Does rugby league have a drug problem or do drugs have a rugby league problem?

By Matt Cleary / Expert

So there was this story in The Guardian, see, about so-called “recreational” drug use by rugby league players in England.

Seems four of the poor blighters have tested positive in the last year or so which has caused commentators and pundits and assorted chatter-boxes to query if the game has a problem with drugs.

So it goes, in the way of these things.

And yet! There is no problem, at least not according to the head of the Rugby League Players Association, Garreth Carvell, a former Great Britain prop, who said rugby league is no different to any other strata of British society.

There’s drugs in it. And that’s just it.

“I honestly think it’s a society thing,” said Carvell. “Rugby players are from a background where they still knock around with the friends they grew up with in working-class areas. They’re not really in the limelight and can live a fairly normal life.

“And, for whatever reason, recreational drugs don’t seem to be as frowned upon as they once were.”

Not that Carvell was advocating drug use, mind. He said he wanted to “help these people and show them there is life to be enjoyed without the use of drugs and, furthermore, outside of rugby league.

“Improving those support channels is something the RLPA is pushing for and I know clubs feel the same.”

Which all seems fairly straightforward to me. Young blokes take drugs. Rugby league’s played by young blokes. Get them help if they need it. But don’t pontificate or call for Life Bans or what have you. Try to understand, to empathise. And don’t lose your mind.

I mean… four positive tests in a year? Pretty good, really.

Because here’s a straight-up fact: there were more than four rugby league players who took drugs in the last year.

If these four of the how-ever-many hundred professional rugby league players in England are the only ones to take a recreational drug in the last 12 months, I will walk nude to Fremantle.

And then swim to Cape Town.

And catch a train to Nairobi.

And swim to Argentina.

And so on.

Drugs? Drugs are just a thing. They just are. They’re a societal thing, a vice, like booze and gambling except illegal.

And one day we’ll legalise them like we did booze and gambling, and manage them as best we can, as we do with booze and gambling which are social vices.

And there is completely legal nicotine which has killed more people than all the wars. Another story.

In this one the RLPA of the UK tweeted out The Guardian’s piece and punters were – in the way of the Twitters – positive and negative about it.

One fellow with what seems some skin in the game, Mr @TheGameCaller – who describes himself as a “Rugby League connoisseur blithely inattentive to the sport’s doomsayers” – contended that he loves rugby league because it’s “dominated by passion and heart”.

And yet, our man laments, that “were we to collectively show equal passion towards the eradication of drug use in rugby league then the sport we all deeply care about would be in a better and healthier place.”

Which may even be true. But eradicating drug use? As Marge Simpson would say to Homer: “Hmmmmmmm”.

I mean, how do you plan to do that? All the police agencies in all the world haven’t done that. Even that maniac in the Phillippines who’s killing people can’t stop it.

Anyway.

So I Tweeted old mate:

“But they’re right though, aren’t they, the RLPA? How would you eradicate drugs from rugby league when you can’t eradicate it from Society? Players live in Society. They’re in a bubble to an extent, sure. But they still go out. They like a party much as the next person.”

To which old mate replied: “The problem is much more widespread in #RugbyLeague than we first thought and you’re right about the role society plays on the accessibility of the players to obtain the drugs. I feel the current deterrents (1/2 year bans) aren’t enough to stop players turning to substance abuse.”

To which I replied: “In the NRL, test positive, first time it’s counselling. Second time it’s 12 weeks and publicised. Third time is two years, publicised, probably your career (depending how good you are). So pretty tough. Doesn’t stop it. Jail doesn’t stop it in Society. ‘War’ on drugs: unwinnable”.

And then I put my keyboard in the holster because you don’t want to get too stuck into these things, they can rule your life.

And I sat back and watched others join in with various opinions which, in the way of these things, skewed off on many and various tangents.

One fellow warned of “the tentacles of organised crime”.

Another advocated for “more stringent testing”.

Someone else said there should be a drug test at every club every Monday morning, which for mine would take the “random” factor out of random drug tests and see a whole lot of parties going on Monday nights.

But, as I said, I wasn’t going to stoke it.

And then Victoria S Dawson – “Researcher. History PhD. Interdisciplinary. Feminist. Socialist. Intersectional. Working-class. Northern powerhouse. Literature/cats/learning = life” – upped the ante, and declared that the entire “culture of rugby league itself needs addressing”.

“The hypermasculine nature of the sport only serves to concentrate the excesses of society, exacerbating issues in men who are made to believe they should to be invincible. RL promotes toxic masculinity,” tweeted Dawson.

Now, I didn’t want to get into it with Victoria S Dawson because, well, y’know, she would be pretty certain of the absolute correctness of her argument and I’d suggest there would be no brooking it.

I foresaw no good from engagement.

