The hypocrisy of drug policy in a game sponsored by vice

Matt Cleary Columnist

By Matt Cleary, Matt Cleary is a Roar Expert

 , ,

120 Have your say

    So – we still talking about cocaine? We are? Okay then! Like everyone, I’ve got a few extra shillings left over from my two bobs.

    And thus, in no particular order, I say these things.

    Testing for a drug that isn’t performance-enhancing is a waste of time. What’s the point? They don’t test for cigarettes; they’ve killed more people than all the wars.

    They don’t test for booze; alcohol’s responsible for all other NRL ‘scandals’ (and, yes, old mate Fitzsimons has been banging on about it this week, doesn’t mean he owns the idea).

    If a player’s taking a recreational drug, it should be none of the NRL’s business. The players shouldn’t cop the testing. Who else would? What other workplace or industry? (Yes, apart from pilots and cops and FIFO workers, all that.)

    Would you? The players should tell their union to tell the NRL to bugger off. And then as one, boycott their bloody tests. Tell ‘em flat out – nup. Not doing it. You piss in the bloody thing.

    Do it en masse. What are they going to do?

    Or if they must undergo these blinking tests they should demand the same standards of behaviour from everyone in the NRL.

    From Todd Greenberg down, all the suits, the receptionist, the mailroom guy, the referees, the referees’ masseuse, all of them – should have to walk in every morning and undergo a drug test.

    Mr Archer? Wee in this, please. Thanks.

    Todd Greenberg

    (Image: NRL Photos)

    And not just NRL employees, all ‘stakeholders’ in the game. Club executives, pundits at Channel Nine and Fox, everyone who makes a quid from rugby league – yes, you, Jaimee Rogers, and you fat bloke with the phone from Sportsbet – all should face the same random drug testing, the same public shaming, the same effect on their livelihood should their urine contain cocaine.

    And so should you, dear reader, especially if you’re sitting there now pontificating how they’re massively well paid and role models for the children, and drugs are illegal, mmmkay, and people shouldn’t take them and if they do they should be put in jail forever.

    No – if it’s good for the players, it’s good for everyone. And everyone should cop the same penalty: Counselling on first offence. Public shaming second offence. Two-year ban from work, probable dismissal, community service, public shaming – the full freakin’ gamut.

    And then: jail.

    Not jail.

    But y’know … how can you get brushed from footy because you sniffed some dodgy icing sugar on a Friday night? As literally one million people do every single weekend? Please. You wouldn’t cop it.

    Yes, it’s a bad ‘look’ for the NRL. It’s negative publicity. Sponsors have fled the Sharks and Roosters.

    Okay – if the NRL doesn’t want the bad publicity of positive tests, don’t publicise positive tests.

    And if a player – or the chairman of a board – gets done by the coppers, take it case by case, as they do every other illegal bit of kit – usually under the effect of alcohol – perpetrated by footy players.

    All the domestic violence, all the anti-social stupidity – all are dealt with case by case.

    So just do that. Treat drugs on a scale the courts do. Like it does drink-driving and speeding, all that.

    Jesse Bromwich New Zealand

    (Image: NRL Photos)

    Why’s the NRL testing anyway? ASADA and WADA test for cocaine and such ‘in competition’ when it would apparently (dunno how, but I’ll cop it from the boffins) assist performance.

    And there’s a case that a club should be able to test their players – their employees – to see if they’re taking something deleterious to their performance, as our Timmy Gore opined yesterday.

    (Which would be ironic, right? One mob’s testing for enhancement of performance, the other for detraction.)

    The NRL appears to have taken its cues from the police on how to deal with those who test positive for or are charged with possession of illicit drugs.

    “If drugs are detected in the system following a random test there’s an opportunity to take a rehab path without being sacked, followed by targeted testing,” says one senior NSW policeman of in-house copper drug policy.

    “But get pinged for possession and it’s an 181D – essentially ‘show cause’ and tell us why you should still be a cop.

    “And if criminal charges are laid for possession, you can face dismissal. If any of those footy players were cops and found guilty, they’d likely be gone.”

