Imagine, as a signed squad member, getting a call from an AFL medico saying you’d tested positive to an banned drug. On a personal level, that would have destroyed me as a player.
It’s one of the reasons I’ve spent the past week wondering, why would any Aussie Rules player take that risk?
The other perplexing part of that equation is, whether it’s an illegal substance or a legal supplement, how much is it going to help you play the game? Some people seem to think that the simple addition of some chemicals will turn ordinary players into superstars.
A synthetic booster doesn’t help you read the play better, doesn’t help you run to the right spots to get a kick, doesn’t help you strike the ball cleanly and hit targets.
Will human growth hormone help with the basics of the game? Does it give you clean hands under pressure? Does it help you one on one in a marking contest, when you have to pick up the flight of the ball first to put yourself in the best position?
I don’t think it does.
For these reasons, I was never too interested in legal supplements, let alone anything prohibited. These days drugs might also be linked to aiding recovery, but recovery was always manageable.
For me it was all about the ice baths, the massage, the physio, the swimming, jumping on the bike early in the week, then slowly jogging and building up so you were right for the main session on a Wednesday. A good hit-out, then taper off leading into the game on the weekend.
Nor was I going to be caught up in any problems with illicit drug testing. The loophole that is now being closed – around self-reporting – wasn’t one I ever knew existed. But it wouldn’t have been relevant: I would have been that scared to have my name associated with anything like a positive test.
Like I said, it wouldn’t just have been the professional fallout. It would have finished me personally, and could potentially have cost the club I loved millions of dollars in memberships and sponsorships that they’d worked so hard for.
On the other side of that, I am aware that the two years I’ve been out of the game may well have seen more change than the 15 years I was in it. Things like nutrition and conditioning have gone to a whole new level.
You can’t be naïve to the fact that players may be influenced to go too far, especially when young. But to my way of thinking, it still staggers me that these risks could even be considered.
Ultimately, if you work hard on your game in the right fashion, you will improve. You don’t need these other influences. Not everyone who makes it onto a list has perfect football ability, but the ones who improve survived. That improvement can only come by working at it.
The prime examples when I was at the Bulldogs were Matthew Boyd and Daniel Cross. Both always had a great running ability and a good aerobic base, but they worked extremely hard on all aspects of their games. They’d be first on the track and last to leave.
It was a mental approach to improving. For ten years I witnessed them excel in a training environment, and after three or four years of pushing themselves and remaining mentally strong, they got to move that dedication into matches.
It was a similar story when I started my career in 1994. The instruction from Terry Wheeler, the coach at the time, was to align myself with a couple of older boys who were already playing the game.
I was lucky to witness the work that Scott West, Rohan Smith, and Chris Grant put into their football development. I learned so much from those guys over my whole career, but especially my first three or four years, about how to get my body right during the week, what was required in training, and how to best present for the weekend.
It was all about working hard when the time was right, especially over the summer, and during the season it was about recovery to get right for the next game.
Given how unnecessary and risky banned substances are for AFL players, I’m hopeful there won’t be too many secrets to come out. In my experience, I never got wind of any possible cases throughout my career.
When I was starting out, the league was a little bit more casual. It was always a case of play hard on the Saturday, go for a few beers, and recover for Monday. Performance-enhancers would have been unlikely in that environment.
1997 was when it started becoming really professional for us at the Bulldogs, and we took each aspect of football to a new level. Under Terry Wallace, we were training during the day, doing pre-game warm-ups, and much more. That’s where it started to grow into how we see footy today, as a full-time job.
But I didn’t hear about banned drugs – performance-enhancing or recreational – even after that professionalisation. Admittedly, through the latter years of my career, I was in my 30s and going home to the kids of an evening. That was where I was in my life, so perhaps I was less likely to encounter anything.
But the likelihood of other players doping wasn’t on our radar, and it’s not like we were ignorant. At the Bulldogs education was prioritised.
Every year we’d have seminars on illicit and performance-enhancing drugs, and if anything was ever brought forward by a player, it was sent to the doctor, who would assess its legality. Nothing borderline would be approved.
I was drug tested plenty of times, both for performance-enhancing and illicit substances. Once after a game I couldn’t leave the MCG until after midnight. Testing was thorough, there was never a sense that you could avoid it by riding your luck.
