL once had a single policy.
"The NRL was the first sport to integrate a performance-enhancing [drugs] policy with an illicit substances policy," he said.
"The NRL action in relation to Matthew Spence, Craig Field and Kevin McGuinness, all of whom were suspended for illicit substances taken out of competition, is evidence of this fact.
"But for its commitment to the WADA code which, by the nature of its templates did not provide for such flexibility, it would have maintained this approach."
In the post-WADA era, when the NRL allowed testing of illicit drugs to devolve to clubs, Newcastle and Penrith were the only clubs not to test.
"We have a long history of ensuring that players are subjected to testing for illicit substances," Gallop said.
"It is unhelpful for sports to brag about who is doing the most in this area but it is disappointing to see claims made about us that are simply incorrect."
Historically, the NRL has also had more ASADA tests done for performance enhancers than the AFL.
Demetriou's centralised drugs policy, where clubs are not permitted to test, was criticised recently by West Coast coach John Worsfold who claimed supplementary tests might have shed more light on what is an almost epidemic problem in Perth.
The AFL policy of keeping the name of a player testing positive a secret from everyone at his club, except the medical officer, has been criticised by Geelong club doctor Chris Bradshaw, who said it would assist a player's rehabilitation if non-medical officials were also informed.
"The important thing now is not the bragging but recognising we all need to continue to work harder in finding solutions," Gallop said.
http://www.leaguehq.com.au/news/new...s/2007/04/03/1175366244064.html?page=fullpage#
Lets see what Andy says, I bet all we get are tumbleweeds.

