Talking Footy

And Druggo

Ben Cousins in rehab .......... again

a fine example of the effectiveness of the AFL's ... soft on Drugs policy
as Jeff Kennett rightly said
someone is going to die before the AFL reveiw this pathetic ... pointless policy of theirs

for shame
for shame



http://www.heraldsun.com.au/news/mor...-1226241193764

FALLEN football star Ben Cousins was last night recovering in hospital after a reported fall in rehabilitation.
A Perth hospital confirmed the former Richmond and West Coast player was admitted on Monday night.

The news came amid unconfirmed reports the confessed drug addict had again sought help at a specialist Perth clinic that treats drug addiction and psychological problems.

It was reported the 33-year-old hit his head and possibly the floor during a fall at the centre.
__________________
Why 9 are crushed at missing out on the AFL..

Ah what a shame indeed. I mean what does the AFL expect by basically providing free license for a young bloke to go out, get drugged up and get away with it? There must be many others just like him and I wouldnt be surprised if the boozehound fevola has been dipping his mits into illicit drugs for some time too...

I, like Kennet, just hope to god they stiffen up their policy before one of the players ends up in a coffin.

Raiderdave wrote:

And Druggo

Ben Cousins in rehab .......... again

a fine example of the effectiveness of the AFL's ... soft on Drugs policy
as Jeff Kennett rightly said
someone is going to die before the AFL reveiw this pathetic ... pointless policy of theirs

for shame
for shame



http://www.heraldsun.com.au/news/mor...-1226241193764

FALLEN football star Ben Cousins was last night recovering in hospital after a reported fall in rehabilitation.
A Perth hospital confirmed the former Richmond and West Coast player was admitted on Monday night.

The news came amid unconfirmed reports the confessed drug addict had again sought help at a specialist Perth clinic that treats drug addiction and psychological problems.

It was reported the 33-year-old hit his head and possibly the floor during a fall at the centre.
__________________
Why 9 are crushed at missing out on the AFL..

Ben cousins began using ilicit drugs before the AFL's current ilicit drugs policy was created and enforced, which is a real shame because it may have resulted in him addressing his issue before his habit became so entrenched.

I will make a couple of comments:

1. the AFL's drug policy is one of the harshest and most comprehensive in world sport. Unlike almost every other sport it does not simply rely on WADA, who effectively ignore out of game time ilicit drug use.

2. Jeff Kennet is a politician, not an expert on drug policies. The AFLs ilicit drugs policy was established by a panel of Australia's leading drug use and rehabilitation experts. I'd take their word over Mr Kennet's any day.

3. Andrew Johns used ilicit drugs most of his career in the NRL. This was either without detection, indicating poor policy, or it was known and covered up, which indicates corruption. Take your pick.

Xman wrote:

Raiderdave wrote:

Ben cousins began using ilicit drugs before the AFL's current ilicit drugs policy was created and enforced, which is a real shame because it may have resulted in him addressing his issue before his habit became so entrenched.

who'd know if he'd of got caught anyway ... no one is told .. not even the club the player plays for
if he'd started after this limp wristed policy came in .. he'd probably be dead by now.

1. the AFL's drug policy is one of the harshest and most comprehensive in world sport. Unlike almost every other sport it does not simply rely on WADA, who effectively ignore out of game time ilicit drug use.

its universally considered the sofest most ineffective on the face of the planet
the ASDA & the IOC have condemed it as not being up to scratch.

2. Jeff Kennet is a politician, not an expert on drug policies. The AFLs ilicit drugs policy was established by a panel of Australia's leading drug use and rehabilitation experts. I'd take their word over Mr Kennet's any day

.
Jeff is on the inside .. its typical for the AFL to shoot the messenger when he is delivering criticism of the AFL .. he is 101% correct on this
the AFL is seriously kidding with this joke of a policy.

3. Andrew Johns used ilicit drugs most of his career in the NRL. This was either without detection, indicating poor policy, or it was known and covered up, which indicates corruption. Take your pick

Andrew Johns was smart enough to avoid detection ... nothing to do with the policy .. if he'd of been caught he would have faced a ban in this first instance .. however it would have taken 3 detections for the same result if he'd played in the AFL


AFL.... soft on drugs

Waste of a thread.

Topper wrote:

Waste of a thread.

& you were a waste of an ejeculation

Ge well Benny....just remember "Tubbs you fools Tubbs"!

