Rumour white line fever

Remove this Banner Ad

Last edited:
Obzerva said:
Agree, and I think it’d be naïve to believe it’d be limited to just the AFL.

Plenty of sportsmen fit your description perfectly and can have periods between games/meets/tournaments.
Tennis anyone?
Click to expand...

You seem to have an intellect - the ‘news’ is the level of potential corruption the AFL could be harbouring.
 
dangerwood said:
The real injustice is the overpriced cut up stuff the rest of us get access to.
Click to expand...

There is that…but atm, you’re not being asked to throw a footy match. 😉
 

Log in to remove this ad.

The PROBLEM here is the BF pinheads think this an ‘anti-drug’ rant.

Ask yourself - why do major institutions fear drugs?

The individual user can be ‘managed’…so what’s the big deal?

I’ll tell you -

- llegal activity creates vulnerable people…who’ll do stuff.

- Vulnerable people do silly things - Miss easy goals, miss easy frees, fail to recall the bounce, tell tales in the clubrooms, put pressure on other team mates, make up stories about coaches, cheat, lie, distort, HURT.

-Silly things bring down Clubs, Cultures, Governments, Sporting bodies, Churches, Cops, Families, Children etc.

Who wins? ‘Crime gangs’ and corrupt people…thats it.

Think about that next time the Ump awards a ‘never there’ free kick that costs you a game..or final.
 
Last edited:
Nebular said:
Players do drugs and the afl is corrupt.

We already know.
Click to expand...

How clever of you🤦‍♂️ - but not many have heard it from the lips in such detail from an ex-senior Police Officer - but of course if you don’t want ‘contributions’…just message Mike or Chief and tell them only your posts are worth reading 🙄
 
SuperMal said:
How clever of you🤦‍♂️ - but not many have heard it from the lips in such detail from an ex-senior Police Officer - but of course if you don’t want ‘contributions’…just message Mike or Chief and tell them only your posts are worth reading 🙄
Click to expand...
I really admire your ability to remain confident despite the results you get, but your hate boner for me is really boring.

Nobody cares.
 
SuperMal said:
I think quite a few, when the very real possibility of corrupt umpiring or ‘chucking games’ is an obvious outcome of half the AFL being ‘on the gear’.

But I guess that takes a tiny bit of imagination to work it through.
Click to expand...
Huh??

How does players on the gear have anything to do with corrupt umpires?
 
GWT6 said:
Huh??

How does players on the gear have anything to do with corrupt umpires?
Click to expand...
GWT6 said:
Huh??

How does players on the gear have anything to do with corrupt umpires?
Click to expand...
OK, in the interests of keeping the peace, I’ll try to precis my posts.

My post is basically about the ‘drug problem’ in the AFL.

The police know it goes far deeper than a few guys getting on the gear.

There are ‘relatives’ of footballers who are king pin dealers, and it’s more than just the players who are enjoying a good night out.

Fine…but these dealers enjoy gambling, and they expect to win.

When an individual gets in too deep…the next thing is ‘corrupted’ games, bad bounces, unpaid frees, non-existent frees etc.


Where are the AFL drug reports with such a drug problem?

How are these issues slipping through the media scrutiny?

And, its not as clumsy a ‘throwing a game‘ - margin betting, line betting, laying off, novelty bets all create opportunities for a crooked player, coach or umpire to affect a result.

Has it happened? Who knows? I can think of a free that wasn’t paid down at Geelong…a game or two that had seriously screwed free kick counts.

I can think of a current player who has the ‘yips’…plays for a team that many expected to play finals….many expected to win the Coleman.

But the reality is there’s many international comps that are ‘bent’….and having a compliant media that doesn’t ask questions is a great way to start.

So my post was to ask the question, is there a Scandal rolling out in front of us?
 
Last edited:

(Log in to remove this ad.)

Nebular said:
I really admire your ability to remain confident despite the results you get, but your hate boner for me is really boring.

Nobody cares.
Click to expand...
You do. And I appreciate it. It’s nice to know whatever I post…you’re there.

Kind of like a mindless blind mutt. But its not a boner…it’s a bone.
 
Do you ever get the feeling you're talking to yourself?

Screenshot 2023-06-03 222357.jpg
 
SuperMal said:
The PROBLEM here is the BF pinheads think this an ‘anti-drug’ rant.

Ask yourself - why do major institutions fear drugs?

The individual user can be ‘managed’…so what’s the big deal?

I’ll tell you -

- llegal activity creates vulnerable people…who’ll do stuff.

