The latest drugs fiasco engulfing the NRL has raised many questions. Not necessarily about the game itself, because the same is being asked of the AFL.
Currently, Australian sport seems to be lacking real leadership in administration.
Both codes have issues with sexism and misogyny, and that’s an issue worth its own focus, while the NRL is marginally in front in tackling racism, compared to the AFL – the NRL has also been on the front foot in terms of its support for the LGBTIQ community, lead by former league star Ian Roberts.
The AFL has also to its credit implemented a Pride Game, at the initiative of the Sydney Swans and St Kilda, last year.
Some keep groaning both games are getting too political, yet the reality is sport and politics will always mix.
The illicit drugs issue is one which threatens to destabilise clubs and integrity of both games, because one, it’s a player welfare issue, and two, it’s overshadowing the achievements of both clubs and players.
2005 Swans premiership captain Barry Hall believed the West Coast Eagles 2006 flag was tarnished as a result of the Eagles alleged drug culture. Ben Cousins and the tragic overdose of Eagles premiership star, Chris Mainwaring, made it a hard issue for both the club and the game to sweep under the carpet.
In the NRL, the Cronulla Sharks are now faced with a similar dilemma. While the NRL’s latest drugs drama just doesn’t involve the Sharks (it’s rocked the Sydney Roosters and two stars from the Melbourne Storm) it is bitterly disappointing for the Shark’s long-suffering supporters.
Cronulla needed its chairman, Damian Keogh, allegedly being caught with cocaine like a hole in the head. This was on the back of Ben Barba being charged with possessing the same substance after the grand final. And then for promising Under 20s Sharks forward, Jesse Savage, to be also be charged for alleged possession has undone the club’s reputation, which had been rebuilt since the ASADA scandal. Losing its million dollar sponsorship is also a massive blow.
In the AFL, the Sydney Swans had to stand down defender Michael Talia after he pleaded guilty to cocaine possession.
Australia’s two leading codes need to take a united approach on this front and implement a zero tolerance attitude to drugs – That means no strikes.
All strikes do is allow for complacency. Life bans are not the answer, however, a two-year ban would suffice, with the option of the player being able to return provided they have been fully rehabilitated and have evidence to support they have taken steps to have a completely drug free life: socially, academically, and vocationally.
Administrators convicted of drug possession should be suspended immediately.
While experts are saying both games need to tread carefully in naming and shaming players, what neither game can afford is to have more Ben Cousins or Ben Barba-like scenarios.
The shaming is actually done by the media, not the club or the game. Drug addiction usually is a link to a major life problem, such as mental illness, and I write this as a recovering drug addict and know the devastation it causes within family and friend circles.
While the media does what it does to sell papers, the clubs and the games have to do all they can to ensure players get support and education on drug use.
Ultimately the responsibility lays with the player with the addiction, and the sooner the NRL and AFL take a tougher approach towards illicit drugs the problem will always be there.
Lidcombe Oval
Guest
Cannot ban a player for 2 years for starters - If found guilty or plead guilty they will more than likely receive a section 10 - no conviction and no conditions and or at worst a no conviction with conditions - good behaviour bond/community service/drug rehab. NRL cannot have a policy above what the courts decide on such matters and or what someone in the general public would receive under the same circumstances. Clubs usually stand down players/officials and may fine them as well being the employer. Be an unfair dismissal case if they terminated players contracts for first offences - usually something is included in contracts/agreements in relation to second and more offences which could result in termination of the contract - i.e Todd Carney -he was taking the Sharks to court for unfair dismissal - not heard where that is up to though?? The NRL illicit drug policy extract is below A first positive test results in the player receiving a suspended fine, and they must undertake a mandatory treatment program. The player is also placed on a monitoring program which involves targeted testing. Players who record a second contravention will serve a 12-match ban, the prospect of contract termination and further treatment and monitoring. Third time offenders would be referred to the CEO or Chief Operating Officer of the NRL for them to determine an appropriate sanction. The Illicit and Hazardous Drugs Testing Policy is based on a player welfare model. Samples are collected in a private and controlled environment by third-party personnel with detailed knowledge of Australian and New Zealand testing standards. Samples are analysed for amphetamines – which includes such drugs as speed, ecstasy and ice – ketamine, cannabis, cocaine, opiates, and synthetic versions of those drugs. In addition to these, the NRL also analyses samples for prescription drugs. Players found to be using illicit drugs have immediate access to professional support and treatment to overcome the potential effects on their health.
scrum
Roar Rookie
When the Captain of a National team makes clueless mistakes like this what does this say for the underlying culture of the game. It has hardly been highlighted- the Captain, the one picked out for leadership qualities, the one who is expected to lead by example, on and off the field. What does it say for the rest of the team. And remember Mitchell Pearce, another Captain.
Jeff Dustby
Guest
Reactionary clueless article
Perry Bridge
Guest
Back 10 or so years ago - when the AFL first went down the path of an illicit drugs policy (additional to the WADA code) - the calls of John Howard for 'zero tolerance' were responded to by those in the drug treatment and policying areas with an open letter to the media calling on the AFL to stand firm on the approach they were developing and that 'zero tolerance' was NOT a helpful phrase. The problem is that many people only associate - in their minds - illicit drugs with rational decision making by spoilt rich party boys. However - that's not the only issue. Apart from anything else there's abuse of prescription medication by players or recently retired players suffering with pain. The mention of Chris Mainwaring - whilst directly linked back to the Eagles - was a past player working in the media - - in his case - what were the responsibilities of his then media employer? As it is - we've seen recent focus on past players from a variety of sports - including Lauren Jackson - who struggle and drugs become an issue. During careers - AFL and NRL players aren't immune to personal stresses (bereavements, sick/ill friends/relatives, general pressure and mental illness). Running a zero tolerance approach is NOT helpful across the broader group. What also needs to be recalled about Ben Cousins is that he was never picked up by WADA - despite being a club B&F and competition B&F (Brownlow) in a top team (GF's 2 years running). Back then the AFL policy was only being introduced with less than 500 annual tests - largely ineffective - much more effective now with more and better directed testing. And then the self reporting loop holes (since closed). The NRL was very different to the AFL for quite a while - the NRL left the testing to be run in-house by the clubs - basically putting the inmates in charge of the asylum. Some clubs - Cronulla and Newcastle in particular - we shudder to think of how seriously they (didn't) took this responsibility. The AFL from the outset was using a 3rd party independent tester (Dorevitch Pathology). The NRL has now fallen more in line - - however - - the problem this weekend has been that it's a week off for many - - although that didn't stop the kiwi squad members in Canberra (but that city will do it to you!! - - we suspect many of our pollies are on the gear). The use of the term 'addiction' is interesting too. In many cases it may be a once off usage - be design or otherwise - or it may be usage only out of season (on holidays). Addiction is what is being attempted to be avoid via a health/welfare oriented harm minimisation policy.
Nanco
Guest
Cronulla got thrashed with a feather for the peptides scandal and now this.