But I’ve had a sit back and think about it and… and, well… I don’t know what she’s talking about.

Rugby league’s hyper-masculinity concentrates the excesses of society and exacerbates male issues to the point they believe they’re invincible?

I don’t know that this is true.

I’m not even sure what it means.

You?

The Crowd Says:

2018-04-28T19:29:55+00:00

Kris

Guest


Many of these drugs are still banned as a stimulants in-competition (so match day) so the NRL is obliged to test for them.

2018-04-28T00:03:30+00:00

i miss the force

Guest


what have drugs and violence towards women got in common? nothing in your comment makes any sense. the big ridneck b$gan Queenslander - Big J

2018-04-27T23:20:30+00:00

Jed Clampit

Guest


Bigger than the Artesian basin ? I certainly hope they don't frack your prostate.

2018-04-27T09:17:05+00:00

terrence

Guest


it should be..young white blokes take drugs..most pacific island - particularly samoan and tongan - players stay away from drugs..

2018-04-27T09:02:58+00:00

The Barry

Roar Guru


You should start all your posts with that sentence BJ.

2018-04-27T07:49:51+00:00

Lovey

Guest


Alex, I agree. So long as there is no performance enhancement factor.

2018-04-27T05:42:34+00:00

BA Sports

Roar Guru


Aside from Shane Warne, I can not begin to list the US pro athletes on TV who had had drug or criminal convictions, not to mention the European soccer players, so that isn't really accurate. Johns is just the one who got caught .

2018-04-27T05:20:12+00:00

Don

Roar Rookie


TB You’d never get away with imposing harsher than current ones. The RLPA wouldn’t cop it given what exists in other codes. And whilst you’d hardly get a sponsor for a mainstream code without a drug testing policy even if only for the optics of it, you also would not qualify for ANY government support or grants.

2018-04-27T04:57:55+00:00

Adam

Roar Guru


It's about looking proactive. Testing for drugs makes it look as though they are trying to rid the game of drugs. But the three strikes policy makes the RLPA happy that there is always a second (and third) chance

2018-04-27T04:39:17+00:00

The Barry

Roar Guru


That argument doesn’t make sense in this context though. If heavier punishment = more sponsors, why have the three strikes policy, why not go straight to a two year ban. Also, if more drug ‘busts’ = less sponsorship, testing for them is counter productive.

2018-04-27T04:29:34+00:00

Albo

Guest


Classic ! BA !

2018-04-27T04:19:10+00:00

Adam

Roar Guru


Hit the nail on the head. Does anyone think the NRL actually cares that players take recreational drugs other than the sponsorship dollars that might be lost

2018-04-27T03:55:51+00:00

Albo

Guest


Regarding Matt's new best mate , Victoria S Dawson, when I saw her promoted credentials including such buzz words as Interdisciplinary, Socialist, Feminist, Intersectional & of course Cats , I immediately thought.........Yep ! There's an obvious expert on both our game and on masculinity whom we should all give our undivided attention !

2018-04-27T03:34:01+00:00

Alex Green

Roar Guru


Check this out http://mobile.abc.net.au/news/2018-04-19/why-australia-should-scrap-prohibiting-cannabis-and-start-tax/9671240

2018-04-27T03:33:00+00:00

Don

Roar Rookie


It’s really got nothing to do with player welfare or whether it should be accepted or not. Outside of a few law firms, there wouldn’t be too many NRL sponsors that will pay anything like the current dollars we see coming into the game if players were not heavily sanctioned for illicit drug use. And oblivious to the hypocrisy, you would likely even see the corporate bookies and alcohol firms downgrading or cancelling deals.

2018-04-27T03:29:35+00:00

Alex Green

Roar Guru


Hi Adam, as mentioned below, when talking about drugs in in society (in which footballers reside) there is no evidence whatsoever to support that legalising increases use.

2018-04-27T03:27:33+00:00

Alex Green

Roar Guru


Yep it's a complex one but I agree with you that dropping the official NRL testing wouldn't result in a crazy increase in players getting on it. And in the whole debate of legalising certain drugs in society the evidence seems to supports this. What I'm basically saying is this: if society is shifting toward viewing certain drugs the same way as alcohol, and trying a different approach than the currently failing "war on drugs", then perhaps at some stage the NRL should look at the very least look at doing the same.

2018-04-27T03:21:37+00:00

The Barry

Roar Guru


WTF is the "lord's shake"... I've got a horrible mental image of David at the urinal...

2018-04-27T02:59:52+00:00

Emcie

Roar Guru


I agree, like a lot of things its just hijacked and used as an excuse to push prejudice

2018-04-27T02:58:01+00:00

The Barry

Roar Guru


It's a really good point but to be fair your last line should be "let's not pretend that drug use isn't rampant..."

More Comments on The Roar

Read more at The Roar