Oppo Camp Non-Essendon Football Thread XVII

[TheGreatBarryB]

I don’t see what the big deal is. Doctor tells his patient you’ve been an idiot taking rec drugs ..you can’t play on Saturday because it’ll still be in your blood. Four year suspension avoided. Remembering that if it’s detected any other day it’s not a a WADA violation. It would be silly not to do it. Different to our case

 

[BomberManU]

I don’t see what the big deal is. Doctor tells his patient you’ve been an idiot taking rec drugs ..you can’t play on Saturday because it’ll still be in your blood. Four year suspension avoided. Remembering that if it’s detected any other day it’s not a a WADA violation. It would be silly not to do it. Different to our case

And if the test detects a PED? Will there be an 'injury'?

 

[Lore]

Doesn’t sound like the coaches are told it is a fake injury. So the player also has to sell it as a real injury to their coach…?

 

[Mr Mojo Risin]

I don’t see what the big deal is. Doctor tells his patient you’ve been an idiot taking rec drugs ..you can’t play on Saturday because it’ll still be in your blood. Four year suspension avoided. Remembering that if it’s detected any other day it’s not a a WADA violation. It would be silly not to do it. Different to our case

The issue is government funding received from being a WADA signed up sport but circumventing them. The issue is being in bed with gambling and changing playing lineups because of their policy in a secretive manner. The issue is doing this for the men but leaving the women out to dry that indicates more about concern for revenue loss than player welfare.

I’m sure there are others…..

Quite frankly I couldn’t care less if all the players want to party it up and the AFL wants to manage it, but they’ve been playing both sides to receive monetary advantage from doing so.

 

[Vindicater]

Doesn’t sound like the coaches are told it is a fake injury. So the player also has to sell it as a real injury to their coach…?

If so then this is cluster*.

 

[TheGreatBarryB]

And if the test detects a PED? Will there be an 'injury'?

Not sure they're testing for PEDs...even if they are just not playing one week won't matter ...ASADA random tests during the week don't they? So player would be in big trouble anyway.

 

[citizen-erased]

I don’t see what the big deal is. Doctor tells his patient you’ve been an idiot taking rec drugs ..you can’t play on Saturday because it’ll still be in your blood. Four year suspension avoided. Remembering that if it’s detected any other day it’s not a a WADA violation. It would be silly not to do it. Different to our case

i don't know enough about the effects, but is there not a heightened risk of heart attack if you're competing at the level of AFL players with substances in your system that artificially raises your heart rate/blood pressure....and your med team doesn't know about it.

 

[TheGreatBarryB]

The issue is government funding received from being a WADA signed up sport but circumventing them. The issue is being in bed with gambling and changing playing lineups because of their policy in a secretive manner. The issue is doing this for the men but leaving the women out to dry that indicates more about concern for revenue loss than player welfare.

I’m sure there are others…..

Quite frankly I couldn’t care less if all the players want to party it up and the AFL wants to manage it, but they’ve been playing both sides to receive monetary advantage from doing so.

It's secretive because it's a privacy issue between doctor and player. As for WADA this has nothing to do with PEDs as player is screwed whether he plays weekend or not if tested during the week. I don't ASADA or WADA would care too much about this current issue.

 

[jmoo wan]

Doesn’t sound like the coaches are told it is a fake injury. So the player also has to sell it as a real injury to their coach…?

Goodwin would definitely be all over it

 

[yodellinhank]

It's secretive because it's a privacy issue between doctor and player. As for WADA this has nothing to do with PEDs as player is screwed whether he plays weekend or not if tested during the week. I don't ASADA or WADA would care too much about this current issue.

If they're circumventing the code then wada should care. Whether they do or not will depend on the dodgy political games which get played.

 

[TheGreatBarryB]

If they're circumventing the code then wada should care. Whether they do or not will depend on the dodgy political games which get played.

Not circumventing. The code is if you take PEDs you're up s**t creek. Also don't have rec drugs in your system on game day. So why not monitor if you have traces of rec drugs beforehand and don't play. WADA won't look into any further.

