Ben Cousins

[Dutchy]

no mention from anyone regarding the positive influence he might have around a young club, if he is clean and stays that way he would certainly be able to guide the youngsters the right way and learn from his experiences

[Adelaide Hawk]

no mention from anyone regarding the positive influence he might have around a young club, if he is clean and stays that way he would certainly be able to guide the youngsters the right way and learn from his experiences

Yeah, because he's been so good at at it so far.

[Psyber]

no mention from anyone regarding the positive influence he might have around a young club, if he is clean and stays that way he would certainly be able to guide the youngsters the right way and learn from his experiences

The fact that he has never publicly stated he regrets having ever used drugs, and that others shouldn't, and his playing games about the testing recently makes him look dubious in that role...
I'd be worried about which way he'd lead.

[Dutchy]

no mention from anyone regarding the positive influence he might have around a young club, if he is clean and stays that way he would certainly be able to guide the youngsters the right way and learn from his experiences

Yeah, because he's been so good at at it so far.

Yeah agree he has been good this year, his rehabilitation from this to date has been great and could be used actively as a role model in the right environment

[Dutchy]

no mention from anyone regarding the positive influence he might have around a young club, if he is clean and stays that way he would certainly be able to guide the youngsters the right way and learn from his experiences

The fact that he has never publicly stated he regrets having ever used drugs, and that others shouldn't, and his playing games about the testing recently makes him look dubious in that role...
I'd be worried about which way he'd lead.

What games did he play?

[Drop Bear]

no mention from anyone regarding the positive influence he might have around a young club, if he is clean and stays that way he would certainly be able to guide the youngsters the right way and learn from his experiences

Yeah, because he's been so good at at it so far.

Yeah agree he has been good this year, his rehabilitation from this to date has been great and could be used actively as a role model in the right environment

Well played there Dutchy.

[Psyber]

no mention from anyone regarding the positive influence he might have around a young club, if he is clean and stays that way he would certainly be able to guide the youngsters the right way and learn from his experiences

The fact that he has never publicly stated he regrets having ever used drugs, and that others shouldn't, and his playing games about the testing recently makes him look dubious in that role...
I'd be worried about which way he'd lead.

What games did he play?

He knew a hair sample was required and fronted up freshly "groomed" so that it was impossible to obtain a suitable one recently...
He must have already been told what the sampling required - the testing labs usually give out pamphlets in advance.

[rod_rooster]

no mention from anyone regarding the positive influence he might have around a young club, if he is clean and stays that way he would certainly be able to guide the youngsters the right way and learn from his experiences

The fact that he has never publicly stated he regrets having ever used drugs, and that others shouldn't, and his playing games about the testing recently makes him look dubious in that role...
I'd be worried about which way he'd lead.

What games did he play?

He knew a hair sample was required and fronted up freshly "groomed" so that it was impossible to obtain a suitable one recently...
He must have already been told what the sampling required - the testing labs usually give out pamphlets in advance.

You're making assumptions there Pysber. It has been stated by Cousins' management that he did not know of the requirements for hair to be 3cm in length. That may be untrue but regardless you are still just speculating.

Those less cynical people would suggest Cousins has always appeared to keep himself well "groomed" and has rarely had hair that is very long.

I myself am unsure which way to lean on this. It does appear suss but on the other hand if the requirements were made explicit to Cousins then surely more would have been made of it by the AFL and the drug testers.

[Psyber]

...You're making assumptions there Pysber. It has been stated by Cousins' management that he did not know of the requirements for hair to be 3cm in length. That may be untrue but regardless you are still just speculating.

Those less cynical people would suggest Cousins has always appeared to keep himself well "groomed" and has rarely had hair that is very long.

I myself am unsure which way to lean on this. It does appear suss but on the other hand if the requirements were made explicit to Cousins then surely more would have been made of it by the AFL and the drug testers.

As I said, the testing labs usually send out pamphlets about the requirements in advance, but I can't disprove any speculation by others that they forgot to do what is usual in his case.
The AFL are soft on drugs because they don't want a big row with the AFLPA and adverse publicity that will scare the sponsors and force a clean up.

My speculation is that the AFLPA know there are a lot more users in their membership and are trying to contain the exposure of that information as discretely as possible too, so the AFL go soft and the AFLPA puts up soft resistance, both acting to not harm the marketability of the brand, and impair the flow of cash...

