Drugs stay in your system a little longer than the puff or snort the night before you resume duty. They will be in their system but may not have an overtly immediate adverse effect whilst on duty.

The entire point is drug taking is a slippery slope to traverse, leaving aside the legal issues the health issues can and do have adverse effects sometimes fatal. Addiction comes from a cumulative effect and leads to lesser performance in the long run, no matter your job.

I speak from 1st hand experience dealing with many people that have ruined their lives and wasted the considerable potential they had and unfortunately most can not turn it around and ever fully realize that potential.

Care to comment on Exhibit A – WCE and the condoning of illicit drug taking

I find it incredulous that you stand by that OP, if not protecting their teammates at least it may protect themselves from sometimes fatal outcomes.

Further you work in a forensic psychiatric facility, you would see the adverse effects of addiction frequently I would guess?

hey oz, I understand your concern, but as I will continue to say, they should be treated like every other citizen. If they get pulled up by the cops and breath tested or drug tested- fair game. What are you suggesting, because they are an AFL player, they should be tested everytime they get in a car?

Pass me the popcorn.

i am not saying that at all… they should be subject to the same law as everybody else is i agree there…infact i doesnt matter what profession or sport you you are in and how good you really are and what ya public status is everyone should be treated with the same law..

however i do not agree with your sendiments that they are not effecting anyone else becuase they are on a football field..

Lance Armstrong could argue there he was effecting anyone else in the drugs he was taking to perform better

Alright Oz and Shanks, I get that drugs are a blight on society and are the devils work- however, it seems that the only reason you can give as to why they are tested above and beyond the normal citizen who has a comparable low risk job is that they are role models to the kiddies. Weak arguments.

So, are you both saying that anyone who has a job should be able to be tested for drugs at anytime-even their own time? I know OZ believes every single person in the world should be just incase they hurt someone.

Jaffle role model is one very small issue.

Footballers are young naive vulnerable boys with to much money and time on their hands. They are prime targets to head toward a future ruined by drugs.

Forget the image of the game, their and the teams performance, they are side issues.

The laws of the land and drug testing might just protect footballers from themselves.

As I said, care to comment on the toxic environment the WCE allowed and the tragic outcomes that came from that.

Sadly, some of the pies are heading the same way at the moment, that is why Pert has raised the issue in the hope it will discourage his players.

People that take drugs sadly are living a life full of lies because of the need to make it covert, not a great teammate or work colleague really!

Each of these players sign a contract of employment. In that contract there is a whole list of obligations that the person must abide by. If players don’t like it, don’t sign the contract. No one is holding a gun to their head.

If someone wants to play footy and also smoke/snort/inject/ingest or stick some illicit drug where the sun don’t shine, then they can still do that. The footy will just have to be down the park with their mates, not at the elite level.

The AFL and (by extension) the individual clubs are trying to protect their reputation in a market where perception is everything. They don’t want to lose “customers” because their employees are continually bringing their brand into disrepute.

So, are you both saying that anyone who has a job should be able to be tested for drugs at anytime-even their own time?

I reckon – Yes. If an employer wants to put this type of condition into a contract, they should be allowed to. As I said above, if you don’t want to sign the contract, then don’t sign it.

Extra butter for me please.

Where are all the civil libertarians when you need them?

Testing of employees when they are not actually at work performing their duties…... or worse, when they’re actually on their holidays? ......... What sort of effin police state do we live in.

If my boss sent some drug tester around to my place at 6 am when I was on holidays …. he’d leave with only a 5 iron wrapped around his head.

The idea of employers being able to put whatever conditions they like on workplace contracts is ludicrous and flies in the face of several pieces of legislation. (Eg ….. for my business, I require my employees to be young, female, long legged, and perky of breast, or don’t bother applying as you won’t fit the terms of the contract)

As it stands I reckon the AFL are extremely lucky that no-one (since Silvio Foschini) has challenged their rtidiiculous rules or contracts to date, as clearly they are a “restraint of trade” example if ever there was one.

As for being role models, I don’t think that is part of the job description for footballers despite the AFL and club bosses trotting that well worn phrase out whenever anyone does anything that may be considered in bad taste.

If “role model” is in their contracts, then I hope they are paid 24 hours a day, as that what it amounts to them being employed for …........ and that the requirements that go into being a role model are well defined and without exception.

Eg, you can’t take drugs, you can’t pee on walls in a public area, you can drink but not over 0.5, you can’t shag you’re best mates wife while he’s in the house…. but you can if he isn’t, etc, etc.

Imagine how long the conracts would have to be to fit in every possible scenario, but that’s what I’d want defined if I was to be held accountable to it at some stage.

Of course, the AFL promoted the shite out of Ben Cousins, so their holier than thou attitude smacks of nothing but hypocrisy, as is their usual leaning.

Remember how a few years ago, the AFL promoted the violence of the sport for the end of year overeas games, then were apparently appalled by the fights that occurred during the game?