 

[jmoo wan]

Not circumventing. The code is if you take PEDs you're up s**t creek. Also don't have rec drugs in your system on game day. So why not monitor if you have traces of rec drugs beforehand and don't play. WADA won't look into any further.

what if they are also doing PEDs? Get tested for that, fake an injury so you dont play on game day, wait until the PEDs are out of your system?

Are injured players exempt from the rando testing?

 

[yodellinhank]

Not circumventing. The code is if you take PEDs you're up s**t creek. Also don't have rec drugs in your system on game day. So why not monitor if you have traces of rec drugs beforehand and don't play. WADA won't look into any further.

Why not monitor the levels of markers for PEDs to ensure you don't get caught? If you're under the levels then that's okay, right?

"Recreational" drugs, as you put it, are banned drugs under the code for a purpose.

 

[BomberManU]

From the Medical Journal of Australia, 2006 -
'Major controversy also surrounds testing for illegal drugs that do not enhance performance, but which athletes may take for social (or recreational) purposes. The banning of stimulants, such as cocaine, when competing is universally accepted. The dilemma lies in whether stimulant drugs should be tested out-of-competition (where presumably they convey no performance advantage) and whether drugs such as marijuana, which are illegal but unlikely to confer any performance advantage, should be tested for and potentially lead to disqualification. The argument offered by WADA is that these drugs affect the health of the athlete, and that taking of drugs inappropriately is against the spirit of sport.

It may be considered an invasion of privacy to test for non-performance-enhancing drugs outside periods of athletic competition. However, it is hard to argue in defence of athletes who choose to break not only antidoping, but also criminal laws by using illicit social drugs. It may be more appropriate that these athletes receive counselling, and perhaps shorter suspensions, than other athletes found using drugs that would confer an unfair performance advantage.'

 

[joey_jo_jo]

Doesn’t sound like the coaches are told it is a fake injury. So the player also has to sell it as a real injury to their coach…?

Yeah buckley had coincidentally told an anecdote a few weeks ago about after a training session the doctor told him three players had hamstring tightness and had to sit out the game. He was bemused because they had all done the training session in full so he had an inkling it could be drug related.
This is why i think the revelation re the doctors not telling club is not really that big a news as we already now with the confidentiality agreement the afl has with aflpa only the club doctor knows about the test results and coaches/other management dont.

 

[BomberManU]

So can you 'coke up' during the week and boost your training, without fear? Or have a full pre-season artificially stimulated?

 

[joey_jo_jo]

From the Medical Journal of Australia, 2006 -
'Major controversy also surrounds testing for illegal drugs that do not enhance performance, but which athletes may take for social (or recreational) purposes. The banning of stimulants, such as cocaine, when competing is universally accepted. The dilemma lies in whether stimulant drugs should be tested out-of-competition (where presumably they convey no performance advantage) and whether drugs such as marijuana, which are illegal but unlikely to confer any performance advantage, should be tested for and potentially lead to disqualification. The argument offered by WADA is that these drugs affect the health of the athlete, and that taking of drugs inappropriately is against the spirit of sport.

It may be considered an invasion of privacy to test for non-performance-enhancing drugs outside periods of athletic competition. However, it is hard to argue in defence of athletes who choose to break not only antidoping, but also criminal laws by using illicit social drugs. It may be more appropriate that these athletes receive counselling, and perhaps shorter suspensions, than other athletes found using drugs that would confer an unfair performance advantage.'

This is why the aflpa stands their ground re confidentiality because the AFL goes above and beyond whats required from wada (and what most other sports do) regarding testing for recreational drugs outside the window they can assist with performance.
The reason the AFL says they do this is to educate player/harm minimisation (the cynic in me thinks its also about getting on front foot from PR perspective).
All the old coaches/media demanding they start looping in coaches/ceos etc dont realise the options will either be:

• The policy as it is
• go back to only testing in the window that is set by wada

The AFLPA will never agree to testing outside of the window if the player privacy isnt guaranteed and nor should they.

