AFLs drug policies win praise from WADA

[King-Eliagh]

Stop mollycoddling AFL players you twit. The poor diddums cant play for another club. Same goes for other professions you goon.

And I already provided a valid answer and more appropriate argument as to why AFL players should be tested more often. I'm not answering again. Again I ask you to try reading Xman. Just read.

I dont know the nrl results because i dont care to know. There's been little serious problems over the last decade in comparison to the AFL. Thank god the AFL has finally taken action.

[piesman2011]

I dont believe that the NRL release their results. I believe that the AFL is the only sporting competition in the world that releases their results. I could be wrong on that but I think I heard that recently.

[Xman]

Stop mollycoddling AFL players you twit. The poor diddums cant play for another club. Same goes for other professions you goon.

And I already provided a valid answer and more appropriate argument as to why AFL players should be tested more often. I'm not answering again. Again I ask you to try reading Xman. Just read.

I dont know the nrl results because i dont care to know. There's been little serious problems over the last decade in comparison to the AFL. Thank god the AFL has finally taken action.

If you were fired from one job for ilicit drug use you could almost certainly work in the same field within weeks. This does not apply for AFL players.

The reason you can't find the NRLs ilicit drugs policy results is because they refuse to release them. This was made even more farcical a few years ago when it was found that the clubs themselves were responsible for arranging the testing and at least one of their clubs was shown to be failing to test as required! now that is a farce!!

[King-Eliagh]

If you were fired from one job for ilicit drug use you could almost certainly work in the same field within weeks. This does not apply for AFL players.

Ahhhh , hmmm Xman. You're just not thinking right again are you.

Government, education, law, policing, health professions are just some where if you are done for drugs, you're most often done with the profession. There'd be countless others. Then we must add the importance of the referee process. Say you're in hospitality and your employer fires you for having dope on your body or being stoned. Ahh what does the next employer ask for first thing? Thats right a referee from your previous boss.

As to your thoughts on the NRL, sure there are some farcical elements and it needs some work. But please Xman, look properly at your own kitchen for a change.

[Xman]

If you were fired from one job for ilicit drug use you could almost certainly work in the same field within weeks. This does not apply for AFL players.

Ahhhh , hmmm Xman. You're just not thinking right again are you.

Government, education, law, policing, health professions are just some where if you are done for drugs, you're most often done with the profession. There'd be countless others. Then we must add the importance of the referee process. Say you're in hospitality and your employer fires you for having dope on your body or being stoned. Ahh what does the next employer ask for first thing? Thats right a referee from your previous boss.

As to your thoughts on the NRL, sure there are some farcical elements and it needs some work. But please Xman, look properly at your own kitchen for a change.

Sure there would be jobs where future employment in the same field would be difficult, or others where it wouldn't. In some cases it wouldnt be legislation that would preclude you from employment. It would be reputation, but for an AFL player it would be both.

But the AFL is now getting to the stage where this would also apply. Look at Fevola or Lovett. Both probably were still good enough to play on an AFL list but clubs a becoming more selective about picking players who have a sketchy history. I would say if a player was proven to have a drug history in today's environment they may be delisted and struggle to be drafted to another club.

[King-Eliagh]

If you were fired from one job for ilicit drug use you could almost certainly work in the same field within weeks. This does not apply for AFL players.

Ahhhh , hmmm Xman. You're just not thinking right again are you.

Government, education, law, policing, health professions are just some where if you are done for drugs, you're most often done with the profession. There'd be countless others. Then we must add the importance of the referee process. Say you're in hospitality and your employer fires you for having dope on your body or being stoned. Ahh what does the next employer ask for first thing? Thats right a referee from your previous boss.

As to your thoughts on the NRL, sure there are some farcical elements and it needs some work. But please Xman, look properly at your own kitchen for a change.

Sure there would be jobs where future employment in the same field would be difficult, or others where it wouldn't. In some cases it wouldnt be legislation that would preclude you from employment. It would be reputation, but for an AFL player it would be both.

But the AFL is now getting to the stage where this would also apply. Look at Fevola or Lovett. Both probably were still good enough to play on an AFL list but clubs a becoming more selective about picking players who have a sketchy history. I would say if a player was proven to have a drug history in today's environment they may be delisted and struggle to be drafted to another club.

