More drugs in AFL

[Choccies]

What is the general opinion on the AFL's '3 strikes' policy ???

I think it is very lenient indeed and know for a fact if I tested positive here at work I'd be goneski after the first positive test... Plus I think the clubs have a right to know which players are testing positive and as Caroline Wilson said last night I'm pretty sure an AFL club wishing to draft a player would like to know if they were bidding for a player sitting on 2 strikes...

[TEX07]

What is the general opinion on the AFL's '3 strikes' policy ???

I think it is very lenient indeed and know for a fact if I tested positive here at work I'd be goneski after the first positive test... Plus I think the clubs have a right to know which players are testing positive and as Caroline Wilson said last night I'm pretty sure an AFL club wishing to draft a player would like to know if they were bidding for a player sitting on 2 strikes...

We have just rolled out a fit for work policy which is similar to the code, we have random drug and alcohol testing. If you test positive then you will not be sacked but you will need to be sent home, obviously if you continue then there will be problems. I have found this actually to be quite fair. They offer rehabilitation and now have to work with the person to ensure they arrive for work in a fully fit state.

I think that the three strikes is ok, except the employer (the clubs) should know when the employee (the player) has tested positive, they pay their salaries, the players sign a code of conduct contract that has this included so they should be informed.

[Voice]

What is the general opinion on the AFL's '3 strikes' policy ???

I think it is very lenient indeed and know for a fact if I tested positive here at work I'd be goneski after the first positive test... Plus I think the clubs have a right to know which players are testing positive and as Caroline Wilson said last night I'm pretty sure an AFL club wishing to draft a player would like to know if they were bidding for a player sitting on 2 strikes...

You wouldn't be tested at your home on your days off or while you're on annual leave though. The 3 strikes is for out of competition testing and there is different rules that apply if a player tests positive on game day (IIRC).
The reason people rip into this 3 strikes policy is that they don't understand that it is a secondary testing program and that we still come under International rules for 'performance enhancing' drugs.
These secondary tests are only for recreational drugs and there is only a few, if any, codes in the world that does additional testing. This may answer why whufc doesn't hear about it in international soccer because as far as I know, the additional testing is not in place anywhere else.

[Barto]

People use drugs. Sportspersons are people.

There's a connection here somewhere...

Less sports people than the general public use them, but you're right and it was only a matter of time when another was caught. Just spewing about who it was.

At least Perth get a handy player next week.

[Booney]

So is it safe to say the AFL will stay out of this one like they did with the Stokes case?

[Wedgie]

So is it safe to say the AFL will stay out of this one like they did with the Stokes case?

I'd say so (depending on being proven guilty, how well his club handles it and how much of the drug is involved) unless it can be proven the player used the substance too in which case he'd receive a "strike" as reported 14 other players were also.

The big question is will Booney treat both cases the same? Going on number of posts made on each topic and the times each player has been mentioned the answer to that one is obvious!

[Ingall]

People use drugs. Sportspersons are people.

There's a connection here somewhere...

Plus they have a larger than usual disposable income and might feel that with all the scrutiny following them that they can't go out as much as they'd like. Also, do they have much to do during the week? Some might have interests outside of footy (family, work etc) but for the others, how much time do they 'work' at their footy with training and meetings? I'd say young, single, cashed up and bored can be trouble for certain individuals.

[Booney]

I will view the cases in a similar light, yes. They appear to be very similar.

I'm not sure the amount of the drug in question has any relevance whatsoever as they should have none on them,none in them and if possible not any in their immediate vicinity.This is hardly possible or worth discussing.

My point is in the Stokes case a player was found to be in possesion of an illicit substance and the AFL felt the 8 week ban from the club was sufficient, WTF? Just goes to show how piss weak the AFL's stance on drugs is. 3 strikes before you get named? Imagine if the whole of society ran on the same program and the AFL are trying to say they have a tough stance on drugs. Pigs.

They stand blokes down and suspend them for having a $5 bet on a game they have no connection too yet you plead guilty to drug possesion and they let the club handle it. My issue isn't with Geelong here, it's with the AFL and the spineless blokes running it.

[Wedgie]

I would think the amount would be extremely relevent just as it us with our law.
Be treated a bit different if you got caught with 1 gram as opposed to 119 kilograms.
The main discrepency seems to be between the players that get discussed in the media and those that don't.
There's talk that Johnson will get a strike and look at all he has to put up with compared to those other 13 that get strikes. Some may have walked away with premierships and individual awards in the pas and not got their photos in the paper for the wrong reason.

[Booney]

I would think the amount would be extremely relevent just as it us with our law.
Be treated a bit different if you got caught with 1 gram as opposed to 119 kilograms.
The main discrepency seems to be between the players that get discussed in the media and those that don't.
There's talk that Johnson will get a strike and look at all he has to put up with compared to those other 13 that get strikes. Some may have walked away with premierships and individual awards in the pas and not got their photos in the paper for the wrong reason.

