Talking Footy

So its ok for Movie & Rock stars to do drugs but not Football players hey Rabbit!!!!!!!!

King-Eliagh wrote:

Rabbit I just noticed your signature . Superb! Who's quote is that?

If I remember correctly, it was from a newspaper years and years and years ago (decades) when the then Vfl was being all huffy and puffy (as usual, what's changed) about being Australia's game and how it was un-Australia not to like it and it was only a matter of time before the superior code took over.

But yeah, the quote pulls no punches and is meant to be read the way it is because it's the truth.

Pete_09 wrote:

So its ok for Movie & Rock stars to do drugs but not Football players hey Rabbit!!!!!!!!

All illegal.

Unless they share it with me :D

I agree Parra, well said. haha

King-Eliagh wrote:

Mark my words, says Demetriou in his office while chomping krispy kreme doughnuts with his feet on the desk, "If you try drugs you WILL be caught". Meanwhile coaches and club staff are fearing phone calls from players, juiced up to the nines on drugs...again.

Ben Cousins anyone?

And on an even more tragic note. Whatever happened to that port adeliade player who leapt/fell from a balcony in vegas? I recall he was severely confused on his phone msg prior to his passing...

The NRL - Enforces a strict policy on the clubs to conduct min 70 tests per year, allowing the clubs and staff on the ground, closest to the players to deal with the issue.

The AFL - Has their fatcat CEO spouting ridiculous clueless, yet carefully and ambiguously crafted statements from his office, while club staff fear phone calls from a clearly out of control player base and a significant spike in positive drug use is on the way...

The AFL, lacking control and perspective on this important issue.

Next you'll be saying the NRL have no drug use issues....

Yet we hear NOTHING!!!!

Wow, which code is proactive and which has their head buried in the sand?

Look a lot of young people use drugs these days so why should footabllers be any different.

The only difference is AFL/NRL players seem to use them a lot less than the general public.

As long as they are not taking performance enhancing drugs I say who cares what they take in there own time. Just be be safe.

Pete_09 wrote:

SO what if they do a little bit of drugs in there off season.

Wrong Pete, it was not the off season according to the below. It appears that the three strike policy is a bit of a joke too, what a big broom the AFL have and an extra large piece of carpet. The AFL has such a good policy (sweep policy that is). The fact that the AFL allows players to come forward (Sweep) with their problems, and they help the players out (Sweep, Sweep) by not giving them a strike , but if they ever do get 3 strikes, then they AFL will act, well done.


http://au.sports.yahoo.com/AFL/news/art ... -drug-use/
Reports have emerged that at least four Collingwood players voluntarily admitted to using drugs last season.

According to the ''Herald-Sun'', the Magpies' players reported their drug use to AFL medical staff late last year and as a result they did not have a strike marked against their name under a controversial clause in the AFL's Illicit Drugs Policy.

Under the policy, if a player fails to respond to treatment and counselling on three occasions, they are subject to a $5000 dollar fine and a suspension of up to 18 matches.

However, if a player reports to using drugs, whether that be deliberately or inadvertently, then they are exempt from having a strike recorded against their name.

The news comes ahead of the AFL holding an historic summit on drug use in the competition on January 30.

Pete_09 wrote:

At least AFL players dont get drunk & try to rape the daughter of a major sponsor at the seaon launch like Brett Stewart.

Don't start a battle that nobody will win, any that are Proven Guilty are a disgrace
no matter what code

I would say both codes have their fair share of disgrace wouldn't you
http://www.thefullwiki.org/List_of_Aust ... _incidents
http://www.thefullwiki.org/List_of_off- ... ue_players

Sweepity sweep sweep! Yes dogs, as long as the player comes up to Demetriou with his tail between his legs and a forlorn look on his face Demetriwhowantssomeblow will always throw him a bone, give the boy a pat and say, now you be quiet now....Every time.

Whatta policy!

This is what I said in another post, read it carefully King & everyone else

"I dont see how naming & shaming is going to help the player that is doing drugs. Look at America for example, they have zero tolerance on drugs & now there jails are way overcrowded with people who have just smoked a bit of weed. They should be in a rehab centre getting help from doctors which is exactly what the AFL do when the person gets caught for the first time".

"Naming a shaming will just ruin peoples lifes who really have just had a bit of a good time in there off season"

Pete_09 wrote:

This is what I said in another post, read it carefully King & everyone else

"I dont see how naming & shaming is going to help the player that is doing drugs. Look at America for example, they have zero tolerance on drugs & now there jails are way overcrowded with people who have just smoked a bit of weed. They should be in a rehab centre getting help from doctors which is exactly what the AFL do when the person gets caught for the first time".

"Naming a shaming will just ruin peoples lifes who really have just had a bit of a good time in there off season"

And the second time, and the third time. And if the player comes to the AFL themselves admitting they dabbled in some party drugs at the weekend? They can effectively continue on with this behaviour, without punishment, forever. Ahhh if only i could hear the jokes in the locker room ... or be at a players party.