End of the story being AFL rulings on drug use and misbehaviour are much more lenient than in society. You've provided the evidence to backup my argument thanks Xman. So its a two year ban in the AFL when in the majority of other professions its either for good and or your reputation is tarred causing difficulty in getting work in the same field. Except! And this was your best point Xman. Except when someone like fevola or cousins gets caught for drugs, or ridiculous behaviour not once not twice but thrice or more in fev's case, completely tarnishing their own and the AFL's reputation. Thats when the AFL act and boot them out for good.

Thanks Xman I'm all clear on the matter now

[Xman]

Ahhhh , hmmm Xman. You're just not thinking right again are you.

Government, education, law, policing, health professions are just some where if you are done for drugs, you're most often done with the profession. There'd be countless others. Then we must add the importance of the referee process. Say you're in hospitality and your employer fires you for having dope on your body or being stoned. Ahh what does the next employer ask for first thing? Thats right a referee from your previous boss.

As to your thoughts on the NRL, sure there are some farcical elements and it needs some work. But please Xman, look properly at your own kitchen for a change.

Sure there would be jobs where future employment in the same field would be difficult, or others where it wouldn't. In some cases it wouldnt be legislation that would preclude you from employment. It would be reputation, but for an AFL player it would be both.

But the AFL is now getting to the stage where this would also apply. Look at Fevola or Lovett. Both probably were still good enough to play on an AFL list but clubs a becoming more selective about picking players who have a sketchy history. I would say if a player was proven to have a drug history in today's environment they may be delisted and struggle to be drafted to another club.

End of the story being AFL rulings on drug use and misbehaviour are much more lenient than in society. You've provided the evidence to backup my argument thanks Xman. So its a two year ban in the AFL when in the majority of other professions its either for good and or your reputation is tarred causing difficulty in getting work in the same field. Except! And this was your best point Xman. Except when someone like fevola or cousins gets caught for drugs, or ridiculous behaviour not once not twice but thrice or more in fev's case, completely tarnishing their own and the AFL's reputation. Thats when the AFL act and boot them out for good.

Thanks Xman I'm all clear on the matter now

Almost every sport in the world follows WADA including the NRL. The AFL have additional policies which are far more comprehensive than the vast majority of other sporting organisations.

If you don't like the AFLs drug policies you must be aghast at other sports!

[King-Eliagh]

So ahhh why'd you disagree vehemently with my point that the AFL's drug rules are more lenient than society Xman?

I urge you to think harder before blurting out "wrong" in future. Because it seems most often when you use that word, you are in fact the one who's wrong.

There you go, some wisdom from the King for you to ponder over for the weekend. This applies to you too TLPG aka Pauline Hanson if you're reading

[Xman]

So ahhh why'd you disagree vehemently with my point that the AFL's drug rules are more lenient than society Xman?

I urge you to think harder before blurting out "wrong" in future. Because it seems most often when you use that word, you are in fact the one who's wrong.

There you go, some wisdom from the King for you to ponder over for the weekend. This applies to you too TLPG aka Pauline Hanson if you're reading

Because you're incorrect. Do the general public get tested multiple times per year? Do they get tested in their own time? On vacation? No?

Well they are far better off than AFL players!

[pookus]

Sure there would be jobs where future employment in the same field would be difficult, or others where it wouldn't. In some cases it wouldnt be legislation that would preclude you from employment. It would be reputation, but for an AFL player it would be both.

But the AFL is now getting to the stage where this would also apply. Look at Fevola or Lovett. Both probably were still good enough to play on an AFL list but clubs a becoming more selective about picking players who have a sketchy history. I would say if a player was proven to have a drug history in today's environment they may be delisted and struggle to be drafted to another club.

End of the story being AFL rulings on drug use and misbehaviour are much more lenient than in society. You've provided the evidence to backup my argument thanks Xman. So its a two year ban in the AFL when in the majority of other professions its either for good and or your reputation is tarred causing difficulty in getting work in the same field. Except! And this was your best point Xman. Except when someone like fevola or cousins gets caught for drugs, or ridiculous behaviour not once not twice but thrice or more in fev's case, completely tarnishing their own and the AFL's reputation. Thats when the AFL act and boot them out for good.