    Our man says most cops who get caught resign. He says that apart from the health and societal issues, there’s the criminality associated with supply and use.

    “It’s very hard to recover with regards to your reputation in the cops,” says our man.

    In rugby league? Same. But why?

    Rugby league will forgive men who bash their wives and spend time in jail for dealing drugs. But test positive for something that affects only you, and you can be rissoled out of the game.


    The NRL tests their players because they don’t like the shame and the stigma of illegal drugs attached to their ‘brand’. Yet for years they took the money from cigarettes, a legal product which has killed more people than all the wars.

    Alcohol sponsors the game. Gambling sponsors the game. And if cocaine was sold in shops it would sponsor the bloody game, I bloody bet it.

    Look at poker machines. Pokies screw more people than leprosy. They essentially sponsor rugby league.

    Rugby league doesn’t care – or can look the other way, or mute the idea of it – that pokie money comes from a source that so shatters families and the very communities rugby league purports to represent.

    I could go on.

    No – recreational drugs are on the nose because they would cause poor, fractious sponsors to disassociate their brand from NRL’s brand. As they’ve done at Roosters and Sharks.

    Know what? People need to chill. Each weekend, suspect white powders from suspect origins are hoovered up hooters. It’s grubby and bad for one’s health. But the light is on and burning bright. And it’s really not anyone’s business, except yours.

    Oh yeah, and the cops’. And the judicial system’s.

    And the NRL’s.

    And here we are.

    Matt Cleary
    Matt Cleary

    Matt Cleary is a sports writer from Sydney. He enjoys golf, footy and Four Pines Pale Ale, and spends as much time as conscience allows at Long Reef GC. Tweet him @journomatcleary, or read him at his website.

    Have Your Say

    If not logged in, please enter your name and email before submitting your comment. Please review our comments policy before posting on the Roar.

    Oldest | Newest | Most Recent

    The Crowd Says (120)

    • May 12th 2017 @ 9:05am
      scrum said | May 12th 2017 @ 9:05am | ! Report

      Good grief let us hope this writer never gets in a position of decision making. Cocaine is illegal-you know against the Law & it is not a victimless drug. And cigarettes and alcohol are drugs but society has deemed them legal. Players get paid big bucks because they are in the public eye- take the bucks and you take the scrutiny. And plenty of jobs get drug tested and they are not jobs which generate income from public exposure. Players are educated & warned-they are adults not 15 year old adolescents . The level of stupidity and from the Captain of NZ-a position of leadership if that word implies anything to the apologists such as this author. Just let everybody put their collective heads in the sand & pretend all is rosy. Brilliant solution !!

      • May 12th 2017 @ 9:15am
        Cathar Treize said | May 12th 2017 @ 9:15am | ! Report

        Perhaps not all of us want head in the sand, out of touch politicians telling us what’s legal or not especially when in their private lives they do the opposite anyway. The world they craft is not necessarily the world I want either.

        • Roar Rookie

          May 12th 2017 @ 9:30am
          eels47 said | May 12th 2017 @ 9:30am | ! Report

          Isn’t it the job of our politicians to tell us what is and isn’t legal? Either way that is not the argument here though is it? We are talking about the NRL’s punishment of these players. I am sick of people excusing what they did for reasons such as they aren’t the only ones, it happens all the time, or it shouldn’t be illegal anyway. At the end of the day they broke the law, they breached their contract and they let their club, team mates, the game and their fans down. What is so hard for people to understand about that?

          • May 12th 2017 @ 10:35am
            Jacko said | May 12th 2017 @ 10:35am | ! Report

            At the end of the day they broke the law, they breached their contract and they let their club, team mates, the game and their fans down. What is so hard for people to understand about that?

            Taking Coke is illegal and a breach of contract but the rest you mention is the reaction to taking Coke not the result of the Coke. The difference is massive and what is so hard for people to understand about that?