 

[Mr Mojo Risin]

It's secretive because it's a privacy issue between doctor and player. As for WADA this has nothing to do with PEDs as player is screwed whether he plays weekend or not if tested during the week. I don't ASADA or WADA would care too much about this current issue.

This is not a self reporting issue whereby a person goes to a doctor with an issue that falls under doctor patient confidentiality. If it was, then the AFL doctor would be unaware.

This is a situation where the players have agreed to a code where they risk being banned for taking drugs and the AFL oversee the club doctors testing their players so they don't get banned. This is a situation where a player is caught doing something against the terms of their employment and the AFL help hush it up to protect revenue.

Don't get me wrong, I believe in doctor/patient confidentially strongly and think that angle is good even in this situation, but let's not pretend it's the main reason the AFL have kept it secret.

 

[Vindicater]

Just a shambles and the AFL have lost whatever integrity they had left.

 

[TheGreatBarryB]

This is not a self reporting issue whereby a person goes to a doctor with an issue that falls under doctor patient confidentiality. If it was, then the AFL doctor would be unaware.

This is a situation where the players have agreed to a code where they risk being banned for taking drugs and the AFL oversee the club doctors testing their players so they don't get banned. This is a situation where a player is caught doing something against the terms of their employment and the AFL help hush it up to protect revenue.

Don't get me wrong, I believe in doctor/patient confidentially strongly and think that angle is good even in this situation, but let's not pretend it's the main reason the AFL have kept it secret.

Both the AFL and AFLPA agreed to the 3 strikes policy...a policy imo that is an absolute farce

Why not monitor the levels of markers for PEDs to ensure you don't get caught? If you're under the levels then that's okay, right?

"Recreational" drugs, as you put it, are banned drugs under the code for a purpose.

ASADA/WADA is always upgrading it's testing...not sure clubs would be able to keep up. As for illicit/rec/whatever you want to call it ...are only banned if detected on game day....if detected a few days before they're not...unlike PEDs.

 

[Mr Mojo Risin]

Both the AFL and AFLPA agreed to the 3 strikes policy...a policy imo that is an absolute farce



ASADA/WADA is always upgrading it's testing...not sure clubs would be able to keep up. As for illicit/rec/whatever you want to call it ...are only banned if detected on game day....if detected a few days before they're not...unlike PEDs.

However they can mask other PEDs...

In the end if you want to believe the AFL's motivation for this was player welfare and there is no issue here go ahead.

But there are definitely a number of major issues with this scenario that are more about taxpayer money and gambling.

I'm not going to be one defending WADA or SIA either and don't really care about that angle...I don't even care if the AFL left the WADA code and said every player can PED up to their eyeballs. Hell we could start the game with a bunch of chemists running out on the field and racing to cook their concoctions for the players before the game and make it an event for all I care (well maybe a little extreme for humour sake), but don't be surprised if the new stadium in Hobart is now at risk along with the Tasmanian team etc because of this.

 

[mcgrath_truther]

Not circumventing. The code is if you take PEDs you're up s**t creek. Also don't have rec drugs in your system on game day. So why not monitor if you have traces of rec drugs beforehand and don't play. WADA won't look into any further.

I think WADA should look into it solely for the reason that the AFL is allegedly condoning the secretive tests happening and protecting players who're on drugs. Shouldn't a policy both exist to prevent players from taking drugs and have players who're caught be suspended? If I turned up to work drunk or high I'd be booted, why do they get the pass, because they're non-sensible dickheads with money? * 'em, they deserve to face actual punishment for it, show them that they're not untouchable messiahs.

 

[mcgrath_truther]

https://archive.is/dPu7c

^ herald sun story

About 100 current AFL players have secret immunity from three-strike drugs policy​

 

[Vindicater]

https://archive.is/dPu7c

^ herald sun story

About 100 current AFL players have secret immunity from three-strike drugs policy​

And no club with less than five.

 

[Mr Mojo Risin]

And no club with less than five.

Our "injury" list last year and Brad's comments about lifestyle have even more meaning...