Melbourne Watch 2023/24

[JanLorMill]

What the AFL could do is anonymously outline some circumstances where this "loophole" (that isn't a loophole) has actually been exploited. I'd be surprised if it was a long list of examples.

Casual usage earlier in the week after the in game period probably happens a lot, but I'd guess the usage would then drop back sharply with only a handful of players still tucking into it once the week's started.

The amount of players dealing with a genuine dependency or addiction would be very small (again, at a guess).

Where would cocaine really impact a player? Think things like attention to detail around diet and hydration, recovery and getting enough sleep. Players are probably still getting to all the sessions and doing the minimum requirements, and mostly wouldn't notice a huge difference if usage was sporadic.

Well many players in the past would have binged on alcohol or even food. That is definitely isn’t performance enhancing and not illegal.

[jeemak]

Well many players in the past would have binged on alcohol or even food. That is definitely isn’t performance enhancing and not illegal.

The bit around alcohol is interesting. Most people would have illegally consumed it underage, in many instances sanctioned or encouraged by their parents/ family members.

We know the harms to society of alcohol far outweigh those of illicit drugs, but for some reason we don't moralise the indoctrination of its consumption into underage people.

Let's not get started on sugar and processed foods and the harms these things combined cause society. That'll take the thread right off track.

[GVGjr]

I understand the hard line but I don't think it helps if players genuinely have a medically diagnosed dependency or addiction. Getting high after a game on a Saturday night and having something in your system a few days later isn't going to do a lot for your performance most likely, and by the time you're testing at the end of the week or on the following game day you're unlikely to be drug affected. Having a dependency or addiction to worry about week to week, having your employment taken from you (one of the things that keeps you on the straight and narrow to an extent) because of those things doesn't sound helpful to me.

The AFL and the players are already going over and above what is required of them by WADA/ legislatively, I don't see how you can put a more punitive program in place without offering up the players more beneficial conditions. The AFL, clubs and the public aren't the police, they can try to be and that's fine but if that doesn't align with the best advice from actual professionals rather than ex-footballers or club administrators then it's a bit silly.

No offence G, but your opinion or mine for that matter doesn't and shouldn't have the same gravitas as an expert in drug dependence or addiction management. We can flap our arms or otherwise as much as we like, but I'd hate to see the health of players compromised in order to satisfy a hard line ideology or for the transparency (read potential for titillating content) sought by the public or league/ club staff or media with clearly vested interests outside of player wellbeing.

And I get the moral side of it that creates and issue for people, but what's moral changes over time as society evolves. The laws probably should as well.

I don't think what I've proposed is a hard line because it gives players a couple of chances and it's focused on the in season component. There are consequences but I wouldn't think it's a hard line.
We suspect that even extensive education that the AFL has on the pathway and the clubs have in place isn't working and that the players are working around it when they can.
The more flexibility we have within the allowances that are made then the more it will encourage not discourage use within the season. That's a poor net result for the competition and the welfare of the players if that is what is being suggested.

It's a complex issue no doubt and there will be variety of views but I'd hate to think that the challenge AFL faced with is about accepting that it's a somewhat 'healthy' solution to turn a blind eye to it.

[jeemak]

I don't think what I've proposed is a hard line because it gives players a couple of chances and it's focused on the in season component. There are consequences but I wouldn't think it's a hard line.
We suspect that even extensive education that the AFL has on the pathway and the clubs have in place isn't working and that the players are working around it when they can.
The more flexibility we have within the allowances that are made then the more it will encourage not discourage use within the season. That's a poor net result for the competition and the welfare of the players if that is what is being suggested.

It's a complex issue no doubt and there will be variety of views but I'd hate to think that the challenge AFL faced with is about accepting that it's a somewhat 'healthy' solution to turn a blind eye to it.

Maybe hard line is a bit much. Though a lot of what you say is that education hasn't had a sufficient impact on behaviour, and I'd counter that with how do you think the problem might be without it?

Nobody can really tell what fame and money does to the head of an eighteen year old, twenty year old or twenty four year old. The money these guys earn (more than their parents ever did in most cases) in such a short time would be a lot to take in. I remember when I got my first big pay bump in my early thirties (relative to the numbers AFL players get early in their careers it's inconsequential) after gradual progression I didn't know what to do with myself.

So I feel judging them by the standards we think as lay people believe are reasonable is limited, education or no education. To me the sooner we agree that AFL players aren't relatable to the rest of us, aren't role models or whatever, and the sooner we can start to get over feeling the need to police them or even worry about what they do in their spare time or how drugs might play a part in all that the better we'll all be.

If it was a complete shit show and players were missing games left right and centre then it'd be different. But I don't think that's the case. What really concerns me about this current situation is the complete lack of quantitative evidence that shows the extent of the issue, but everyone is carrying on as if it's the worst thing to happen to the league since the EFC drug saga. That's right, people are carrying on as if this is close to a systematic doping program. I mean, get a ****en grip.