            • Roar Rookie

              May 12th 2017 @ 2:08pm
              eels47 said | May 12th 2017 @ 2:08pm | ! Report

              Of course it is a reaction to taking the coke. By taking the coke they breached their contract and, in turn, were punished for it with suspensions, thus letting down the club, team mates and fans. One leads to the other, if they hadn’t taken the coke we would not be having this discussion. What is the massive difference that you are referring to?

              • May 12th 2017 @ 4:53pm
                Jacko said | May 12th 2017 @ 4:53pm | ! Report

                I would of thought it was basic to see to be honest. Plenty of players take Cocaine without it affecting their contracts, their fans their clubs and the game. They dont get caught so it has ZERO effects on any of the things you mention…..

            • May 13th 2017 @ 10:21pm
              Kramer said | May 13th 2017 @ 10:21pm | ! Report

              Im a fan…didnt’ let me down. Could not give 2 stuffs what they or anyone else does in there free time.

          • May 13th 2017 @ 10:20am
            shiftyxr said | May 13th 2017 @ 10:20am | ! Report

            Yea, cause we all trust politicians to do what’s in our best interests

          • May 13th 2017 @ 10:20am
            shiftyxr said | May 13th 2017 @ 10:20am | ! Report

            Yea, cause we all trust politicians to do what’s in our best interests

        • May 12th 2017 @ 9:54am
          scrum said | May 12th 2017 @ 9:54am | ! Report

          Well I am sorry but that is how democracy works which is very basis of our society. If you think anarchy is the solution where everybody does what they want society would break down overnight and violence & crime would be rampant. I know it is a bit hard for some to comprehend but people have to conform to the rules of society which are decided by our representatives.

          • May 12th 2017 @ 10:41am
            Jacko said | May 12th 2017 @ 10:41am | ! Report

            Scrum the laws of society said that alcohol was illegal at some stage in history so why didnt we just accept that and CONFORM to those rules of society? Women going in to pubs was illegal why didnt we just CONFORM to that?.Women voting was illegal, CONFORM? Driving at faster than 10mph was illegal…CONFORM?
            I know its a bit hard for some to comprehend but society needs to constantly review their rules of society which are decided by our representatives.

            • May 12th 2017 @ 11:32am
              Pauly said | May 12th 2017 @ 11:32am | ! Report

              The war on drugs has been a colossal failure. Legalise them, slap a tax on them and let people do as they please fully aware of the risks.

              • May 12th 2017 @ 4:18pm
                clipper said | May 12th 2017 @ 4:18pm | ! Report

                It is true that the war on drugs has been an abject failure. Portugal decriminalised all drugs in 2004 and has just about the lowest rate of overdoses in the world and drug use hasn’t risen. They’ve shifted the emphasis away from the punitive approach.
                That said, this is also about employee responsibilities. If you sign a contract not to indulge in drugs – legal or illegal, then you can’t really complain if you break that contract – especially if you are well compensated and even more so if you’re doing what you love.

              • May 12th 2017 @ 4:57pm
                Jacko said | May 12th 2017 @ 4:57pm | ! Report

                Clipper they have even found in the US that by legalising pot it has dropped in use for teens. (which is where most harm is done) But as they say…You cant ensure peace with force…you only ensure something that looks like peace. Same with recreational drugs…You can never stop them….you only try to give that impression

          • May 12th 2017 @ 10:43am
            Jacko said | May 12th 2017 @ 10:43am | ! Report

            Actually Scrum…..Coke WAS legal so why not just CONFORM to those society rules?

      • May 12th 2017 @ 11:22am
        Pedro the Maroon said | May 12th 2017 @ 11:22am | ! Report

        Scrum – you probably drive 5kms under the speed limit at all times too.
        Speeding’s illegal, mmkay?
        Spare us the sanctimonious claptrap. I thought it went out with Reagan’s war on drugs.

        • May 12th 2017 @ 12:25pm
          Granter said | May 12th 2017 @ 12:25pm | ! Report

          Good comment; finally, a Maroon I like!

