So... Maybe Jason Akermanis was right about drugs in the AFL?

[bulldogtragic]

Aker was widely condemned many moons ago about players taking performance enhancing substances. I don't recall him having any real support from anyone in the industry over it.

34 Essendon players, Saad, Keefe, Frost and Crowley in a short period.

I can't 100% think this is a brand new phenomina. Perhaps, he was right?

[1eyedog]

Re: So... Maybe Jason Akermanis was right about drugs in the AFL?

The law of averages...olympians, cyclists, swimmers, divers, rugby players, boxers...AFL. There is a massive anabolic steroid scandal in professional tennis brewing as I write.

It would be naive to think that the AFL was immune to such uses and as another poster stated in another thread we are finally starting to see some almost adequate testing by the AFL so some careless individuals are being rooted out. Wait till we start finding out about the careful ones. I suspect we are only at the tip of the iceberg.

[The Bulldogs Bite]

Re: So... Maybe Jason Akermanis was right about drugs in the AFL?

He was always right.

It's a colossal issue, amazing it's taken this long to hit the surface so to speak, and that's without mentioning recreational drugs.

[G-Mo77]

Re: So... Maybe Jason Akermanis was right about drugs in the AFL?

Nope he wasn't. All this happened after he finished.

[jeemak]

Re: So... Maybe Jason Akermanis was right about drugs in the AFL?

Aker was widely condemned because he fingered a player that improved his fitness over a short period and ran out a game better than he did. With no evidence other than being beaten by this person he tried to stain his career.

He himself in his first book (disgusted with myself that I read it) talked about the massive improvement in fitness and overall performance - due to extra work and attention to detail - he experienced leading up to his 1999 season and first B&F (I think), but it wasn't good enough for him that another player may have been able to do the same.

Of course he was right in a general sense, I don't think anyone after Justin Charles could have suggested it wasn't a possibility.

[Twodogs]

Re: So... Maybe Jason Akermanis was right about drugs in the AFL?

Maybe he was right about Adam Cooney too.

[boydogs]

Re: So... Maybe Jason Akermanis was right about drugs in the AFL?

I'm not convinced. Essendon were obviously pushing the limits but Saad was an unlabelled ingredient, Crowley is still underway and the 2 Collingwood blokes are housemates. From 700+ players it's a bit unfair to taint the good ones with the same brush

[ratsmac]

Re: So... Maybe Jason Akermanis was right about drugs in the AFL?

Aker is probably right about a lot of things but some things you can't say. It's easy to speculate but then to speculate and add somebody's name to it becomes defamatory and slander. Hence why Aker is a dickhead.

[1eyedog]

Re: So... Maybe Jason Akermanis was right about drugs in the AFL?

I'm not convinced. Essendon were obviously pushing the limits but Saad was an unlabelled ingredient, Crowley is still underway and the 2 Collingwood blokes are housemates. From 700+ players it's a bit unfair to taint the good ones with the same brush

But who are the good ones and are they just the ones who have not tested positive yet?

[Remi Moses]

Re: So... Maybe Jason Akermanis was right about drugs in the AFL?

Look I'm no expert, but it seems signing up to WADA has fished out some players.
Wouldn't be surprised if players beforehand were pulling all sorts of stunts and getting away with it.
I think signing up to WADA is a good thing BTW.
As for Acker, well as Ian Chappell would say even a broken clock is right twice a day.

[boydogs]

Re: So... Maybe Jason Akermanis was right about drugs in the AFL?

But who are the good ones and are they just the ones who have not tested positive yet?

Call me naive but I think that's a bit conspiracy theorist

[azabob]

Re: So... Maybe Jason Akermanis was right about drugs in the AFL?

Maybe he was right about Adam Cooney too.

What did he say about Cooney?

[1eyedog]

Re: So... Maybe Jason Akermanis was right about drugs in the AFL?

Call me naive but I think that's a bit conspiracy theorist

Yeah it can be viewed like that.

I guess we'll wait and see but as you say an entire team, Saad, Crowley and now two Collingwood players in the space of two years tells me there will be more to come. It would be naive to think that we have heard the end of it. How widespread is it? It's interesting to extrapolate that of the 700 footballers 38 are currently under investigation as above which is approx. 5% of total players. If you accept the percentages in the article below as a base point for discussions then we could have up to 175 players in the AFL who are doping. There are so many variables to these data obviously because doping percentages vary across different sports but these are the conservative figures from track and field, which was the subject sport of the study and these are only the athletes that actually fessed up.

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/08/23/sports/research-finds-wide-doping-study-withheld.html?_r=1

[wimberga]

Re: So... Maybe Jason Akermanis was right about drugs in the AFL?

I work with a couple of ex-footballers (players in late 90's and early 2000's) and they each have some interesting stories about other players.

Nothing on the systematic scale we have seen with Essendon or overly widespread amongst a playing group, but these guys remain covinced a number of players were enhancing their performance with illicit materials

[Maddog37]

Re: So... Maybe Jason Akermanis was right about drugs in the AFL?

I have grave doubts about the Eagles and their ability to bulk up to an extraordinary level in a short period of time and yet still be able to maintain high anaerobic fitness levels. Blokes like Braun and Lamb etc. seemed very dodgy to me.