Willie Rioli’s fate in relation to a breach of the anti-doping protocols has bee sealed after the relevant tribunal reached their verdict today.
The West Coast forward has been handed a two-year ban for providing urine substitutes during a doping control sample collection in August 2019 and testing positive to cannabis in a September 2019.
However, as the ban is backdated to the date of his initial breach, the 25-year-old will be eligible to return to the field in Round 23 of this season. He can also resume training with the club on June 20, two months before he is allowed to return to the field.
Rioli ban was reduced from a potential four years to two on the basis of the Prompt Admission defence.
In a joint statement on the West Coast Eagles website, CEO Trevor Nesbitt and Rioli both said they were pleased the matter had been resolved.
“We are pleased for Willie that this ordeal is now over and he has some clarity around his future,” Nisbett said. “We look forward to him returning to the club and resuming what is an integral part of his life.
“It has certainly been very challenging for all concerned and what this case has highlighted is the need to continually educate and that the programs in place do not necessarily suit all players.
“Our club would like to acknowledge David Grace QC who handled this matter on our behalf,” he said.
Rioli said he was relieved the stress of waiting for an outcome was over.
“I am very relieved that this long process has now ended,” he said. “The stress of waiting for the outcome over a long period of time has been difficult for me and my family.
“I realise I have done wrong things and I have learned from it. I am sorry for letting people down. I am looking forward to putting all this behind me and playing footy again soon.
“I would also like to thank David Grace QC, West Coast Eagles football club, my management & the AFLPA for their support throughout this process,” he said.
shifty
Roar Rookie
Yea they supervised him tampering with the sample as per protocol.
shifty
Roar Rookie
From memory 2 weeks later he was found to have THC on his system on game day.
Nico
Roar Rookie
Agree he got off lightly... But most likely due to the embarrassing length of time leaving him in limbo. No one deserves to be treated that way, guilty or not.
Nico
Roar Rookie
Early Christmas present really. Cannot wait to see you back Willie!!!
Lukey Miller
Guest
The next bloke to do what Willie did won't be playing again, that is for sure. A very silly Willie for sure, but any future occurrence (no matter who it is) will surely have the book thrown at them.
Reg Grundy
Guest
The punishment was fair enough, but it shouldn't have taken 2 years with the slow wheals of justice. The AFL should never have signed up to the Government's anti doping code backed by IOC (whoever the foreign body is) for taxpayers funds, unlike US professional sports. However, I heard Simpson saying in the media yesterday something like that he isn't a drug cheat because of his cultural background. Sorry, but I don't get why his cultural background has anything to do with his stupidity in tampering with his sample twice, apparently on 2 separate occasions. Their professional athletics that would be forced to do education courses with their respective clubs and the AFLPA.
Yattuzzi
Roar Rookie
WADA can’t let it stand. Your argument is spot on.
2dogz
Roar Rookie
“Smoked a joint” tigers fan on the way to a game :silly:
Marty
Roar Rookie
People taking responsibility for their actions and not blaming others for their poor choices might be a ‘strange’ argument for you Don but for the rest of us it’s a pretty basic concept that we’ve worked out by the time we’ve reached double figures. The seatbelt analogy is just plain silly because you can have the safest seatbelt in the world but if someone decides to act in a way that purposefully negates the ‘safety’ aspect of the device, and is then injured as a result, its the seatbelt’s fault? And I’m the one with the strange argument? Dear oh dear…
RT
Roar Rookie
I wasn't being mischievous. To quote you "Rioli smoked a joint with mates, hardly an intentional performance enhancing strategy, and freaked out when tested and tried to swap gatorade with his urine sample". That reads as stating fact, rather than stating what he claims happened. Given he tested positive for cannibas 3 weeks later it is a pretty likely story, but I tell you what, if I was loaded up with something wrose, I would subsitute a test for Gatorade, and then start smoking joints in the hope of a positive test for that a few weeks later. That is why I say it is a bad precedent. Don't forget, what Rioli did is supposed to be the worst offence because in substituting a sample you could be hiding anything.
Johnno
Roar Rookie
Yeah, I think he new around Xmas. The penalty is interesting. I think going through 18 months of mental stress means 2 years is about right. But without that & 2 cases then a bigger suspension would have been warranted. Anyway, good to see talent back on the track.
Gary
Roar Rookie
I have never said there was proof, that is mischievous. I said there are many factors they could/do consider when handing out penalties. This does not 'set a bad precedent' (more mischief), this happens all the time... just look at the Essendon saga. We agree on tampering being bad and needing to be punished, and i think we agree there is no definitive proof eitherway regarding what could of been in his system. But, we are both happy with the penalty. :thumbup:
RT
Roar Rookie
Not at all. I am just correcting the misconception by you and others that there is some proof he was only trying to cover up cannabis use. In truth we don't know. Plus the other misconception that it is not a banned substance, which it is (regardless of anyone's opinion of whether it should be). My gut feel is that he never used anything worse than cannabis, but it is just that, a gut feeling. Penalties shouldn't be decided on gut feel and this has set a bad precedent.
Gary
Roar Rookie
You are pretty keen to push the more sinister narrative of Rioli sample tampering. Well done.
RT
Roar Rookie
:thumbup: It would be about 90 days I think.
RT
Roar Rookie
Stupid last last sentence in a serious discussion. Anyway it was the AFL tribunal that gave the penalty, not WADA. I read somewhere that they may have chosen a penalty based on the least liklihood of either side appealling. That sounds on the money.
Johnno
Roar Rookie
Nah.. Willie new some time ago of his penalty. They needed to wait for the appeal period to pass before announcing it.
Gary
Roar Rookie
Ok. Is canabis performance enhancing for footy players? Isn’t there a push to have this excluded? We agree on the substitution breach being the more severe crime. But, clearly WADA, etal , felt there was no sinister ploy by Rioli at play here. Essendon players and coaches could have got 4 years, but got 2 years for being dumb… like Rioli.
Don Freo
Roar Rookie
Why would they do that? Do you not know what supervision is?
DarwinDee
Guest
I'd suggest he's paid for it and we should all just leave the poor guy alone. The drug he took will be legal soon enough- he was a fool for taking the drug given his profession and a fool for swapping the test but he's paid the penalty and more importantly learned from it.