West Coast Eagles shocking drug culture

[Aussie in exile]

Full extent of West Coast Eagles’ shocking drug culture exposed

The below is an edited extract from The Boys’ Club by Michael Warner (Hachette Australia, $33).

www.news.com.au

 

[Kwality]

Full extent of West Coast Eagles’ shocking drug culture exposed

The below is an edited extract from The Boys’ Club by Michael Warner (Hachette Australia, $33).

www.news.com.au

Certainly be worth a read IF it is not simply a rewrite of earlier media coverage.
What is new here?

 

[Aussie in exile]

Certainly be worth a read IF it is not simply a rewrite of earlier media coverage.
What is new here?

Just confirming what will already know that the game has a drug culture and the AFL condones it imho.

 

[RussellEbertHandball]

Certainly be worth a read IF it is not simply a rewrite of earlier media coverage.
What is new here?

Demetriou was a business partner of WCE chairman in 2007 Dalton Gooding the Dental false teeth import guys Ruthinium Group Pty Ltd both were directors, Demetriou MD, the relationship was never revealed, no conflict of interest was revealed and the AFL never sanctioned the WCE for any poor administration of a decade long slack oversight. Demetriou and AFL commissioned the Gillard report into what happened at WCE and he made sure it was never released. IIRC Warner said on the Footology podcast only 3 copies of the report was ever printed.

 

[Cuzz09]

On SM-G925I using BigFooty.com mobile app

 

[Makka]

Full extent of West Coast Eagles’ shocking drug culture exposed

The below is an edited extract from The Boys’ Club by Michael Warner (Hachette Australia, $33).

www.news.com.au

*YAWN*

 

[Aussie in exile]

*YAWN*

I'm not wrong though and obviouslyy the truth hurts

 

[Kwality]

I'm not wrong though and obviouslyy the truth hurts

What are you 'not wrong' about?

 

[Aussie in exile]

What are you 'not wrong' about?

The clubs drug culture

 

[Kwality]

The clubs drug culture

Then or now?

 

[Aussie in exile]

Then or now?

Certainly then.

 

[owen87]

Certainly then.

Bloody West Coast, ruining the reputation of the comp.

 

[Kwality]

Bloody West Coast, ruining the reputation of the comp.

Did they deal with their problem as well as the Bombers did theirs. Mind numbing.

 

[Aussie in exile]

Bloody West Coast, ruining the reputation of the comp.

We all know that the game has had a drug problems for many years, hence why they brought in the 3 strike rule to try and cover up the games drug problems and to protect the AFL brand

 

[Kwality]

We all know that the game has had a drug problems for many years, hence why they brought in the 3 strike rule to try and cover up the games drug problems and to protect the AFL brand

Footy players are human beings.

 

[Aussie in exile]

Footy players are human beings.

I'm not denying that, and we all make mistakes in life, but in my opinion the game has had a drug problem for many years and i say again that's why the 3 strike rule was brought in, and lets never forget that Essendon were tipped off when the testers were in town and all records of what was injected into the players disappeared. So why did the records of what was injected into the players disappear? So the obviously conclusion to me is that somebody at AFL house knew what was going on at the bombers and until the testers were in town and blind eye was turned towards the bombers.

 

[owen87]

I'm not denying that, and we all make mistakes in life, but in my opinion the game has had a drug problem for many years and i say again that's why the 3 strike rule was brought in, and lets never forget that Essendon were tipped off when the testers were in town and all records of what was injected into the players disappeared. So why did the records of what was injected into the players disappear? So the obviously conclusion to me is that somebody at AFL house knew what was going on at the bombers and until the testers were in town and blind eye was turned towards the bombers.

Ahem. This is the West Coast thread.

 

[Aussie in exile]

Ahem. This is the West Coast thread.

Sometimes we have to digress to make a point and sometimes people don't want to hear the truth

 

[owen87]

Sometimes we have to digress to make a point and sometimes people don't want to hear the truth

There's a difference between 'taking drugs' and a 'drug problem'.

I'd take a stab that many, if not the majority, of AFL players dabble in the illicit party drugs category, without a drug problem or a culture of drug taking.

 

[Aussie in exile]

There's a difference between 'taking drugs' and a 'drug problem'.

I'd take a stab that many, if not the majority, of AFL players dabble in the illicit party drugs category, without a drug problem or a culture of drug taking.

A majority yes, but not all, and you are missing the point about why the AFL brought in the 3 strike rule and why somebody tipped off Essendon when the the testers were and why Essendon destroyed or lost all evidence of what was injected into their players.
Why do you think the AFL brought in the 3 strike rule?
Why do you think Essendon destroyed or lost all evidence as to what was injected into their players?
Why do you think the life long druggie Ben Cousins never tested positive for drugs when he was playing?

 

[owen87]

A majority yes, but not all, and you are missing the point about why the AFL brought in the 3 strike rule and why somebody tipped off Essendon when the the testers were and why Essendon destroyed or lost all evidence of what was injected into their players.
Why do you think the AFL brought in the 3 strike rule?
Why do you think Essendon destroyed or lost all evidence as to what was injected into their players?
Why do you think the life long druggie Ben Cousins never tested positive for drugs when he was playing?

What exactly are you trying to argue about in this thread?

The AFL conducts brand management, to the surprise of no one.

EFC was a sports doping issue, vs an illicit drugs issue where the three strikes policy is relevant.

You're trying to conflate a few things together here that are really only peripherally related.

 

[Aussie in exile]

What exactly are you trying to argue about in this thread?

The AFL conducts brand management, to the surprise of no one.

EFC was a sports doping issue, vs an illicit drugs issue where the three strikes policy is relevant.

You're trying to conflate a few things together here that are really only peripherally related.

What i am saying is the AFL are more concerned with protecting the AFL brand rather the player welfare

 

[owen87]

What i am saying is the AFL are more concerned with protecting the AFL brand rather the player welfare

Yes. Was this meant to be a revelation?

 

[Aussie in exile]

Yes. Was this meant to be a revelation?

Lets put it another way. For the AFL money is more important than player welfare

 

[owen87]

Lets put it another way. For the AFL money is more important than player welfare

Again. Was this meant to be a revelation?