[Adelaide Hawk]

My speculation is that the AFLPA know there are a lot more users in their membership and are trying to contain the exposure of that information as discretely as possible too, so the AFL go soft and the AFLPA puts up soft resistance, both acting to not harm the marketability of the brand, and impair the flow of cash...

That's been obvious for some time. The fact that the AFL goes soft in relation to drugs is why players are still getting into trouble using them. This "3 strikes and you're out" policy is proof of a governing body pussy-footing around an issue for fear of damaging the brand.

People point the finger at cycling as a sport riddled with drug problems, but that's because they are the only sport fair dinkum about eradicating the problem. They catch more because they test more .. and when they test, they mean it.

The thing that makes my head spin is the fact Cousins has been "supposedly" tested numerous times over the years by the AFL and never tested positive. If the AFL were doing their jobs properly, how could this be possible? If they picked up on Cousins early, maybe they could have prevented Cousins' situation from getting out of control.

The other incredible part of all this is the number of players from all 16 clubs currently sitting on 1 or 2 strikes, and their clubs not aware of the players' identities. In other words, the clubs are not able to do anything to help the players. I just find it all too much to digest.

[Dutchy]

no mention from anyone regarding the positive influence he might have around a young club, if he is clean and stays that way he would certainly be able to guide the youngsters the right way and learn from his experiences

The fact that he has never publicly stated he regrets having ever used drugs, and that others shouldn't, and his playing games about the testing recently makes him look dubious in that role...
I'd be worried about which way he'd lead.

What games did he play?

He knew a hair sample was required and fronted up freshly "groomed" so that it was impossible to obtain a suitable one recently...
He must have already been told what the sampling required - the testing labs usually give out pamphlets in advance.

He didnt know the sample was required, if he wanted to avoid it why didnt he have the No. 1 cut on his head? it was a short haricut but by no means the shortest you can get

Again the media beats it up and the gullible take the hook, line and sinker

[rod_rooster]

My speculation is that the AFLPA know there are a lot more users in their membership and are trying to contain the exposure of that information as discretely as possible too, so the AFL go soft and the AFLPA puts up soft resistance, both acting to not harm the marketability of the brand, and impair the flow of cash...

That's been obvious for some time. The fact that the AFL goes soft in relation to drugs is why players are still getting into trouble using them. This "3 strikes and you're out" policy is proof of a governing body pussy-footing around an issue for fear of damaging the brand.

People point the finger at cycling as a sport riddled with drug problems, but that's because they are the only sport fair dinkum about eradicating the problem. They catch more because they test more .. and when they test, they mean it.

The thing that makes my head spin is the fact Cousins has been "supposedly" tested numerous times over the years by the AFL and never tested positive. If the AFL were doing their jobs properly, how could this be possible? If they picked up on Cousins early, maybe they could have prevented Cousins' situation from getting out of control.

The other incredible part of all this is the number of players from all 16 clubs currently sitting on 1 or 2 strikes, and their clubs not aware of the players' identities. In other words, the clubs are not able to do anything to help the players. I just find it all too much to digest.

This is a very good point. If the AFL was fair dinkum about helping the players rather than protecting the brand then they would be giving them help rather than covering up their indiscretions.

[Q.]

My speculation is that the AFLPA know there are a lot more users in their membership and are trying to contain the exposure of that information as discretely as possible too, so the AFL go soft and the AFLPA puts up soft resistance, both acting to not harm the marketability of the brand, and impair the flow of cash...

That's been obvious for some time. The fact that the AFL goes soft in relation to drugs is why players are still getting into trouble using them. This "3 strikes and you're out" policy is proof of a governing body pussy-footing around an issue for fear of damaging the brand.

People point the finger at cycling as a sport riddled with drug problems, but that's because they are the only sport fair dinkum about eradicating the problem. They catch more because they test more .. and when they test, they mean it.

The thing that makes my head spin is the fact Cousins has been "supposedly" tested numerous times over the years by the AFL and never tested positive. If the AFL were doing their jobs properly, how could this be possible? If they picked up on Cousins early, maybe they could have prevented Cousins' situation from getting out of control.

The other incredible part of all this is the number of players from all 16 clubs currently sitting on 1 or 2 strikes, and their clubs not aware of the players' identities. In other words, the clubs are not able to do anything to help the players. I just find it all too much to digest.

