AFL"s Illicit Drug Policy | PUNT ROAD END | Richmond Tigers Forum
  • IMPORTANT // Please look after your loved ones, yourself and be kind to others. If you are feeling that the world is too hard to handle there is always help - I implore you not to hesitate in contacting one of these wonderful organisations Lifeline and Beyond Blue ... and I'm sure reaching out to our PRE community we will find a way to help. T.

AFL"s Illicit Drug Policy

Do you agree with the 3 strike policy currently in place?

  • 1 strike you are out.

    Votes: 18 24.3%
  • Leave it as it is.

    Votes: 5 6.8%
  • 2 is better

    Votes: 25 33.8%
  • All codes should have a uniform drug policy

    Votes: 6 8.1%
  • Confidentiality should be in place to protect players

    Votes: 2 2.7%
  • Name and shame

    Votes: 9 12.2%
  • Education is more important then all out punishment

    Votes: 9 12.2%

  • Total voters
    74
lamb22 said:
The players should say that they agree to in season testing for performancing enhancing drugs and tell the AFL they should screw themselves in relation to testing for recreational drugs.

If the AFL don't agree the players should go on strike.

The present scenario was a good attempt at harm minimisation where players VOLUNTARILY accepted more restrictions on their lives in return for a welfare based approach.

However due to the nongs in the press and the general public sensationalising what appears to be drug use well below the norm in society we have come to this witchhunt and bull$hit bastardry masquerading as brainless middle class morality.

lamb22 said:
If we are serious we should have every employee bow into a breathalyser each morning and anyone above 0.0 should be sacked on the spot.

They could have them at Centrelink and we can save heaps by stripping pensioners, the disabled and the unemployed of their benefits.

They could do random audits of the homeless and those without benefits could get the lash instead.

It never ceases to amaze me how the common man or woman in the street has such contempt for notions such as freedom of choice and freedom of expression.

It really doesn't take much to rouse the torpid from their slumber with the prospect of a good stoning of someone not quite like us. (or like us, but NOT actully us)
Amen, brother.
 
Obviously I am a simpleton. If someone wants to play AFL and the AFL have rules regarding drug testing and you sign on to play then you accept the rules. If you don't like it then don't sign on and play.
 
Ian4 said:
that's a comment from someone who clearly hasn't been exposed to this type of environment.

let me tell you something... we've been hearing stories about ice and weed and how illicit drugs ruin peoples lives. for every 1 person who 'ruins their life' by taking drugs, there are another 100 people (at least) who work, have families, and lead a normal life. like alcohol, moderation is the key.

As a GP who is sick of hearing patients tell me they can control their addiction, I respectfully disagree with you, but you (as I am) are entitled to your opinion. The term recreational drugs makes me sick - they are illegal mind altering substances.
 
joegarra said:
As a GP who is sick of hearing patients tell me they can control their addiction

and I concede that addiction a trait I don't have myself, so its a side of other people I don't really comprehend. i'm a casual smoker, casual drinker, casual drug taker, casual gambler, etc. the only thing I can't really go without is coffee.

but what I do see is that many of my mates are also casual drug takers and all of them work full time, and lead normal lives. if I was to choose one vice that would create issues more than anything else amongst my circle of friends, its alcohol hands down.
 
Round and round and round they go...next we'll read suggestions for Ice to be legalised and provided on the PBS. Whoops already been done. :blah
 
Ian4 said:
they are if taken on match day I believe.

Just match day you believe? That surprises me, would like that confirmed.
Guess it depends on what the definition of 'in competition' means because cocaine is definitely on the banned stimulants list.

http://list.wada-ama.org/prohibited-in-competition/prohibited-substances/
 
The AFL doesn't need a drugs policy. Who is anyone to dare accuse our young upstanding role models who play football of taking drugs? Please remember your places people. It's not yours to accuse anyone above you of anything. How dare you? You bunch of miserable weeds. It's all just 'tall poopy' syndrome. You're all just jealous.

The catholic church must be spewing they didn't think of a '3 strikes' policy.
 
