what happend to the 3rd strike rumour????

[shoe boy]

It has been alledged that a high profile player has had his 3rd strike?

Now I thought that this forum was for placing rumours?

[Dogwatcher]

You're right, it is a forum.
However, as is the rules of this site (We don't want to be sued - and neither do you) we don't publish names of people who are yet to be charged of an offence.
Naming a player who could have received this third strike could be dangerous legally.
By all means publish rumours but do so responsibly.
Please discuss the issue but any allusions to the player's name or identity will see this thread shut down too.

[Footy Smart]

If this player has infact tested positive then they are a d*ckhead.... after all that cousins have been through and the way he was treated why would anyone want to put themselves through that all for a so called "good time".

The AFL has set a stand against a guy wh never tested positive so will be interesting to see what happens if infact the rumour is true....

[MW]

3rd strike means what? lifetime ban from AFL?

[Sojourner]

AFL says six players are on third strike for illegal drugs

Jon Ralph
August 28, 2008 11:00pm

THE AFL has revealed six players have been caught twice in drugs tests and are one positive test away from being banned for 18 months.
According to figures released by the AFL, six players are on their last strike under the AFL's illicit drugs code.

In 12 months of testing up to February year 11 players tested positive to drugs out of competition. Three of those tested positive twice, which means six players across the competition are on two strikes.

The AFL has increased the penalty for a third test to a maximum of 18 matches and $5000, up from 12 matches.
Hair tests on the way
It came as the league changed the drug code, but refused to bow to demands to penalise players after two strikes.

Under the new policy tests will increase to 1500 a year and the AFL says every player will be tested each year.

In his Courier-Mail column this week, Bulldogs midfielder Jason Akermanis questioned why some players were repeatedly tested.

AFL chief executive Andrew Demetriou yesterday hailed the policy as cutting edge.

"Our policy is backed by Australia's leading drug and medical experts," Mr Demetriou said. "We refuse to have a policy that is 'name and shame', and which benefits no one.

"If you triple the sample size and the percentage (of positive drug tests) goes down then the trend (of drug use) is going down."

This year's testing showed 14 positive tests from 1152 tests, up on last year's positive tests but down in percentage terms.

Last year there were 486 tests conducted and nine positive readings, with a detection rate of 1.85 per cent, compared with this year's 1.2 per cent.

Of this year's 14 positive tests, four were for cannabis, and 10 were for stimulants, including speed and ecstasy.

Only one player, Richmond's Justin Charles, has tested positive during the competition period despite more than 6000 tests.

Other changes include increasing the penalty for a third positive test using cannabis, from six to 12 matches, with the AFL following medical advice linking marijuana to mental health.

http://www.news.com.au/couriermail/stor ... 89,00.html

[The Big Shrek]

3rd strike means what? lifetime ban from AFL?

The way Cousins was treated I doubt any team would go near a player who had been done 3 times. Especially after a couple of years out of the game. I reckon the ban would effectively be a lifetime one.

[blink]

I'd still be extremely happy for Port Adelaide to still pick up "the player in question", regardless of his reported drug use!

[Footy Smart]

They picked up J Carr instead of Cousins great decision

[blink]

Cousins isn't the player I am talking about. Can't name him for obvious reasons, but the rumour has been circulating for a little while now...

[Footy Smart]

Cousins isn't the player I am talking about. Can't name him for obvious reasons, but the rumour has been circulating for a little while now...

I know who your talking about Blink... my comment was in jest of the power taking a washed up tagger over a "drug addict" and the suggestion they would take the next one that came along

The rumour is rife a while back and was a possible reason why he was taken later in the draft

[Adelaide Hawk]

The question is ... "what happened to the 3rd strike rumour?".

It has done its 6 monthly cycle and has taken a short break. Don't worry, it will be back later because, quite simply, there are people who want to believe it is true.

If it WERE true, it would no longer be a "rumour", it would be a fact, because the AFL would have no option but to release the player's identity. It is in the standard player agreement to be drug tested.

I find it all very amusing that people are prepared to believe rumours, even though there is no evidence to support them. I have been been approached many times over the past couple of years by people asking if I heard about "......". There rumour's been around for ages, it will be around for some time to come .. and yet the player in question still plays. Go figure

[brod]

All the innuendo...just keeping the interest in the "rumour" going

[Dogwatcher]

The question is ... "what happened to the 3rd strike rumour?".