And anyway …..... who is it that exactly defines what a “role model” is, cause I’ve tried getting onto Seek. com. but have yet to see the position advertised.

Its a bit like the term “Un-Australian” that gets bandied about, and likewise …........ means S.F.A.

Just adopt the WADA rules which apply to athletes, swimmers etc. I cannot see how any footballer could raise a valid argument against it.

Under the current rules anyone other than someone as thick as Tuck never gets rubbed out. If you have 2 strikes you just self report and/or go under medical treatment and miss a couple of games until it is out of your system

I wonder why a high profile footballer without injury missed a few games at the end of last year ?

Geez, longdriver….... well spoken. You have obviously been pulling a few cones this morning.

I myself don’t take drugs at the moment, but have enjoyed the occassional recreational pursuit whilst dabbling. Being an adult, it was my decision to break the law and also my intellect that allowed me to see that if I carried on dabbling, it could lead to addiction and a life lived less than optimally.

It is funny, the media don’t know how to attack this story as they know their industry is rife with drug use.

What makes a role model? Is it just someone your child looks up to? Let them idolise Cousins. Be a fuckin parent and chat to them about his shortcomings and how it has cost him dearly. Take them to a emergency dept or a boarding house and show them the future.

As long as their are mind altering drugs on this planet, adolescence are going to experiment. Doesn’t make it a legalise everything argument- it is just that as citizens, I don’t think an employer has the right to intrude on your personal life. If you take drugs and your performance suffers, you might lose your job. If that doesn’t wake you up, then maybe you were always going to a drug addict.

I would hazard a guess that there are less drug addicts in the AFL than percentage wise for the greater population.

“role model” is a cop out from parents.

I would hazard a guess that there are less drug addicts in the AFL than percentage wise for the greater population.

Agree with that when roughly 23% of persons over 14 yrs age said they had taken drugs in the last 12 months. (taken from the ABS survey.)

The role model, image of the club, game are side issues.

The real issue is the destructive influence drugs can have on young peoples lives if it leads to addiction.

Drug users are living a lie because it is illegal and therefore the need to keep it secret. When you beginning living lies then your integrity is in question and many find it hard to tell the truth in many cirumstances.

As I said they are qualities you don’t seek in a teammate or work colleague.

AFL contracts are extremely restrictive in a whole range of areas – they get the agreement of both clubs and the players association to enter into the types of agreements that they enter into because that is the trade-off with some of their other deals, being able to claim a right to a large share of the dollars that fly around football.

It is not just on this issue – for example AFL contracts specify what clothing brands their players are permitted to use so as not to violate sponsorship contracts, what personal sponsorships they are entitled to enter into and so on.

Players in the past have been sanctioned for alcohol use and abuse, and for simply acting like a dickhead off the field – I don’t see too many people complaining about the powers that the AFL and clubs have when it is traded off against the fact that people are lining up for AFL contracts prepared to comply with the conditions.

The voluntary testing regime came in with the support of the players’ association because they perceived that it was better than allowing individual contracts requiring random drug testing, which was inevitably going to be implemented into people’s contracts.

With players having so much free time, so much money to spend, and with the ease of availability of illicit drugs – what is the culture, or the lead in to these drugs for elite sports people, given that everyone should know the danger these drugs pose?

Gary Pert is quoted as saying “We saw the presentation today that in 90 per cent of cases where players are using drugs, alcohol is the lead-in to that.”
Binge drinking, the probable lead into harder drugs… fighting the culture of binge drinking may (even greatly) lessen the incidence of illicit drug taking…. That is why clubs need to be more involved – to try and provide such a supportive atmosphere.

I doubt EPO, Testosterone, or blood transfusing will make a player stoned… but it is still considered performance enhancing drug taking… Can you imagine a stoned cyclist barrelling down the Pyrenees

I think we need to stop this BS that AFL players have so much free time. Anyone would think that they still just turn up for a 2 hours run around the paddock on Tues and Thur night, play the game Sat and then spend the free hours in the pub or gutter. They are fulltime. You will find they work 40 or more hours with weights training, skills training, meetings etc.

The first and second year recruits earn bugger all- maybe better than your standard apprentice, but hardly enough to move out of home and blow high grade coke around.

If the AFL are consistent with setting the highest standards, then Demetriou and all the staff at AFL headquarters shold be randomly tested also. Agree? Will he do that….not a chance.agine how many staff in headquaters using illicit drugs on the weekend.

Jaffle – you must know some very well paid apprentices

Should players accept the AFL offer, the league says AFL players average salaries would increase from $236,000 in 2011 to $262,000 next year and beyond $300,000 in the final year of the agreement.

The minimum rookie wage would increase from $35,000 a year to $49,000. $49,000 for a player on a rookie list that does not even play AFL games!

The players get 9 weeks leave a year, my guess is you get 4 weeks, a bit more free time than you and me.