Sure, just like in the real world massive amounts would be of greater concern.

Its the AFL's lack of comment on the Stokes case that confuses me.I dont recall Cousins ever being caught in possesion or being charged by police, yet the AFL gave him a year off. Consistent?

The strangest part of this whole "3 strikes" policy is this. If you record a positive result the record of this is only kept for four years, after that time you start on a clean slate. So for all intents and purposes a player could play for 12 years, amass over 200 games, (perhaps premierships and Brownlows ) test positive 3 times ( 4 years apart ) and no-one will ever know.

[Bum Crack]

I would think the amount would be extremely relevent just as it us with our law.
Be treated a bit different if you got caught with 1 gram as opposed to 119 kilograms.
The main discrepency seems to be between the players that get discussed in the media and those that don't.
There's talk that Johnson will get a strike and look at all he has to put up with compared to those other 13 that get strikes. Some may have walked away with premierships and individual awards in the pas and not got their photos in the paper for the wrong reason.

Sure, just like in the real world massive amounts would be of greater concern.

Its the AFL's lack of comment on the Stokes case that confuses me.I dont recall Cousins ever being caught in possesion or being charged by police, yet the AFL gave him a year off. Consistent?

The strangest part of this whole "3 strikes" policy is this. If you record a positive result the record of this is only kept for four years, after that time you start on a clean slate. So for all intents and purposes a player could play for 12 years, amass over 200 games, (perhaps premierships and Brownlows ) test positive 3 times ( 4 years apart ) and no-one will ever know.

Stokesy did well for his first game back last week. He's going to be very handy for us for the rest of the year.

[Wedgie]

I can understand your thoughts on the three strikes policy but not of Cousins.
Cousins was a self confessed drug addict who brought the game into disrepute with his off field antics.
One would think being an addict would be admitting you've taken the drug more than 3 times.
How you're caught be it through self confessing, police reports or in house tests should be irrelevent but it isn't.

[Wedgie]

Stokesy did well for his first game back last week. He's going to be very handy for us for the rest of the year.

Agreed, could be a blessing in disguise like the Johnno incident a few years back. The club is a bloody genius at turning negatives into positives!
If we hit another form slump we'll have to get another player on the turps or similar!

[Booney]

Stokesy did well for his first game back last week. He's going to be very handy for us for the rest of the year.

Agreed, could be a blessing in disguise like the Johnno incident a few years back. The club is a bloody genius at turning negatives into positives!
If we hit another form slump we'll have to get another player on the turps or similar!

Just dont let him gamble on another game, then he'll be deep in the.....

[Pottsy]

People use drugs. Sportspersons are people.

There's a connection here somewhere...

Plus they have a larger than usual disposable income and might feel that with all the scrutiny following them that they can't go out as much as they'd like. Also, do they have much to do during the week? Some might have interests outside of footy (family, work etc) but for the others, how much time do they 'work' at their footy with training and meetings? I'd say young, single, cashed up and bored can be trouble for certain individuals.

If I'd had that sort of disposable income at that age, I would have been completely stuffed. Make Amy Winehouse look like a teatotaller.

In general terms, I reckon the sport is actually quite clean. Considering the amount of players, their average age, and their average income, surprisingly few of them get done.

[Wedgie]

Stokesy did well for his first game back last week. He's going to be very handy for us for the rest of the year.

Agreed, could be a blessing in disguise like the Johnno incident a few years back. The club is a bloody genius at turning negatives into positives!
If we hit another form slump we'll have to get another player on the turps or similar!

Just dont let him gamble on another game, then he'll be deep in the.....

lol, agreed!

[JK]

People use drugs. Sportspersons are people.

There's a connection here somewhere...

Spot on mate

[Voice]

List of sanctions for Michael Johnson click here

[am Bays]

The AFl has announced the sanctions it will apply to the Fremantle Footy Club in the wake of teh latest drug scandal....

NEWS FLASH NEWS FLASH

Fremantle Football Club has been rocked by a drug scandal.

After investigations by the AFL Commission suggested that a Fremantle player was involved in the use of illegal drugs, the AFL have taken a hardnosed approach to the problem and stripped the Fremantle Football Club of ALL awards won over the past 15 years.

An AFL Commissioner was seen leaving Fremantle Oval this morning with

· 15 participation certificates.
· 3 junior whopper with cheese value meals.
· 7 chocolate frogs.

Insiders close to the club, state that the club is devastated.

[Zelezny Chucks]

Can someone explain to me why the AFL is testing for illicit drugs anyway?

Shouldn't it be upto the employer (the clubs) to punish their employees for these indiscretions?

If Johnson is found not guilty of possession he has been punished for no reason by the AFL, what happened to innocent till proven guilty?