Thanks Xman I'm all clear on the matter now

Almost every sport in the world follows WADA including the NRL. The AFL have additional policies which are far more comprehensive than the vast majority of other sporting organisations.

If you don't like the AFLs drug policies you must be aghast at other sports!

Are you seriously suggesting that pro sportsman arent under more scrutiny than the average man.How many times have you been drug tested.What a load of crap and in nearly all work places they have processes to deal with people who suffer problems instant dismissal is very rare.But the real point is that both the AFL and the NRL players are streets ahead of the populous.30% of men aged between 18 and 30 have used recreational drugs do you honestly suggest that these guys should all be booted from employment.Using the big stick on drugs has not worked and you are seeing preventative and education programs taking hold in many countries.The AFL on this one were ahead of their time and the sooner we stop turning users into criminals and except they need help and not a belting the better.There is multitudes of research on this do some.I know because it is my field.Noone can seriously suggest that a 19 year old kid whos been caught smoking pot or having stimulants twice should have his whole life ripped to shreds.Who does this benefit.Is it to make an example of him.Surely we have enough of those and it has not made one iotas difference when it comes to the uptake of illicit drugs.Education is the only way forward on this issue.The AFL should hold its head up very high on this one for heeding the advice given by those that know rather than pandering to those that dont.And by the way isnt leagues next immortal a self confessed drug addict.

[Xman]

End of the story being AFL rulings on drug use and misbehaviour are much more lenient than in society. You've provided the evidence to backup my argument thanks Xman. So its a two year ban in the AFL when in the majority of other professions its either for good and or your reputation is tarred causing difficulty in getting work in the same field. Except! And this was your best point Xman. Except when someone like fevola or cousins gets caught for drugs, or ridiculous behaviour not once not twice but thrice or more in fev's case, completely tarnishing their own and the AFL's reputation. Thats when the AFL act and boot them out for good.

Thanks Xman I'm all clear on the matter now

Almost every sport in the world follows WADA including the NRL. The AFL have additional policies which are far more comprehensive than the vast majority of other sporting organisations.

If you don't like the AFLs drug policies you must be aghast at other sports!

Are you seriously suggesting that pro sportsman arent under more scrutiny than the average man.How many times have you been drug tested.What a load of crap and in nearly all work places they have processes to deal with people who suffer problems instant dismissal is very rare.But the real point is that both the AFL and the NRL players are streets ahead of the populous.30% of men aged between 18 and 30 have used recreational drugs do you honestly suggest that these guys should all be booted from employment.Using the big stick on drugs has not worked and you are seeing preventative and education programs taking hold in many countries.The AFL on this one were ahead of their time and the sooner we stop turning users into criminals and except they need help and not a belting the better.There is multitudes of research on this do some.I know because it is my field.Noone can seriously suggest that a 19 year old kid whos been caught smoking pot or having stimulants twice should have his whole life ripped to shreds.Who does this benefit.Is it to make an example of him.Surely we have enough of those and it has not made one iotas difference when it comes to the uptake of illicit drugs.Education is the only way forward on this issue.The AFL should hold its head up very high on this one for heeding the advice given by those that know rather than pandering to those that dont.And by the way isnt leagues next immortal a self confessed drug addict.

Nicely said. Good to see an educated opinion on the topic.

These RL fools have no idea. They think a policy based on education and support should have more strick punishment. They can't understand that this is against the entire concept of the policy and that simply banning a player may rid them from the game but will most likely leave the player unemployed and left to deal with an addiction on there own.

[King-Eliagh]

Yes thanks pookus you put a much clearer point forward than Xman. But you got me a bit wrong. If you read back you'll see quite clearly my preference is for the more harsh punishment to be taken on those using enhancing drugs. And secondly, i am not suggesting sportspeople are under less scrutiny but the rules in which they are dealt with are more lenient. 3 strikes is not provided in mosthighly regarded professions and considering the pay and profile of elite sportspeople we can easily class them as very highly regarded professions. Ever heard of a politician getting three shots at doing ganga or acting like fev before they're given the boot? Sorry it just dont happen. What about a school teacher?A much lower profile job but do you reckon they'd be in their job after two nights out cutting lines with cousins? afraid not my friend...afraid not.