        • May 12th 2017 @ 12:31pm
          scrum said | May 12th 2017 @ 12:31pm | ! Report

          Sorry gents-let us get all our kids on cocaine-seems to be smart. I think comparing, as some has this issue with the rights of women to vote, is rather over the top. And yes I have broken traffic laws & I have copped the fines & demerit points. What you are suggesting is that each individual has the right to decide which Laws he needs to follow. So somebody murdered you daughter and you feel it is your right to kill the murderer & that is fine because that is your opinion. And all these posts conveniently ignore the fact that these players receive constant education on the outcomes- I am sorry but even if you find accountability to society unacceptable that is not going to change. Whether prohibition is dumb or smart is not the issue-players know the outcome-they only make good money because of their public profile-part & parcel of their job. Mining workers get drug tested prior to every shift as a matter of interest. But keep apologising for these dumb actions if it makes you feel good.

          • Roar Guru

            May 12th 2017 @ 1:43pm
            Chris Kettlewell said | May 12th 2017 @ 1:43pm | ! Report

            I don’t think anyone is suggesting that, just suggesting that it’s not necessarily the NRL’s business. In most jobs, unless it’s the sort of job where doing it under the influence of alcohol and drugs would actually be dangerous (driving a truck or a forklift of various other such things) you won’t get tested for drugs as part of your job. So unless you are turning up to work clearly under the influence and it’s actually affecting your performance, nobody at work would likely even know.

            Obviously the NRL have to test for PED’s, and since they have the samples to test for them, they clearly think they can easily add tests for illicit drugs also.

            I think the argument here isn’t the illicit drugs are okay, or should be legalised, or even that the NRL should be happy with their players taking them, but rather that what makes the NRL different from any other employer when it comes to illicit drugs. And if it’s reasonable for them to test their “employees”, even for drugs that don’t necessarily affect their performance, why is it only one category of their employees, surely if players need to get tested for it, then everyone else should be too.

            Of course, players already have to supply samples for testing for PED’s, which nobody else would, so they don’t have to add extra drug tests to test players like they’d have to do for everyone else.

            • May 12th 2017 @ 2:39pm
              scrum said | May 12th 2017 @ 2:39pm | ! Report

              They have signed contracts which prohibits this sort of conduct- it is a condition of their employment. They are educated & warned. Is that so hard to understand.

              • May 12th 2017 @ 5:05pm
                Jacko said | May 12th 2017 @ 5:05pm | ! Report

                Its not comparing it to anything Scrum…Its pointing out laws that did not suit society so society had them changed….You forget that these drugs are used legally in our society and have been for many many years. and will continue to be for many years to come…..As for saying get the kids on it …well thats just silly…Would you get the Kids on Alcohol? Tobacco? There are such things as “suitable for adults”in every part of life from driving to movies and most things in between

              • May 14th 2017 @ 10:45am
                Jack E said | May 14th 2017 @ 10:45am | ! Report

                You don’t actually know that’s in their contract because you don’t know what the employee in your own workplace has in their contract. You assume it’s the same because you do the same job but you simply don’t know. For instance Jack Bird currently takes something which is on the ASADA banned list but gets an exemption because of his aggressive arthritis, his contract lets him do that but no one else in the NRL gets that particular drug exempted. There all sorts of weird things in contracts nobody understands, gets or would expect to be there. Some clubs simply might not have it in there unbelievably and the NRL doesn’t check contracts as close as you think when registering them so it’s very possible it’s not in there. ( Cue blind rage response from guy who can’t comprehend something like this possibly happening despite it happening many times in many sports before)

          • May 12th 2017 @ 1:57pm
            Campbell Watts said | May 12th 2017 @ 1:57pm | ! Report

            No mining workers don’t!
            They may get breathalyzer each shift but urine testing is a rather more complex and expensive exercise!

      • May 13th 2017 @ 5:34am
        Chris Love said | May 13th 2017 @ 5:34am | ! Report

        Good grief? You know women voting was illegal once. Slavery was legal, and so was bashing your missus if you go back far enough. Just because some conservative Christians have held the balls of too many politicians over the years doesn’t make it right. Legal or not legal drug use is victimless.

