The AFL won’t mandate its players to have a flu vaccination ahead of the season resumption and will leave the decision up to footballers and their respective club doctors.
NRL players are required to either have the flu vaccination or sign waiver forms as rugby league works towards a planned May 28 season restart.
But the AFL maintains flu shots will be at the discretion of players and club staff, not a league-wide policy.
“While the AFL recommends players and officials to get a yearly flu shot, the decision is ultimately that of the player and club doctor as to whether they wish to do so,” an AFL spokesperson said.
On Friday morning, Gold Coast Suns captain David Swallow questioned whether flu vaccinations should be compulsory in the AFL if players weren’t comfortable with them.
(Michael Dodge/Getty Images)
“I’m not too sure it should be mandatory,” Swallow told reporters.
“Everyone is going to have their different beliefs and opinions on this matter.
“I don’t know whether we should be forcing them to do anything they wouldn’t be comfortable doing.
“I know others would have a different opinion on that, but that’s my opinion.”
The NRL had amended its original waiver form on Thursday after several players refused to sign it on religious or conscientious grounds.
On Friday, three Gold Coast Titans players, including Bryce Cartwright, were stood down by the NRL for refusing to take the flu shot on the advice of Queensland health officials.
The other two players were believed to be Nathan Peats and Brian Kelly.
Peats later said on Twitter he was not anti-vaccinations and had avoided the flu jab due to an adverse experience while at South Sydney back in 2012 – but was now planning to have the shot on Friday afternoon.
Earlier on Friday, prime minister Scott Morrison backed any decision by state governments to apply a no jab, no play policy to the NRL.
Parkside Darren
Roar Rookie
Compulsory flu vaccine for professional sports players this year is because of Covid-19. If you get the flu your immune system will not be as strong and you are more susceptible to COVID-19. Which then puts others at greater risk.
Scott
Guest
Yep I’d say you’re correct with what your saying. I think it’s more about crossing the border into another state they are worried about. If they did properly isolate it wouldn’t be a problem, but no one can guarantee that. So I’m guessing the way they see it, is it’s safer for someone not to travel then to travel unvaccinated
Scott
Guest
Gday Peter. I don’t quite understand which side you’re on from your comment. The 2nd half of my comment was aimed at the entire population. With the flu shot given annually, which only protects against that years strain of flu, if someone has a bad reaction they can choose to avoid it. As far as 1 shot vaccinations that protect us for life against deadly diseases, it should be compulsory for society to take them. These selfish people who say it’s “their child” so it’s “their choice” should be punished. It’s not “their child” they’re killing. It’s SOMEONE ELSES CHILD they are killing! As far as footy players go, only a proven adverse reaction should disqualify them from taking the shot annually. In the current situation if they are travelling across borders it should be compulsory
DTM
Guest
My previous post on this story seems to have been "moderated" so I'll try again. I have posed this to medical practitioners and they cant give me a straight answer however I'm sure our Roarers can come up with an explanation (as we know everything). Let's say we have 50 people in a group and that group is isolated from the rest of the community. According to the science, if we give all of those 50 people the flu shot then none of them will get the flu they are being vaccinated against. However, if one person is not given the flu shot then that person is the only one who can contract the flu - the other 49 are safe as they have had the vaccination. So, if we are isolating a group and some of those people elect not to get the vaccination then they are not a risk to the others. Of course, this doesn't work in general society where (for various reasons) people do not get vaccinated and any viruses or diseases can spread from an unvaccinated person to a vaccinated person as a carrier and then on to another unvaccinated person. One of the reasons people don't get vaccinated are pre existing medical conditions so they do not have the option of vaccinating and therefore are at risk from people who do not vaccinate. So, I am not an anti vaxer, I just don't understand the logic of insisting on vaccinating in relation to an isolated group. I'm eagerly awaiting enlightenment. PS we are talking about the flu here not Covid-19 for which there is not yet a vaccine.
peter ostle
Guest
Dear Scott, if the flu vaccine is a must - except if medical issues etc. Then why has the Australian government only bought 13.5 million, when the total population is 25 million? I cannot think that over 10 million people have had an adverse reaction, or that for religious/moral issues, or certain conditions that preclude having the jab.
Scott
Guest
Every player should be getting it anyway so they can play out the full season. It’s common sense and the clubs should be enforcing it regardless, as they are the ones paying the players big money On a side note, peoples beliefs should mean jack all when it comes to vaccinations. The flu shot they can choose to avoid, if they’ve had an adverse reaction, but in general when it comes to vaccinations, the beliefs of fairy tail conspiracy freaks should be left out of it.
peter ostle
Guest
Solves some issues, but raises others. If the health authorities in QLD insist the jab is non-negotiable does this lead to QLD teams being unable to train/choose players who refuse the jab? What occurs when players from non QLD travel to play QLD based teams are those who have not had the jab chosen to travel/play? Does this mean the AFL to avoid the issue ask the QLD teams to relocate for the season, or part of the season, until all the states have similar policies?