Its clear that these blokes get more chances considering their position. It is changing but its not like the rest of society. So Xman, you're wrong again pal, and you too pookus.

In all seriousness though, apart from performance enhancing drugs, i reckon give these lads the chances. A bloke like fevola is fantastic reading in the papers and something the wider society laps up with fervour. He also helps those who are sane realise the sun doesnt shine outside the AFL's asshole . But not even big fev can show Xman that

[pookus]

Yes thanks pookus you put a much clearer point forward than Xman. But you got me a bit wrong. If you read back you'll see quite clearly my preference is for the more harsh punishment to be taken on those using enhancing drugs. And secondly, i am not suggesting sportspeople are under less scrutiny but the rules in which they are dealt with are more lenient. 3 strikes is not provided in mosthighly regarded professions and considering the pay and profile of elite sportspeople we can easily class them as very highly regarded professions. Ever heard of a politician getting three shots at doing ganga or acting like fev before they're given the boot? Sorry it just dont happen. What about a school teacher?A much lower profile job but do you reckon they'd be in their job after two nights out cutting lines with cousins? afraid not my friend...afraid not.

Its clear that these blokes get more chances considering their position. It is changing but its not like the rest of society. So Xman, you're wrong again pal, and you too pookus.

In all seriousness though, apart from performance enhancing drugs, i reckon give these lads the chances. A bloke like fevola is fantastic reading in the papers and something the wider society laps up with fervour. He also helps those who are sane realise the sun doesnt shine outside the AFL's asshole . But not even big fev can show Xman that

Sorry mate but your wrong a school teacher is not instantly sacked.Like most work places including police they would be suspended and put into a program.A politician would not be sacked or even removed unless convicted of a criminal offence which excludes them from parliment.In all these cases anonymity would be kept as positive tests are not a matter for the public but just that of the parties concerned.A south australian senator just resigned and was unable to be removed even though she had been caught shop lifting twice.Of course they are open to public scrutiny but unless they are charged with a criminal offence we would never know but im sure in a polies case it would mean death but not by legislation. Im glad you see sense on the matter.Honestly who doesnt expect testosterone laden young men to get it wrong occasionally.

[Xman]

Yes thanks pookus you put a much clearer point forward than Xman. But you got me a bit wrong. If you read back you'll see quite clearly my preference is for the more harsh punishment to be taken on those using enhancing drugs. And secondly, i am not suggesting sportspeople are under less scrutiny but the rules in which they are dealt with are more lenient. 3 strikes is not provided in mosthighly regarded professions and considering the pay and profile of elite sportspeople we can easily class them as very highly regarded professions. Ever heard of a politician getting three shots at doing ganga or acting like fev before they're given the boot? Sorry it just dont happen. What about a school teacher?A much lower profile job but do you reckon they'd be in their job after two nights out cutting lines with cousins? afraid not my friend...afraid not.

Its clear that these blokes get more chances considering their position. It is changing but its not like the rest of society. So Xman, you're wrong again pal, and you too pookus.

In all seriousness though, apart from performance enhancing drugs, i reckon give these lads the chances. A bloke like fevola is fantastic reading in the papers and something the wider society laps up with fervour. He also helps those who are sane realise the sun doesnt shine outside the AFL's asshole . But not even big fev can show Xman that

Performance enhancing drugs are covered by wada, not the Ilicit drugs policy. Therefore there are no strikes!

Pookus showed you up nicely!

[King-Eliagh]

Thanks Xman but i think you've got little more to offer on this one ol chap.

Pookus I still think you have the separate issues of scrutiny and leniency a little tangled in your take on what I'm saying. If the public community hears about a school teacher acting ala big fev or cousins, they'd be out on their ear quicker than you could bounce them out of the school. Sure if its not public the teacher may get away with a more lenient charge but i know and i think xman would too that the education department takes a very very hard line with those who are caught with drugs. Politicians are much the same as are all highly regarded professions in my opinion.

Now the scrutiny players receive is a different kettle of fish, its harsh and a very difficult thing to address considering the popularity of the players. NRL players in melb and AFL players in syd are living the dream really. Why big fev would prob be sitting in star casino right now relaxing after a win with the swans by chucking a few thousand on the tables if he played in sydney.