        It’s none of yours, the NRL’s or anyone else business until the player turns up at training or game day. Then, test away all you like. But if he’s clean at work who are you are any one else to determine what he does in his spare time.

        • May 13th 2017 @ 2:43pm
          Pablo said | May 13th 2017 @ 2:43pm | ! Report

          I’m actually pro decriminalisation of drugs, but “drug use is victimless” ………. you clearly don’t have a clue what you are talking about.

    • May 12th 2017 @ 9:18am
      Johnno said | May 12th 2017 @ 9:18am | ! Report

      NRL accepts millions in sponsorship from alochol,fast food and gambling and soft drink companies, hardly industries that are pillars of society and promoting good healthy lifestyles. Also it allows cheerleaders as well at clubs which are inherently sexist most of the time, as it’s overwhelmingly the majority of cheerleaders are women and there dressed in skimpy clothing as that appeals to the majority of NRL fans eg straight adult male.

      • Roar Rookie

        May 12th 2017 @ 9:31am
        eels47 said | May 12th 2017 @ 9:31am | ! Report

        But whether we like it or not, all of those things are legal aren’t they?

        • May 12th 2017 @ 9:54am
          Oingo Boingo said | May 12th 2017 @ 9:54am | ! Report

          Johnno Johnno Johnno , so now a girl can’t have a bit of a dance and be proud of her appearance because ” Johnno ” has an issue with it .
          Perhaps these poor mislead girls could pontificate in relation to your pastimes and improve your standing amongst us.
          We really are lucky to have beacons of hope such as yourself to guide us through the darkness in these testing times .

          • May 12th 2017 @ 10:06am
            Johnno said | May 12th 2017 @ 10:06am | ! Report

            Don’t try and twist it Oingo, it’s not about the women, it’s about rugby league fans like you and other men who like to see women dressed up scantly clad and dancing to please straight men like you, and seuxalizing women, which is very sexist attitude you have.
            If there was any equality to this cheerleading circus there would be more gay friendly dane themes to appeal to gay men rugby league fans, and more scantly dressed men dancers to appeal to straight women and lesbian themed dane routines to appeal to lesbian nrl fans. The whole cheerleading thing is “majority rules marketing” and haveing this hetro style dance cheerleading stuff to appeal to NRL straight male fans. It’s not inclusive at all, but it does demean women and you seem to like that Oingo.

            • May 12th 2017 @ 10:16am
              Oingo Boingo said | May 12th 2017 @ 10:16am | ! Report

              Gee you cannibalised your own argument there , by claiming Lesbians wouldn’t find it appealing.
              And secondly you don’t know a thing about me , so keep your judgements inside that tiny little brain of yours .

            • May 12th 2017 @ 10:34am
              Jimmmy said | May 12th 2017 @ 10:34am | ! Report

              Ah Jono, my wife looks at NRL players and tells me which ones she thinks are cute . In fact if Cameron Smith walked through the door , i may need to move out. A lot of women watch NRL for the added benefit of the ‘beef cake’ . It would surprise if some gay men didn’t as well. Have the NRL players been ‘ sexualized’ by this . Do we need players to abandon tight fitting jersies and go back to the fifties look. It could traumatise these young men to be thought of in this way .
              You really do need to get out more.

              • May 12th 2017 @ 10:37am
                Oingo Boingo said | May 12th 2017 @ 10:37am | ! Report

                Ji Ji Ji jimmeeeeee ?

            • May 12th 2017 @ 11:07am
              Oingo Boingo said | May 12th 2017 @ 11:07am | ! Report

              We really do live in strange times when ,a man that finds women attractive is deemed to be some kind of dirty devious carnation of the devil whilst the person proposing the argument is happily promoting the sexualisation of men for other men .

