Oppo Camp Non-Essendon Football Thread XVII

Remove this Banner Ad

Log in to remove this ad.

Dunno man, all these arguments that coke has no performance enhancing abilities if taken outside of game day.. anyone seen crazy eyes from withdrawal?
Also imagine if players were incentivized with a coke hit after the game for a good performance?
Now there is motivation.
I’ve heard of people doing a lot worse for a lot less!
 
can't say i'm too surprised, honestly, i suppose i'd be curious as to who's the most prolific snorter

Happy Pump Up GIF by Essendon FC
 
I definitely understand why the AFL are trying to help ensure players don't get banned for having drugs in their system. And whilst it is refreshing to have another club taking most of the heat on this, the reality is that all clubs will have players affected here. The issues I have is whether the secret tests breach the WADA code (seemingly not) and the AFL is sanctioning players faking injuries to not get caught. I couldnt care less about the gambling implications but there is something fundamentally wrong about a sanction process of players faking injuries. I guess the AFL see it is the lesser of two evils to stop players getting rubbed out for 1-2 years.

If they do tighten all this up which is now suggested will happen, then it is a matter of time until multiple players get caught out and rubbed out for some time.
 
I definitely understand why the AFL are trying to help ensure players don't get banned for having drugs in their system. And whilst it is refreshing to have another club taking most of the heat on this, the reality is that all clubs will have players affected here. The issues I have is whether the secret tests breach the WADA code (seemingly not) and the AFL is sanctioning players faking injuries to not get caught. I couldnt care less about the gambling implications but there is something fundamentally wrong about a sanction process of players faking injuries. I guess the AFL see it is the lesser of two evils to stop players getting rubbed out for 1-2 years.

If they do tighten all this up which is now suggested will happen, then it is a matter of time until multiple players get caught out and rubbed out for some time.

Also the AFL having an illicit drugs policy, then actively enabling clubs to get around it is pretty sketchy.
 
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.
If i was a truckie and was under the influence i wouldn't turn up. I'd a love a personal breathalyser to check...even if i wasn't a truckie.

Don't get me wrong...the whole 3 strike thing has always been an utter load of crap and was no one was ever going to be caught and this confirms it...guarantees no 3 strikes. This news shouldn't surprise anyone.
 
Also the AFL having an illicit drugs policy, then actively enabling clubs to get around it is pretty sketchy.
The other thing I didn't like from the AFL's statement was linking taking recreational drugs to mental health problems. It seems whenever someone wants to explain or justify any negative/poor/inappropriate behaviour, just throw in the words "mental health" and it is all magically acceptable (or at least not as bad).

I don't mean to say that all mental health issues are nonsense. Far from it, and many people have very real problems in that regard. But it does seem to have become easy to blame everything on mental health these days.
 
Just a shambles and the AFL have lost whatever integrity they had left.
I feel like this is likely the standard system for pro sports worldwide and not exclusive to the AFL. Truth be told it's kind of too ingenious of a system for it to not be utilised everywhere.
It seems to be a bit of a unique circumstance that's led to it leaking out, usually there would be a culture of mutual interests leading to silence and protection, but there's been a perfect storm at Melbourne with cultural issues leading to a disaffected CEO, club doctor, and a father/player manager whose kid has slipped through the cracks of the protection racket.

It's a really complicated issue. There's no world in which you pool $2.3 billion between ~750 young men and some of them don't use it to buy drugs. That stuff is contagious too, just look what happens in mining towns.

I think the AFL's approach, while obviously imperfect, is somewhat the right angle. People shouldn't be getting named publicly by their employer for substance use. But they also need to be doing more not to facilitate an environment of drug use - it feels like the unlimited strikes system, as I understand it, does just that. Many employers have strong enough deterrents to prevent their workers taking drugs. Maybe mandatory rehab upon second strike would be a deterrent for drug use during the playing season... but getting past the doctor/patient confidentiality component of the current system would be very tricky.
 
I definitely understand why the AFL are trying to help ensure players don't get banned for having drugs in their system. And whilst it is refreshing to have another club taking most of the heat on this, the reality is that all clubs will have players affected here. The issues I have is whether the secret tests breach the WADA code (seemingly not) and the AFL is sanctioning players faking injuries to not get caught. I couldnt care less about the gambling implications but there is something fundamentally wrong about a sanction process of players faking injuries. I guess the AFL see it is the lesser of two evils to stop players getting rubbed out for 1-2 years.

If they do tighten all this up which is now suggested will happen, then it is a matter of time until multiple players get caught out and rubbed out for some time.

And that would not be a bad thing. Would actually drive some positive change in professional culture.
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

I feel like this is likely the standard system for pro sports worldwide and not exclusive to the AFL. Truth be told it's kind of too ingenious of a system for it to not be utilised everywhere.
It seems to be a bit of a unique circumstance that's led to it leaking out, usually there would be a culture of mutual interests leading to silence and protection, but there's been a perfect storm at Melbourne with cultural issues leading to a disaffected CEO, club doctor, and a father/player manager whose kid has slipped through the cracks of the protection racket.

It's a really complicated issue. There's no world in which you pool $2.3 billion between ~750 young men and some of them don't use it to buy drugs. That stuff is contagious too, just look what happens in mining towns.