For me, that was fine: I was always confident that I had nothing to worry about and nothing to hide. After a difficult week in the AFL, I can only hope that most players across the league are feeling very much the same way.
Lroy
Guest
@Gomaxwell... are you Paul Van Der Haar??? Just kiddding ;-)
Jack D
Guest
The 'slander' as you put it, is a report from the Crime Commission. The names and details are listed in report version 2, confidential and in the hands of the investigators. When charges are laid, those people will be identified. Your argument is like the criminal claiming charges against him are slander. Investigating a crime is not slander or mud slinging. Keep buying the AFL's spin and hypocrisy though. Clearly you believe it. PS. one player at one poor to average club, does not give much of a representative sample as to the extent of doping in the game.
Jack D
Guest
That's a common fallacy repeated in cycling, that you can't dope your way to the yellow jersey. Footy has plenty of players with skill who can't make it at the top level because they're not big enough or fit enough, yet much is made today about the 'athletic ability' of players, gut running, etc. Dope them up to run all day, even micro-dose them (smaller amounts of HGH or EPO, coupled with large quantities of water to dilute in urine), then run the gauntlet of the AFL's testing regime that randomly tests players, if at all. Seriously, does anyone think injecting players with a HGH substitute was legitimate? The comments from Brad Johnson are sadly irrelevant, because we have no idea or basis to justify the comment that drug cheats are not widespread in the AFL. Being a good bloke, or not being exposed to bad practices, proves nothing. Whole teams injecting players in mysterious and unusual circumstances points to something though...and it's not good.
Jack D
Guest
How can steroids sweep world sport, then EPO, and athletes test positive all round the world in every sport, but not one in the AFL...? Power sports, endurance sports, all had drug cheats caught out. AFL wi it's combination of both, and a need to recover quickly (ie. Essendon backing up from Saturday beating Carlton last year to lose by 1 point to Collingwood on Anzac Day), this says to me the testing has been woeful, not that it's a clean sport. You must believe the spin and lies the AFL and Adrian Anderson feeds you year after year. Ben Cousins never tested positive yet left the game with a drug addiction to ICE. Huh? West Coast Eagles of the '90's were huge, as were players in the 70's and '80's like Rene Kink and Mick Conlan. Natural? Sure. You must be the real True Believer.
gomaxwell
Guest
Well footy has come along way in the banning of lifestyle side of things; When I was playing a few beers the night before, a potato cake sandwich for breakfast, sex before the game (this was a sure bragging point), a durrie before and at half time (not for me but common) and a swig of green ginger wine on a cold day at three quarter time were all considered "performance enhancing" and the stuff of legendary performances. Sadly all of this is now banned and we seem to be looking for the most sterile environment possible. I say make them have a hang-over, eat potato cakes like a man, make them smoke and have green ginger wine, have sex before the game; at least it is a bit more fun and we return to a more level playing field where adversity is the game and winning is nice but over-rated.
Bondy
Guest
Hey Guys I feel a lot of the time i'm provoked here at this site,but not on this occasion i've started it, but good luck with your world footy.
Bondy
Guest
I notice under the peice in the comment section a heavy concentration of a 1 Evan's who would that be I wonder. The only bloke left in cycling to be a negative tester amazing. How long did it take to find and were's the next one ?. Terrible way to introduce yourself to the world one would think.
TC
Guest
Ha, ha - that's quite funny. This is the original Danish article: http://www.dr.dk/p3/programmer/gomorgen-p3/2013/02/08/dopingskandale-gennemsyrer-australsk-sport Australien i chok: Større dopingskandale end Armstrong Australia in shock: Major doping scandal a la Armstrong Der er tale om de største sportsgrene som rugby og australsk fodbold... Involves the largest sports, rugby and Australian Football oh well, they can't get every little bit right
Brewski
Guest
@ Bondy, you might have missed this , the Danish media certainly missed the mark. http://www.worldfootynews.com/article.php/20130211215111956
clipper
Guest
Yes, Bondy, agree that both league and Aussie Rules have virtually zero international appeal and therefore won't be picked up overseas (unless by the major papers in Jamaica, apparently), but by association our international sports may be tainted if there is shown to be a large drug culture (and that's a big if)
TC
Guest
Nevertheless, we have a former decorated captain of an AFL club, giving his impressions, observations and opinion after playing 17 seasons for the one club (retired at the end of 2010), and people are doubting what he has observed from his own experience. It's probably true that clubs have continued to push the boundaries in the two years since he retired, but reading some opinions, people are trying to create in impression that goes way beyond pushing the limits, all on zero evidence. As I said in another post, around 70 players are cut from AFL lists at the end of each season, and have been for over the last 22 seasons - that's over 1,500 potentially disgruntled players - and we have never heard boo about anything.
