Remove this Banner Ad

BigFooty Forum

Thought this could use it's own thread.

Looks like there is a new policy from 2016.

Source.

Under the new policy - which AFL football operations boss Mark Evans on Wednesday branded as tougher - players will receive a $5000 suspended fine for their first strike but will remain anonymous while receiving counselling and target testing.

Their name will be made public on the second strike, as they serve a four-match suspension.

A third strike will incur a 12-match suspension.

Interested in getting peoples thoughts on this as it's an area that interests me. How much power should the AFL have to dictate what a player does outside of game day?

IMV there is a fine but important distinction between demanding professionalism and controlling the lives of the athlete. I am all for PED testing however I do not feel the AFL should have an illicit drugs policy. Why should it matter what the player does to himself outside of matches? I am certainly not one to advocate drug use but I really don't understand why the AFL thinks it has the ability to dictate what choices a player makes outside of their working week, regardless of how careless those choices are (outside of harming others, of course).

Thoughts?

Remove this Banner Ad

🥰 Love BigFooty? Join now for free.

Back
Top