The staff including leaders should be tested, as in “do as I say and do” just like in my workplace and many others

Jaffle my advice is to look at the real damage drugs can do to lives, it is a good agreement for all concerned but most importantly for individuals.

The minimum rookie wage would increase from $35,000 a year to $49,000. $49,000 for a player on a rookie list that does not even play AFL games!

Damn, that’s more than I make.

But I get more than 9 weeks a year off, maybe that’s why I’m such a derro?

when you give young people a bucket load of cash?

but then you put them under extreme physical and mental stress for 46 weks of the year…they get about 5 to 6 weeks off

YOU tell me whats going to happen?

something has to give

http://m.heraldsun.com.au/a...;utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+HeraldSunAfl+%28Herald+Sun+%7C+AFL%29

I note that Mekat has raised the point in relation to the correlation between binge drinking leading on to drugs.

90% is a very big indicator in that regard, and highlights the fact that while the AFL are harsh on illicit drugs …..... they are to coin a phrase …........ “weak as piss” ......... when it comes to alcohol.

I guess though that is to be expected from them when their major sponsor is a brewery.

I hear Demetriou and co are now talking about working closer with their major sponsor, in order to provide even more education for the players on “responsible drinking”.

Another case of the hypocritical AFL trying to be seen to be doing the right thing, yet at the same time …..... not wishing to bite the hand that feeds it.

If they had any balls, and were in fact serious about it, then they’d just drop CUB as their sponsor completely .. and impose compulsory breathalyser testing of players.

Too right GPJ about the hypocrisy and lip service the AFL pay this issue.

There were only 1400 tests in the whole of 2011. There are roughly 800 players- so on average they aren’t even getting tested twice in the year. Probably explains why the players seem to treat this system with contempt.

The majority of players would only be recreational user- not addicts. They probably like their chances of not being ‘dirty on the one occasion they get called in for the ‘piss in the bottle’. I seem to think the AFL are doing such little testing so the number of positives stay low.

Does anyone have the breakdown of when these tests were carried out? ie: Monday mornings, match day, out of season etc.

I think the problem is this

an Olympian isa truly proffessional athlete – yet many of them are paid chicken feed. They devote their whol life to train and many of them wouldnt even drink

you wouldnt see a swimmer pissed at 3 am – they are in the pool at 5am!!

AFL has a culture of drinking.

That said if you look at the % of players who land in trouble on a friday night as opposed to the general public then you would find the general population has a far bigger issue with alcohol than AFL footbal players do – if youre comparing

Its just that the afl player makes the papers when he gets in a spot of bother

I would like to see the AFL have a round during the footy season where NO ALCOHOL is served

kids get in free! and get a free hotdog or pie

encourage people that they can go to the footy without drinking….and have a good time without drinking

I think the other issue is night games – it would be really hard to “come down” after playing in front of 75,000 people – This is someething Wayne Carey said he binge drinked during his career and then used cocaine later..The Kangaroos were the first team to play night games on regular basis – they played many friday night games when Carey was in his glory days

meekat isnt right on that stat – Most people binge drink but most people dont go and do harder drugs after

2 beers is considered safe if you like – oddly 3 beers is considered a BINGE…

gary pert said alcohol was the lead into other substances well thats true but players need to unwind so you can’t have them operating like robots

I have also suggested the pressure players are under leads them to let their hair down a smidgen too

These are young men, a bukcet load of cash in thier pockets and ready to party – zero tollerance dosnt work

if you say that to them they will then gamble or do something else that gives them a buzz

But interesting Craig Bradley wasnt a drinker and he played almost 400 games when you add his games from the SA league

Also Robert harvey rarely touched alcohol either – he played what 350 games!!

Its interesting drugs – it doesnt have any barries in terms of who uses

Lawyers use, doctors use, house wives use – police officers would use..AFL players will use

Alcohol is rreally toxic substance that doesnt allow muscles to recover that well when youre tired

I personally couldnt give a stuff if an afl footballer or any other person is on recreational drugs.

If they dont perform due to said drugs, then they get sacked i.e delisted, just like everyone else in the world.

I have given up trying to have a reasoned conversation with Dave 1 about this. As you can see, he is now suggesting that by playing night games, this has increased the liklihood of players turning to illicit drugs…..bahahahahaha

read wayne careys book!

many players have stated they have found it very difficult to get to sleep after night games

its common knowledge FFS

read wayne careys book!

many players have stated they have found it very difficult to get to sleep after night games

its common knowledge FFS

We make a living by what we get, we make a life by what we give. Winston Churchill

so they took coke and eccies- ie: stimulants. I know they are dumb but this is great. Why didn’t they take sleeping pills that the club doctor could prescribe them. You would fall for any excuse. Love ya for it though Dave.

Players use caffeine too and this makes it harder to sleep

http://m.smh.com.au/afl/afl...