Player one: Hey man I got some E, you wanna party?
Player two: Hell yes, its what heaps of other players are doin right!?
Player one: You got that right, lets go and make ben cousins look like a choir boy
Player two: Ah umm but waita minute, can we get busted though?
Player one: Not if we own up to what we did, then we get nothing! this system is awesome!

On a serious note I'd like to say its no wonder coaches and club officials have stated they're afraid to answer their phone late at night for fear its another player juiced up to the nines on party drugs. Shame shame shame AFL

Pete_09 wrote:

"Naming a shaming will just ruin peoples lifes who really have just had a bit of a good time in there off season"

is this a claus in the VFL's drugs policy ?

VFL.... passive acceptance of drug use
what we all knew anyway

but confirmation that the VFL .... just don't care

Raiderdave wrote:

Pete_09 wrote:

"Naming a shaming will just ruin peoples lifes who really have just had a bit of a good time in there off season"

is this a claus in the VFL's drugs policy ?

VFL.... passive acceptance of drug use
what we all knew anyway

but confirmation that the VFL .... just don't care

The NRL leave testing to their clubs. These clubs have been shown to fail basic testing regimes. Now THAT is care!

Add to that they release NO results. Sweep sweep...

Lordy lordy me, this is just getting worse by the minute

Former Hawthorn president Jeff Kennett has savaged the outcome of the AFL's drugs summit as a "copout" after no immediate changes were made to the three-strikes illicit drugs policy.

The AFL says it will close a policy loophole that allows its players to take party drugs but avoid being tested - it just can't say when.

The three-strikes provision of the policy will remain - AFL chief executive Andrew Demetriou saying there was unanimous support at the summit for retaining it.

And any further recommendations for change - including the contentious issue of when to alert club bosses a player has been caught using drugs like cocaine, ice and ecstasy - will be left to a working party of three club chief executives, AFL medical officers, the AFL Players Association and outside medical experts.

That group won't meet until after the AFL releases its 2012 drugs policy findings - Demetriou saying no date has been fixed for that to happen.

After long being an advocate for clubs to be alerted earlier than a player's third strike, Kennett believes if the AFL can't do that, it must take a zero tolerance approach to illicit drugs.

"This is a copout. I have argued for a long time the clubs must know at two strikes so we can help the player," Kennett told Melbourne radio station SEN on Wednesday night.

"From what I understand today it's been a talk-fest.

"I have now come to the view, even though I'm prepared to compromise, that the time has come for the AFL and the presidents to put in place the simplest policy possible - the use of illicit drugs ... is not acceptable and if you are caught you will be suspended or banned."

Kennett's AFL club is the only one to have had a player test positive to illicit drugs three times.

But the extent of Travis Tuck's problems were not known by club hierarchy - including Kennett - until he was found unconscious and under the influence of drugs in his parked car in 2010.

Kennett was critical of the AFLPA's role in helping design the policy, believing players should have no say in setting the rules regarding illicit drug use.

"The players have no right to actually make the rules of the code," Kennett said.

"The code rules have got to be set by the administrators in the interest of all players.

"And if that code says the taking of illicit drugs and performance-enhancing drugs is illegal and if you're detected you'll be suspended for a year and your pay reduced by 90 per cent, so be it."

Demetriou said AFL medical officers had told Wednesday's summit they didn't believe exploitation of the self-reporting loophole in the illicit drugs policy was a widespread problem.

Players who put their hands up and admit to having used recreational drugs can avoid being tested and therefore registering one of their three strikes under the policy.

Instead they are referred to seek help - and there have been concerns some players are abusing that option any time they are required to undergo testing.

Despite saying the loophole would be closed, Demetriou could not confirm if it would happen before the start of the new season as the AFL Commission and AFLPA must first sign off on it.

Collingwood chief executive Gary Pert and Essendon and Gold Coast counterparts Ian Robson and Travis Auld will be part of the annual working party to review the illicit drugs policy.

http://wwos.ninemsn.com.au/article.aspx?id=8602002

I'll say it again. Lordy lordy me oh my. What a flamin joke of an organisation. How many more times do we gotta see what happened to Tuck and numerous others who have been essentially hidden from those closest to them, their club mates and colleagues in their direst times of need before the AFL get's its act together and actually does something!? Absolutely disgusting! The circumstances around the death of the port adeliade player in vegas last year concern me deeply and I must say, I'm quite worried that if this guy did have problems, the AFL's weak drugs policy may have kept those close teammates and club officials, those who could have helped him most from helping him...

Kennet has expressed dismay at the policy before. No surprise he wasnt happy when his suggestions werent met. Yet the AFL, AFLPA and medicos agreed to the recent changes because they all believed it was in the best interest of the players.

Kennet needs to realise the AFL and their medical professional advisors have developed a policy that looks after the players well being, NOT THE CLUBS. players are people and they have lives outside the football clubs. They are entitled to medical treatment outside their clubs, who have selfish interests.

This isnt about Kennett you silly twat Xman. It's about instituting a policy which deters players from using drugs. From Tucks and others examples we can see the current policy doesnt cut it. Yet they wish for it to remain...shame shame shame, how many more need to be found unconscious in their car, while the fatcats down at AFL HQ hide their knowledge of the players problems from those who can help them most?