Raiderdave wrote:

Xman wrote:

Raiderdave wrote:

who'd know if he'd of got caught anyway ... no one is told .. not even the club the player plays for
if he'd started after this limp wristed policy came in .. he'd probably be dead by now.

its universally considered the sofest most ineffective on the face of the planet
the ASDA & the IOC have condemed it as not being up to scratch.
.
Jeff is on the inside .. its typical for the AFL to shoot the messenger when he is delivering criticism of the AFL .. he is 101% correct on this
the AFL is seriously kidding with this joke of a policy.

Andrew Johns was smart enough to avoid detection ... nothing to do with the policy .. if he'd of been caught he would have faced a ban in this first instance .. however it would have taken 3 detections for the same result if he'd played in the AFL


AFL.... soft on drugs

The only people who have that view are completely naive about the policy.

What part of the policy appears soft?

Raiderdave wrote:

Xman wrote:

Raiderdave wrote:

who'd know if he'd of got caught anyway ... no one is told .. not even the club the player plays for
if he'd started after this limp wristed policy came in .. he'd probably be dead by now.

its universally considered the sofest most ineffective on the face of the planet
the ASDA & the IOC have condemed it as not being up to scratch.
.
Jeff is on the inside .. its typical for the AFL to shoot the messenger when he is delivering criticism of the AFL .. he is 101% correct on this
the AFL is seriously kidding with this joke of a policy.

Andrew Johns was smart enough to avoid detection ... nothing to do with the policy .. if he'd of been caught he would have faced a ban in this first instance .. however it would have taken 3 detections for the same result if he'd played in the AFL


AFL.... soft on drugs

Provide proof the policy is universally condemned. I'll show you plenty of proof that it is well supported by the very people who know about drug abuse.

Xman wrote:

Raiderdave wrote:

Xman wrote:

Andrew Johns was smart enough to avoid detection ... nothing to do with the policy .. if he'd of been caught he would have faced a ban in this first instance .. however it would have taken 3 detections for the same result if he'd played in the AFL


AFL.... soft on drugs

Provide proof the policy is universally condemned. I'll show you plenty of proof that it is well supported by the very people who know about drug abuse.

I did last time a **** flogball merkin asked me too in here
proved it up all ova da house

couldn't be stuffed doing it again
its here amongst the pages ... a thread about the AFL's wimpy policy
find it yourself

Xman you won't get a cogent reply.

Raiderdave wrote:

Xman wrote:

Raiderdave wrote:

Andrew Johns was smart enough to avoid detection ... nothing to do with the policy .. if he'd of been caught he would have faced a ban in this first instance .. however it would have taken 3 detections for the same result if he'd played in the AFL


AFL.... soft on drugs

Provide proof the policy is universally condemned. I'll show you plenty of proof that it is well supported by the very people who know about drug abuse.

I did last time a **** flogball merkin asked me too in here
proved it up all ova da house

couldn't be stuffed doing it again
its here amongst the pages ... a thread about the AFL's wimpy policy
find it yourself

It has had criticism, mainly from people who are not professionals in the field of drug abuse. They are welcome to their opinion but I prefer to listen to people who know the topic inside out, like the professionals who developed the policy.

There have also been plenty who have supported it too.

Tell me, if you know the AFLs ilicit drugs policy so well answer this: what happens if an AFL player is found with ilicit drugs in his system?

Xman wrote:

Raiderdave wrote:

Xman wrote:

Provide proof the policy is universally condemned. I'll show you plenty of proof that it is well supported by the very people who know about drug abuse.

I did last time a **** flogball merkin asked me too in here
proved it up all ova da house

couldn't be stuffed doing it again
its here amongst the pages ... a thread about the AFL's wimpy policy
find it yourself

It has had criticism, mainly from people who are not professionals in the field of drug abuse. They are welcome to their opinion but I prefer to listen to people who know the topic inside out, like the professionals who developed the policy.

There have also been plenty who have supported it too.

Tell me, if you know the AFLs ilicit drugs policy so well answer this: what happens if an AFL player is found with ilicit drugs in his system?

Not much they still have two more chances under your three strike policy.

cooee wrote:

Xman wrote:

Raiderdave wrote:

I did last time a **** flogball merkin asked me too in here
proved it up all ova da house

couldn't be stuffed doing it again
its here amongst the pages ... a thread about the AFL's wimpy policy
find it yourself

It has had criticism, mainly from people who are not professionals in the field of drug abuse. They are welcome to their opinion but I prefer to listen to people who know the topic inside out, like the professionals who developed the policy.

There have also been plenty who have supported it too.

Tell me, if you know the AFLs ilicit drugs policy so well answer this: what happens if an AFL player is found with ilicit drugs in his system?

Not much they still have two more chances under your three strike policy.

Wrong. Very wrong.

Why criticise it if you dont know the policy?

So its not a three strike policy?