It has done its 6 monthly cycle and has taken a short break. Don't worry, it will be back later because, quite simply, there are people who want to believe it is true.

If it WERE true, it would no longer be a "rumour", it would be a fact, because the AFL would have no option but to release the player's identity. It is in the standard player agreement to be drug tested.

I find it all very amusing that people are prepared to believe rumours, even though there is no evidence to support them. I have been been approached many times over the past couple of years by people asking if I heard about "......". There rumour's been around for ages, it will be around for some time to come .. and yet the player in question still plays. Go figure

You make a good point. I'd think if there was something substantial to this, even a hint of truth, it would have been in the media by now.

[Hondo]

You make a good point. I'd think if there was something substantial to this, even a hint of truth, it would have been in the media by now.

I agree. This particular rumour has come up regularly since Xmas yet nothing has come of it still. Not even on BigFooty and that's saying something!

The same club was the subject of Today Tonight story about the leaked rehab centre documents (the one the AFL got the court order for). Plus the player in question won't be available until Rnd 1 because of injury. so I reckon it's just lazy connect-the-dots conjecture leading to rumour mongering.

It's the not the first time this has happened, a few years back a high profile Adelaide-based player had apparently done 3 strikes and was faking an injury to serve his suspension ( ). Of course he returned from injury earlier than the then 12-week suspension for 3 strikes ( again).

Unfortunately mud sticks no matter how untrue the rumour is.

[Dirko]

I agree. This particular rumour has come up regularly since Xmas yet nothing has come of it still. Not even on BigFooty and that's saying something!

The Big Footy mods delete any thread on the topic. There is a thread on Talking Carlton about the same thing and that's been edited a few times as to not allude to who the player is....

[hearts on fire]

Or maybe the AFL should just give up and make drugs legal.........

[Dogwatcher]

I agree. This particular rumour has come up regularly since Xmas yet nothing has come of it still. Not even on BigFooty and that's saying something!

The Big Footy mods delete any thread on the topic. There is a thread on Talking Carlton about the same thing and that's been edited a few times as to not allude to who the player is....

Maybe those who decry forums such as this as not having the same responsibilities as other media regarding slander etc should have a look at these sites then shouldn't they?
Very responsible by all forums involved by the sounds.

Interestingly, forums do it as they feel there is a responsibility to not post injudicious rumours because the legal boundaries on forums and defamation are still to be tested, whereas the regular media do it because they have to to protect themselves against legal action.

[Rik E Boy]

What happened to.....

INJUNCTION

regards,

REB

[Dogwatcher]

In regards to what REB?

[Adelaide Hawk]

I agree. This particular rumour has come up regularly since Xmas yet nothing has come of it still. Not even on BigFooty and that's saying something!

The Big Footy mods delete any thread on the topic. There is a thread on Talking Carlton about the same thing and that's been edited a few times as to not allude to who the player is....

Not necessarily, but the problem is it is a very popular forum, and there are way too many immature posters to know when they are crossing the line. Some of them just blurt out player names etc, so the mods over there are very conscious of the need to be vigilant.

The thing that amazes me is that there are still people out there who don't know who the player is, even though he has been named in the media.

I will tell people, once and for all, exactly what Andrew Demetriou stated last season ... that the rumour it totally devoid of truth and should be disregarded. The problem, is it just keeps re-surfacing (this is the problem with emails and text messages), and I just wonder how long it will be before that player says "enough" and starts taking legal action.

For those people who still believe there is some truth in the rumour, in order to get the players to support drug testing, the AFL promised the players that they were entitled to 2 strikes in which their identites were undisclosed, even to their clubs, meaning the player could seek medical assistance without anyone knowing.

However, should a player transgress for the third time, they are no longer protected, and will be named and their playing licence revoked for a period of time. In the absence of any such statement or disclosure in the media, you can safely assume the rumour is exactly what it is ... pure and utter crap.

So .. if you receive an email or text suggesting otherwise, just delete it ... don't forward it on .. this is how these rumours get out of hand in the first place.