              • May 12th 2017 @ 1:00pm
                Johnno said | May 12th 2017 @ 1:00pm | ! Report

                I’m saying there should be a balance in the NRL’s marketing and sexualization so to speak. They actively do things e.g. cheerleading under the banner of sex sells, and it’s pushed to straight men like lingerie football. I don’t see the NRL actively looking to please gay man at halftime with manpower or male dancing or male semi strip shows. It’s like lingerie football in the states, it pushes to market itself to appeal to straight men not gay men.

              • May 12th 2017 @ 1:10pm
                Oingo Boingo said | May 12th 2017 @ 1:10pm | ! Report

                I don’t see a straight float in the gay Mardi Gras …
                Sometimes you just have to accept, that ,that’s just the way things have been for a long time and leave it alone .

        • May 12th 2017 @ 10:09am
          Johnno said | May 12th 2017 @ 10:09am | ! Report


          They might be legal, but if the NRL truly wanted to promote all thigns integrity and not care about money and profit, and instead focused on more amatuer ideals of decency and morals it would scrap these sponsorships. But instead it cares more about making money than haveing a true sports-comp based on decency and respect and good human ideals. It’s why no one with half a brain takes the IOC and it’s Olympic ideals seriously. It’s hillarious when the IOC bangs on about good ideals when it’s awash in corruption and dirty deals $.

          • Roar Rookie

            May 12th 2017 @ 10:27am
            eels47 said | May 12th 2017 @ 10:27am | ! Report

            It is a bit of a catch 22 though. Without the money and profit there is no NRL. I get what you are saying, but unless viable alternatives present themselves it will continue how it is.

      • May 12th 2017 @ 11:24am
        Pedro the Maroon said | May 12th 2017 @ 11:24am | ! Report

        Do they still have cheer squads? If so then they’re a lot offensive than a Gus Gould monologue at the start of an Origin game.

    • May 12th 2017 @ 9:25am
      Carl said | May 12th 2017 @ 9:25am | ! Report

      In the end it all comes down to the money! As the philosopher Homer (Simpson) said ” Professional athletes, always wanting more”.

    • May 12th 2017 @ 9:48am
      Oingo Boingo said | May 12th 2017 @ 9:48am | ! Report

      “Hi Five” for Matt Cleary .
      Angry , opinionated stuff , I like it.

    • May 12th 2017 @ 9:51am
      GoGWS said | May 12th 2017 @ 9:51am | ! Report

      Matt – I’m afraid you don’t seem to realise that Cocaine is a prohibited stimulant (S6). You’ve just asserted it is a ‘recreational’ drug akin to booze and cigarettes, and suggest there should be no tests for it. Had the players been tested positive for cocaine by ASADA they’d be open to lengthy bans.

      Personally I think NRL players (and AFL players) need to pull their heads in and get some perspective. They’re in extemely highly paid positions for what are very short careers in the overall scheme of things – most would have careers lasting 5 years or less, with exceptional players usually maxing out at 10 years (and a few random freak playing more than 10 years). For the very short time careers I don’t think NRL/AFL clubs are asking too much of their players not to be caught breaking the law by taking drugs. It’s not that hard to stay off the gear surely. And when they are caught then the media will report it, and sponsors will walk (as we’ve seen).

      • May 12th 2017 @ 10:40am
        northerner said | May 12th 2017 @ 10:40am | ! Report

        No, Matt is correct – cocaine is only on the prohibited list “in competition.” ASADA couldn’t care less if a guy is on the stuff four days before or the day after the game – it’s only concerned about the day of the game.

        • May 12th 2017 @ 1:02pm
          GoGWS said | May 12th 2017 @ 1:02pm | ! Report

          ASADA may not care less..but the cops would. They are breaking the law!! When these guys are caught (and most of them are not caught) they’re dragged through a very public process via the courts and via the media reporting, and sponsors can/do pull the plug. The legal system and the media are not changing any time soon so unless player behaviour changes then NRL/AFL clubs will continue to be open to damage to the value of their brands.