I think the AFL's approach, while obviously imperfect, is somewhat the right angle. People shouldn't be getting named publicly by their employer for substance use. But they also need to be doing more not to facilitate an environment of drug use - it feels like the unlimited strikes system, as I understand it, does just that. Many employers have strong enough deterrents to prevent their workers taking drugs. Maybe mandatory rehab upon second strike would be a deterrent for drug use during the playing season... but getting past the doctor/patient confidentiality component of the current system would be very tricky.
It's a good point that what the AFL seem to be doing no doubt wasn't their idea but what is done in professional sports around the world. I am as critical as most on the AFL, but less so on this issue, simply because we dont want Russian roulette of which players are going to get rubbed out for 1-2 years.
 
The league should just remove the illicit drugs health policy entirely and let the players take their chances with WADA/SIA on game day. Have the clubs deal with the health aspect of it themselves. At the moment it looks like the AFL is complicit in avoiding doping tests using the in/out of competition loophole. Morally I don't see that being much different than lying on a whereabouts form or backdating a Therapeutic Use Exemption. Also there's nothing to say that players are not still using recreational drugs for performance enhancing during training.
 
i don’t really care that players take drugs recreationally, but it shits me that guys who are paid a LOT of money to play footy are sitting out games because they couldn’t wait until after the game to get on the gear.

Obviously for some guys there is a dependency issue and they should be helped out, but i suspect a great many of them simply don’t care.
 
Prohibition has never worked in any society in any period of history, it's not gonna magically work in the AFL - FWIW I think the harm minimisation approach is the right one. The issue here is the tension between confidentiality and a harm minimisation approach, and the trust between the AFL and its fans. The AFL has always been pretty opaque and had a dismissive attitude towards fans, but this is a pretty strong fracture in whatever trust does exist. I think they're gonna have to do some work to restore that, but I wouldn't want that to be publicly naming and shaming or lengthy suspensions for players doing what (particularly young) people in every single society on earth do and have always and always will do - namely taking mood/mind altering substances (legal and illegal).
 
Still think clubs should be told if a player tests positive to any ilicit drug. All this medical privacy is BS IMO, this is not a medical issue. No different to a roadside breath test and club doctors are flat out lying, where is the integrity in that?

We are not talking personal medical records that should remain private, we are talking breach of contract by willingly taking a substance that is banned and affects clubs directly as you can't play. Clubs and coaches should know. I bet truck bosses would know if one of their drivers failed a RBT.

Of course players will dabble and Coke is the choice as it doesn't affect weight as much a say booze but if it is affecting in season availability then players should be fined by their clubs for breach of contract IMO.

All a bit murky.
 
Still think clubs should be told if a player tests positive to any ilicit drug. All this medical privacy is BS IMO, this is not a medical issue. No different to a roadside breath test and club doctors are flat out lying, where is the integrity in that?

We are not talking personal medical records that should remain private, we are talking breach of contract by willingly taking a substance that is banned and affects clubs directly as you can't play. Clubs and coaches should know. I bet truck bosses would know if one of their drivers failed a RBT.

Of course players will dabble and Coke is the choice as it doesn't affect weight as much a say booze but if it is affecting in season availability then players should be fined by their clubs for breach of contract IMO.

All a bit murky.
This is the bottom line as far as I'm concerned. If your workplace performance is impacted negatively because you chose to break the law by taking an illicit substance, it becomes a contractual matter.

The club should know. Write the proper clause into future contracts and be done with it. There's no place for that stuff in an elite sports environment or an elite athlete's career. Let the player choose; elite football career or not.
 
So on a separate note, who gets up tonight? I'm tipping the Lions. Partly cos I think they'll win, partly cos I really just want to see Collingwood go 0-4.

I'm tipping Brisbane too.
Pies need a Plan B because their game plan seems to have been thoroughly figured out.
 
Legal minefield. No doubt the lawyers at AFL House have been busy today.

I've been pondering interesting happenings from the past;
  • John McCarthy's death (RIP)
  • Jake King inviting Toby Mitchell (Bandidos bikie boss) into the Richmond rooms
  • Karmichael Hunt and the group of Suns players who were regular party boys with him
  • The Buddy rumours
  • The Oliver and Goodwin rumours

I'm sure there's more, but the implications of the AFL's double standard with this will run deep for those affected.

I didn't know the Australian Crime Commission warned about 10 years ago that drug use and organised crime was widespread in professional sport.

At some point the question of the extent to which the AFL's system of non-reporting actually was an enabler will be asked. If I'm John McCarthy's father, I want some answers.
 
Legal minefield. No doubt the lawyers at AFL House have been busy today.

I've been pondering interesting happenings from the past;
  • John McCarthy's death (RIP)
  • Jake King inviting Toby Mitchell (Bandidos bikie boss) into the Richmond rooms
  • Karmichael Hunt and the group of Suns players who were regular party boys with him
  • The Buddy rumours
  • The Oliver and Goodwin rumours

I'm sure there's more, but the implications of the AFL's double standard with this will run deep for those affected.

I didn't know the Australian Crime Commission warned about 10 years ago that drug use and organised crime was widespread in professional sport.

At some point the question of the extent to which the AFL's system of non-reporting actually was an enabler will be asked. If I'm John McCarthy's father, I want some answers.
...continued.
This is fascinating. A quick Google search also turned up;
  • Alan Didak partying with Chris Hudson at the Hells Angels clubhouse.
  • Brock McClean being good mates with the Moran family
  • Wayne Carey partying with Jason Moran; didn't Carey get dropped from 7 over his special bag of stuff?

Good family friendly culture AFL!
 

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top