- Vulnerable people do silly things - Miss easy goals, miss easy frees, fail to recall the bounce, tell tales in the clubrooms, put pressure on other team mates, make up stories about coaches, cheat, lie, distort, HURT.

-Silly things bring down Clubs, Cultures, Governments, Sporting bodies, Churches, Cops, Families, Children etc.

Who wins? ‘Crime gangs’ and corrupt people…thats it.

Think about that next time the Ump awards a ‘never there’ free kick that costs you a game..or final.
Click to expand...
Gambling revenue is my biggest concern regarding integrity but I don’t disagree with your argument here. I’ve never really thought about illicit drugs and the potential to compromise a result through them.
 
SuperMal said:
- How are these players NOT being detected…..I would note there have been Zero illicit substance detections confirmed by the AFL for sometime.

- If this issue is as widely known as my source implied, why aren’t the media pursuing these stories harder? Killing the Golden Goose perhaps?
Click to expand...

Regarding detection rates:
  • Players are being detected, we just don't know how many.
  • Urine tests typically won't detect cocaine for more than a couple of days after use. Factors influencing detection times include whether or not alcohol was consumed at the same time as cocaine, the fitness (and body fat %) of the user, how much they used, and how frequently they use it. AFL players that take cocaine would typically tick every box favorably for being able to clear it out of the system fastest. Most would be clear in less than 48 hours.
  • Testing is random, and I'd confidently say at least the majority (50%+) of players are not using drugs at all, and of those that do use them, most do not use them habitually (something close to daily).
  • There are things one can do to reduce how long cocaine stays in the system after use, and things one can do to increase the odds of beating a urine test. A super vigilant player might even carry synthetic urine on their person during any window of time they might test positive, just in case.
So the odds are low that a randomly selected player a) is someone that does them at all, and b) has done them within a couple of days of the test. And of those at risk of testing positive, many will have been taking steps to help beat the test, leaving a very small number of players likely to test positive, whom we don't even hear about the first two times anyways. It's almost impossible to record three strikes without being a highly problematic drug user.

Regarding how widely the issue is known and reported:
  • It is known that players take recreational drugs as it is known they are used in the wider community.
  • The three-strikes policy means there is nothing to report unless someone is caught in the act (at which point it is reported on heavily).
  • And, by and large, cocaine use in and of itself is not of all that much concern to the general public (many of whom use themselves).
I just don't think there is much of a story here, beyond those that are reported.
 
PizzaPie said:
Regarding detection rates:
  • Players are being detected, we just don't know how many.
  • Urine tests typically won't detect cocaine for more than a couple of days after use. Factors influencing detection times include whether or not alcohol was consumed at the same time as cocaine, the fitness (and body fat %) of the user, how much they used, and how frequently they use it. AFL players that take cocaine would typically tick every box favorably for being able to clear it out of the system fastest. Most would be clear in less than 48 hours.
  • Testing is random, and I'd confidently say at least the majority (50%+) of players are not using drugs at all, and of those that do use them, most do not use them habitually (something close to daily).
  • There are things one can do to reduce how long cocaine stays in the system after use, and things one can do to increase the odds of beating a urine test. A super vigilant player might even carry synthetic urine on their person during any window of time they might test positive, just in case.
So the odds are low that a randomly selected player a) is someone that does them at all, and b) has done them within a couple of days of the test. And of those at risk of testing positive, many will have been taking steps to help beat the test, leaving a very small number of players likely to test positive, whom we don't even hear about the first two times anyways. It's almost impossible to record three strikes without being a highly problematic drug user.

Regarding how widely the issue is known and reported:
  • It is known that players take recreational drugs as it is known they are used in the wider community.
  • The three-strikes policy means there is nothing to report unless someone is caught in the act (at which point it is reported on heavily).
  • And, by and large, cocaine use in and of itself is not of all that much concern to the general public (many of whom use themselves).
I just don't think there is much of a story here, beyond those that are reported.
Click to expand...

Thanks for explaining the testing regime - clearly there are massive holes in the system and many more players are using than are being caught.

While I agree that players are expected to ‘get on it’ - it’ll only take one top line Administrator or an Ump to get themselves ‘compromised’ to create a serious problem.
 
Wouldn't be at all surprised by that.
It's pretty widely used by local footy players at suburban level.
 
SuperMal said:
When an individual gets in too deep…the next thing is ‘corrupted’ games, bad bounces, unpaid frees, non-existent frees etc.
Click to expand...

I don't thini even prime Pablo Escobar was powerful enough to match fix the bounce of the ball
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top