          As with many issues like this, it’s probably a tiny minority causing the problem. Not sure what the next steps should be but it could include routine hair sample testing and contractual termination clauses. Yes the is a wider societal issue but it can be controlled, and should be controlled to protect NRL/AFL clubs. Look at what regular testing did for Ben Cousin when at Richmond – the club stayed right on top of him for his stint at that club, and he remained clean for that period due to regular testing – goes to show what is possible. If applied properly from the start young kids entering the system are less likely to pick up bad habits.

          • Roar Guru

            May 12th 2017 @ 1:51pm
            Chris Kettlewell said | May 12th 2017 @ 1:51pm | ! Report

            Actually, I don’t think anyone would generally ever get dragged before the courts for testing positive for illicit drugs unless they were driving or something at the time. Getting caught in possession of any significant amount is another story.

            Don’t get me wrong, I’m not in any way in favour of illicit drugs. They are bad for the people taking them and the best thing for these people is often for others to find out about it as per your Ben Cousins argument. If regular testing keeps players from taking these drugs and therefore helps prevent them totally stuffing up their lives wtih drugs then there’s very much a positive benefit to the testing.

            But I can see the authors point, that, if it’s not something that actually affects their performance in their job, why should it make any more difference to their employer than if any non-playing staff are doing the same thing.

      • Columnist

        May 12th 2017 @ 11:18am
        Matt Cleary said | May 12th 2017 @ 11:18am | ! Report

        Yeah wrote it mate. “ASADA and WADA test for cocaine and such ‘in competition’ when it would apparently (dunno how, but I’ll cop it from the boffins) assist performance.”

        So yes, it’s a stimulant. But jeez – run around the footy field with a head full of coke? You won’t be a better player. You’ll be a blithering fool.

        • May 12th 2017 @ 5:10pm
          Jacko said | May 12th 2017 @ 5:10pm | ! Report

          Damn it looks like my team are on coke then…All blithering fools lol

        • May 12th 2017 @ 7:38pm
          Peter said | May 12th 2017 @ 7:38pm | ! Report

          So you are now saying it’s performance enhancing and is therefore a bad thing, presumably because it distorts the competition, never mind the illegality.
          I would have tjought the club would be legitimately concerned if the drug of choice was, on the other hand, performance inhibiting so that the player is incapable of giving his best, and therefore not earning his salary.
          Just as a matter of interest, because I don’t know – is”in competition” really limited to the 80 or 90 minutes of the fame, and not the start and end of the season, training, etc? If so, really smart of the athletes to put that one over their employers!

        • May 12th 2017 @ 7:52pm
          Peter said | May 12th 2017 @ 7:52pm | ! Report

          So you are now saying it’s performance enhancing and is therefore a bad thing, presumably because it distorts the competition, never mind the illegality.
          I would have thought the club would be legitimately concerned if the drug of choice was, on the other hand, performance inhibiting so that the player is incapable of giving his best, and therefore not earning his salary.
          Just as a matter of interest, because I don’t know – is”in competition” really limited to the 80 or 90 minutes of the game, and not the start and end of the season, training, etc? If so, really smart of the athletes to put that one over their employers!

    • May 12th 2017 @ 9:58am
      bbt said | May 12th 2017 @ 9:58am | ! Report

      Spot on!!!! Alcohol abuse, gambling, prescription drugs, are much bigger problems.

      • May 12th 2017 @ 10:45am
        Jacko said | May 12th 2017 @ 10:45am | ! Report

        And Cocaine is a fully legal prescription drug….Just not a recreation drug

        • May 12th 2017 @ 3:12pm
          Gray-Hand said | May 12th 2017 @ 3:12pm | ! Report

          It should be noted that although cocaine can technically be prescribed by certain doctors in certain situations, it basically never happens. Your local GP sure as hell can’t prescribe cocaine and would be charged with a crime if he was found with any in his possession. Certain drugs derived from cocaine, such as procaine are prescribed for use in controlled settings ie being used as a local anaesthetic by a dentist.

          You sure as hell can’t get cocaine over the counter at the chemist.

          • May 12th 2017 @ 5:36pm
            Armchair expert said | May 12th 2017 @ 5:36pm | ! Report

            Cmon, lets not let the truth get in the way of a good story.

    , ,