Google says WADA defines "incompetition" as "the period commencing twelve hours before a Competition through to the end of such Competition and the Sample collection process related to the end of such Competition"
 
WorkSafe Victoria set to probe AFL’s ‘off the books’ drug testing regime


WorkSafe is set to probe the AFL’s ‘off the books’ drug testing after a complaint from the parent of a player who says he was disgusted by the revelations.


Mark Robinson
June 26, 2024 12:18 pm



The AFL’s illicit drugs probe has taken a twist after WorkSafe Victoria said it would investigate the league’s “off-the-books’’ drug-testing policy.


WorkSafe responded to a request from Shaun Smith, the father of Melbourne footballer Joel, who is facing at least a four-year suspension for testing positive to cocaine.


Joel Smith is also being investigated by Sport Integrity Australia for alleged drug trafficking.


Shaun Smith believes Melbourne, the AFL and the AFL Players Association are guilty of enabling an unsafe workplace and zeroed in on the“off-the-books’’ drug tests that are sanctioned by all three bodies.


SIA this week found no evidence that the off-the-books testing of players did not “constitute an ADRV (Anti-Doping Rule Violation)”, nor did it find evidence to support allegations players who tested positive to banned drugs feigned injury and missed games.


Shaun Smith said the SIA report left him no alternative than to contact WorkSafe.


“Where else can I go?” he said.


“It’s not just about Joel; it’s about every parent, every son or daughter who has had some issues.


“I think Clayton Oliver is a pretty bad victim of the system as well. There’s Harley Balic.


“We have people in jail. We have people who have committed suicide.’’


WorkSafe chief executive Joe Calafiore confirmed to Peter Jess, who lodged the complaint of an unsafe workplace on behalf of Shaun Smith, that he had referred Smith’s complaint to the investigation and safety teams.


“WorkSafe will now respond,’’ Mr Calafiore said.


It is at least the third time Jess has made such a complaint to WorkSafe, which is obliged to investigate all such claims. In previous claims, it has found no safety concerns.


The SIA report, which was released on Monday, is expected to be part of the investigation.


“I’m just a concerned parent,’’ Shaun Smith said.


“The off-the-books testing was the killer for me. They enabled young men to take drugs and get away with it. That’s disgusting. And the exact words out of (AFL chief executive) Andrew Dillon’s mouth are that they make no apologies for it and that they do not condone illicit drug use. But they have a medical model, which is exactly the opposite.


“It just seems the AFL gets away with anything at the moment.”


Shaun Smith does not defend his son’s actions, which he says has ripped the family apart.


“It’s the worst I’ve been in many years,’’ he said. “I was in hospital about five years ago and I was actually contemplating going back in not long ago. The strain (on) our relationship … it’s just unbelievable. It really has destroyed my life for the past eight months.


“I don’t condone what Joel did, and yes we are responsible for our own actions, but it’s not right that the environment enables you to do it quite easily. The clubs have to do constant testing to ensure the players are compliant and safe from drug use.


“I sent my son into an environment when he was a fine young man and he’s come back to me in the prime of his life as a drug-user and potentially a drug-trafficker. It’s horrendous.”


Jess said there were concerns about players’ testing positive to drugs in the workplace – the “off-site testing”, he called it – and then still being able to train and drive a car.


“That can’t be a safe workplace,’’ Jess said. “The AFL, Melbourne and the PA (AFL Players’ Association) all support the current practice.”


He supported Smith’s call for increased testing by clubs during the week.


“Unless the organisation is testing, which they are not because Joel got through the system, then how many other ‘Joels’ are there that we don’t know about?,” he asked.


“If they don’t test, how do they know the extent of the problem? In other workplaces, which are considered dangerous, people are tested daily before they are able to start work.’’


This masthead also reported this week that AFLW players appeared set to be tested for illicit drugs for the first time, with SIA’s recommendation to include the female cohort in the league’s revamped illicit drugs policy.


“It’s amazing the AFLW competition had not previously had an illicit drugs policy,’’ Jess said.


“We’ve had two Sydney (AFLW players) who have been publicly caught with drugs, and that raises a whole range of problems.’’