Hardly a comparison, cycling has issues with performance-enhancing drugs, ie. cheating. The AFL's problem is players getting off-tap occasionally in their spare time.

Which is why Cousin's probably never tested positive, it's not like he was pulling out the ice-pipe for breakfast every morning, he was just a bloke who went on a bender on the odd weekend and may have got lucky that he never had to piss in a jar on that Monday.

[Hondo]

He didnt know the sample was required, if he wanted to avoid it why didnt he have the No. 1 cut on his head? it was a short haricut but by no means the shortest you can get

Again the media beats it up and the gullible take the hook, line and sinker

Dutchy you can't be so sure on this. That's Ricky Nixon's explanation and he says they knew about the hair test, just not about the 3cm min length. Taking their word on it is as gullible as taking the media's word.

Haircut = OK, fully body wax = ?. If he always does the full body wax then maybe fair enough. But with such a critical test (the last before the AFL made a D), his actions were stupid, at best. It's his manager's job to do everything possible to get that test through and understanding exactly what was required. Now there's uncertaintly and innuendo which he could have avoided, and could be impacting on whether clubs want to draft him.

We'll probably never know the truth but you can't attack someone for believing one side "hook, line and sinker", when you are being just as gullible the other way. We should keep a healthy scepticism on both sides.

[Dutchy]

So Ricky Nixon is a liar? Sorry I tend to take people on face value until they prove otherwise...picture above show his haircut, hardly No. 1 all over

Maybe, just maybe, he cut it short just like he has most of his career

[Drop Bear]

So Ricky Nixon is a liar? Sorry I tend to take people on face value until they prove otherwise...picture above show his haircut, hardly No. 1 all over

Maybe, just maybe, he cut it short just like he has most of his career

Looks pretty close to a number 1 haircut to me Dutchy.

[JK]

So Ricky Nixon is a liar? Sorry I tend to take people on face value until they prove otherwise

There's no way I'd take that bloke on face value, wouldn't trust him as far I could spit.

(Sorry to go off track, I don't really have an opinion one way or the other on BC, would just like to see him playing footy again).

[The Wuss]

My speculation is that the AFLPA know there are a lot more users in their membership and are trying to contain the exposure of that information as discretely as possible too, so the AFL go soft and the AFLPA puts up soft resistance, both acting to not harm the marketability of the brand, and impair the flow of cash...

That's been obvious for some time. The fact that the AFL goes soft in relation to drugs is why players are still getting into trouble using them. This "3 strikes and you're out" policy is proof of a governing body pussy-footing around an issue for fear of damaging the brand.

People point the finger at cycling as a sport riddled with drug problems, but that's because they are the only sport fair dinkum about eradicating the problem. They catch more because they test more .. and when they test, they mean it.

The thing that makes my head spin is the fact Cousins has been "supposedly" tested numerous times over the years by the AFL and never tested positive. If the AFL were doing their jobs properly, how could this be possible? If they picked up on Cousins early, maybe they could have prevented Cousins' situation from getting out of control.

The other incredible part of all this is the number of players from all 16 clubs currently sitting on 1 or 2 strikes, and their clubs not aware of the players' identities. In other words, the clubs are not able to do anything to help the players. I just find it all too much to digest.

Not sure how much people know about the illict drugs policy....

A bit of light reading for you...

Illicit Drugs
http://www.afl.com.au/Portals/0/afl_docs/afl_hq/Policies/Illicit%20Drugs%20Policy%20Feb%202007.pdf

Anti Doping
http://www.afl.com.au/Portals/0/afl_docs/afl_hq/Policies/Anti-Doping%20Code%20January%202008.pdf

Here is an interesting clause from the illicit policy

3.3 All tests conducted on match days shall be referred to be dealt with under the
AFL Anti-Doping Code, to the exclusion of this Illicit Drugs Policy.

That basically means that is a player is caught with Illicit Drugs in their system on game day they are sent straight to the tribunal.

Having spent the time to read the policies I would say the AFL aren’t soft on Drugs

Just my thoughts

[Interceptor]

On 7 news up here, they just said Brisbane won't be pursuing Cousins... "end of story".

I assume that now means the Pre-season draft is no longer an option.

[Thiele]

On 7 news up here, they just said Brisbane won't be pursuing Cousins... "end of story".

I assume that now means the Pre-season draft is no longer an option.

http://www.news.com.au/adelaidenow/stor ... 01,00.html