Christo the Daddyo
Guest
Well, no, sports aren't the same, but my point remains valid. Your points about football players needing to be skilled at reading the pitch, calculate risks, etc and drugs don't help that is incorrect. If you are fatigued, then your ability operate at your peak skill level is reduced. So it's not that the drugs make you stronger or faster, they help you recover quicker from fatigue (or allow you to operate for longer at peak skill level). So, performance enhancing drugs don't add to your skillset, but the do allow you to use your skills for longer.
teepee
Guest
I'll rephrase: The author appears to either not fully understand, or not want to understand, the potential for doping in *AFL, and by extension Australian sport in general*, and the damage that could be caused to the public perception. This is not an appropriate or sufficient attitude. I think that covers it. If someone of Brad Johnson's standing doesn't understand or accept the arguments put forward by Bobo, especially points 1 and 2, then there are serious problems in the AFL. A captain and Hall of Famer with 17 years in the league should have better awareness of the nature and potential of PEDs than this.
Bondy
Guest
The fortunate thing is both of these sports AFL and NRL have a minimal International presence,I've just spent five minutes googling the subject internationally and virtually nothing can be found apart from the BBC having a strory about the NRL positives. We are fortunate that the government picked on those two sports their international appeal is viirtually zero,I assume the government new this so not to damage our reputation Internationally,no major Interanational sport has really been implicated in this no Olympians are under major investigation or a Rugby or Associate,intentional I believe.
Steve
Guest
But sports aren't the same: some sports ultimately come down to endurance or muscle mass; others are more dependent on skill. There is clearly more incentive for, say, someone in Cycling to take PEDS than someone in Cricket. There'd be more reason for someone in League to take steroids than someone in Soccer. Lance Armstrong sits down and pedals in a straight, or slightly curved line: taking drugs that allow him to overcome fatigue and muscle strain make him vastly better at doing that. A Footy player, Soccer player etc., needs to read the pitch, calculate risks, look for openings and passing lines, catch, kick, pass, dispose etc. and PEDs aren't *really* going to help that much. That's the difference, in 'Skilled' sports, you and the other guy can both do 100 pushups in one session, but it isn't going to come down to mere arm strength or lung capacity., and Johnson's point makes perfect sense in that context.
TC
Guest
Firstly, I draw a distinction between recreational drugs and PEDs, just as I don't pass moral judgement on young people popping Es on a night out, I don't pass judgement on professional footballers doing the same (most of whom are also quite young). I might believe it's silly for a professional athlete to be doing that, but I don't see it as a moral issue. REgarding PEDs, once again, I draw a distinction between what is permissible under WADA and what isn't. If professional players are taking supplements up to the threshold that allows them to stay within WADA guidelines, then I say that's fine and it's nobody's business. Furthermore, if Johnno reckons he's never come across players using banned substances in his 17 years with the bulldogs, then I believe him - where is the evidence to believe otherwise?
TC
Guest
If you read it carefully, he's not talking about Australian sport per se, he's talking about his time as a player and captain in the AFL, in particular, his 17 seasons with the Bulldogs.
teepee
Guest
A big +1 to this analysis of the arguments made in the article. I don't believe that every player would take PEDs if given the chance. But it's dangerously naive for the author to assume that simply because he can't the benefits of PEDs, no one would take them. The author appears to either not fully understand, or not want to understand, the potential for doping in Australian sports, and the damage that could be caused to the public perception. This is not an appropriate or sufficient attitude.
Lroy
Guest
The more I think about it, the more I think you are onto something.... so far, not one shred of concrete evidence has been produced to back up the claims made 2 weeks ago. The Bombers look like they havent done anything wrong either from what I can tell.
SkinnyKid
Roar Rookie
TC - I apologize but I'm struggling to figure out which side of the fence you are on. Mine and bobos point is that to everyone knows pro sports is full of gear, both recreational and performance enhancing. I'm pretty sure you agree with that. Now I am not judging BJ at all. I don't know the bloke. But his piece screams of AFL disinformation.