So while I'm sensitive to how generational, moral or ethical concerns play a part, I feel everyone needs to take a breath and get some perspective. And adjust to more modern times/ norms while responding to quantitative evidence as and if it comes to hand.

It's just footy, after all.

[GVGjr]

Maybe hard line is a bit much. Though a lot of what you say is that education hasn't had a sufficient impact on behaviour, and I'd counter that with how do you think the problem might be without it?

Nobody can really tell what fame and money does to the head of an eighteen year old, twenty year old or twenty four year old. The money these guys earn (more than their parents ever did in most cases) in such a short time would be a lot to take in. I remember when I got my first big pay bump in my early thirties (relative to the numbers AFL players get early in their careers it's inconsequential) after gradual progression I didn't know what to do with myself.

So I feel judging them by the standards we think as lay people believe are reasonable is limited, education or no education. To me the sooner we agree that AFL players aren't relatable to the rest of us, aren't role models or whatever, and the sooner we can start to get over feeling the need to police them or even worry about what they do in their spare time or how drugs might play a part in all that the better we'll all be.

If it was a complete shit show and players were missing games left right and centre then it'd be different. But I don't think that's the case. What really concerns me about this current situation is the complete lack of quantitative evidence that shows the extent of the issue, but everyone is carrying on as if it's the worst thing to happen to the league since the EFC drug saga. That's right, people are carrying on as if this is close to a systematic doping program. I mean, get a ****en grip.

So while I'm sensitive to how generational, moral or ethical concerns play a part, I feel everyone needs to take a breath and get some perspective. And adjust to more modern times.

The reason why I raised the education part is that both Demetriou and Dillion have mentioned in recent days that it's the solution whenever any player gets caught. It's not.
Sure it plays a big part but if enough players aren't listening to it on the pathway then I don't see it as the sole solution once the horse has bolted. It then becomes more about counseling and support than education and it's why I'm of the strong belief that there needs to be some consequences around out the educate and support model the clubs offer players.

The irony to me is that as supporters we constantly get frustrated by players who's skill level and decision making don't improve despite all the coaching the players receive and then demand they get delisted because they're not up to it.
But when it comes to the decision making around drug taking during the season there are a large number of supporters that don't want anything like consequences applied and a vastly higher level of acceptance that it's just about an inevitable part of the journey for a player.
I'm calling bullshit on that.

[hujsh]

Haaaaa... Lock up your children

Jake?

[bornadog]

Anyone who says cocaine is performance enhancing probably hasn't had a lot of experience with it or people who use it.

I posted a link earlier from SIA that says it does enhance performance. see here Sorry I believe them not you.

[jeemak]

Jake?

GG's vision of himself on speed is someone who is a danger to children. I'm glad he didn't chase that rabbit.

[jeemak]

I posted a link earlier from SIA that says it does enhance performance. see here Sorry I believe them not you.

Of course they'd say it enhances performance, they're the ones prohibiting its use on that very basis.

I'm just telling you it's bullshit. It does all of the things they say it does, but that's in a controlled environment that wouldn't reflect an actual competition environment or actual usage of the drug itself.

Another academic study was posted in this thread contradicting the SIA's view on cocaine's impact on performance, and I'll believe that one given its objectivity, without even taking into account my personal experience with the drug.

[1eyedog]

Is taking hard drugs still a crime? Aren't the AFL covering up a known illegal activity? Also, if they are known players and repeat offenders that makes a difference in a court of law and is far more serious i.e. fines of up to 100k and up to 25 years in prison for repeated use. They are also likely repeatedly in possession of illicit hard drugs.

I know heaps of people do this however this is proof of people actually commiting a crime, and the AFL covering up the crime, repeatedly.

Times have changed that's for sure.

[jeemak]

John Ralph just called people who take drugs in the AFL ratbags and scallywags.......

Think about that. Ratbags and scallywags. Which one is which? If a player has a bit of toot is he a scallywag? If a player has an addiction are they a ratbag?

**** the media.

That's the type of throwaway commentary that is unhelpful and all too prevalent in the landscape right now. Disgraceful.

[hujsh]

I posted a link earlier from SIA that says it does enhance performance. see here Sorry I believe them not you.

Maybe it boosts your performance if you're just running or something, in a game like AFL where you have to make decisions it's not so clear cut. There are conflicting studies as to how much performance is enhanced on gameday (as Jeemak has mentioned) so I'm not surprised a governing body would just say 'yep it enhances performance' for the sake of simplicity.

[hujsh]

John Ralph just called people who take drugs in the AFL ratbags and scallywags.......

Think about that. Ratbags and scallywags. Which one is which? If a player has a bit of toot is he a scallywag? If a player has an addiction are they a ratbag?

**** the media.

That's the type of throwaway commentary that is unhelpful and all too prevalent in the landscape right now. Disgraceful.

Dastardly fellows they are

[jeemak]

Dastardly fellows they are

At least they're clean skins though. No drugs in the AFEL media.

[hujsh]

At least they're clean skins though. No drugs in the AFEL media.

Perish the thought!