What's new
The Front Row Forums

Register a free account today to become a member of the world's largest Rugby League discussion forum! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

Organised crime and drugs in sport investigation part III

Status
Not open for further replies.

Parra

Referee
Messages
24,900
Masters suggests that Essendon players might have held truth meetings so they could agree. He has not said they have done this, but he is happy to make the suggestion.

"If all the Essendon players agree on the circumstances of the injections they were given and provide the same evidence to ASADA, they could scarcely be accused of ‘‘dobbing in a teammate’’.

Read more: http://www.smh.com.au/rugby-league/...cc-evidence-20130515-2jmyh.html#ixzz2TOgsburF
 

El Diablo

Post Whore
Messages
94,107
why haven't Essendon players been seen on TV going to interviews?'

someone tipped off the media where Wade Graham would be
 

Brutus

Referee
Messages
26,355
Could the Telecrap just give this whole drugs thing a rest.

Most people are interested in the footy. They seem to be serving up back page after back page of this shit.

I have really turned off this entire drugs story.

When ASADA have something concrete then we'll be interested. These low position-changing journos should just give it a rest for a while.

Typical of this rag.
 

SharkShocked

Bench
Messages
4,540
So are we led to believe that the AFL players will conveniently get their sentence in the off season?

But no deal has been done right?
 

Perth Red

Post Whore
Messages
70,348
So are we led to believe that the AFL players will conveniently get their sentence in the off season?

But no deal has been done right?

The way I am reading it is that there is pretty damning evidence against Essendon so they are rolling over to minimise the impact on the club and code, the evidence against the Sharks is less or possibly equally damning but tied up by the acc issue so the Sharks are rolling the dice and waiting for asada to play their cards.

If I was guilty, I knew they had evidence and as a team my team mates were all in agreement I would be working damn hard to make sure the club was doing a deal so I didn't have to sit out for two years!
 

SharkShocked

Bench
Messages
4,540
I think it is convenient that the club is looking to make a deal occur in the offseason and not railroad their season.

AFL seems to be backing them heavily in that regard.

So if the evidence is all there against Essendon and found out in the next week and they roll over, would they then let the players finish the season and cop their ban at the end? No docking of points this season? No competing for no competition points?

It is all seeming VERY convenient.

I'm not disputing that the AFL might be cooperating more than the NRL and in particular the Sharks.

I would just laugh to high heaven if nothing happens to an AFL team and their penalties are in the offseason and the Sharks had all points stripped, players banned during the season etc.

Would really show which code does rule Australian football.
 

ek999

First Grade
Messages
6,977
I believe Roy was talking out of his arse for most of that article. Almost all of it was hypothetical so I'm not going to pay any attention to it.
 

Tommax25

Bench
Messages
2,959
Does anyone know why every article about the drugs issue from the DT has the three names on them? Like, what is the point? I don't care if all three of you wrote, one of you wrote it, an intern wrote it. It's dribble. Is this a common practice in journalism? To write an article, no longer than usual, and attach more than one persons name to it?
 

Garbler

Juniors
Messages
286
Have I got this wrong but is:

Cronulla being pinned for shady 4 weeks vs Essedon shady entire season?

But yet both face same punishments?
 

Hello, I'm The Doctor

First Grade
Messages
9,124
The thing about these interviews that the media is conveniently forgetting is that this as a criminal case, and therefore the players absolutely have the right to remain silent. Our legal system says that a person cannot be coerced into incrimination yourself and even if they player is not a current suspect he cannot know that he will not be one in the future.
To say the players have an obligation to cooperate is just dumb, they have the right to not answer questions and not be judged for that silence.
 

ek999

First Grade
Messages
6,977
Don't think it is a criminal case at all actually. If it was the players would be interviewed by the police or other law enforcement agency not ASADA
 

Eion

First Grade
Messages
8,034
Have I got this wrong but is:

Cronulla being pinned for shady 4 weeks vs Essedon shady entire season?

But yet both face same punishments?
Yes, it's good isn't it garbler.

Imagine you are Essendon and dead to rights. Over 12 months of club sanctioned practices and a lot of evidence smack bang in your face.

Imagine you are Sharks with a blow in for a few weeks where no one seems to really know what he was doing. What is fact is that there was a level of discomfort and he was rissoled in reasonably quick fashion.

If I was Essendon I'd be pleading down too. If you're the Sharks are you even sure you've done the wrong thing?

But that's right, Essendon are the goodies here. Give them 6 months or let them off and go after the sharks for 2 years.
 

gUt

Coach
Messages
16,935
Speaking of drugs in sport, in TFC there's an article saying there's been the biggest result for AFL players testing positive for illicit drugs, mainly cocaine.

Why are they allowed to keep it all in house and hushed up when players like Sailor had to take a 2 year ban for the same offence?

And then they (the AFL) lecture the rest of the country that their drugs policy is the best going around? Makes no sense.

http://forums.leagueunlimited.com/showthread.php?t=420450
 

madunit

Super Moderator
Staff member
Messages
62,358
AFL boss Andrew Demtriou has defended the success of the league's illicit drugs policy despite a 400 per cent increase in positive tests being recorded.

Demetriou today revealed 26 players had tested positive to illicit substances in 2012, up from six the previous year.

AFL medical director Dr Peter Harcourt said cocaine was the drug players most often tested positive for.

It was also revealed three AFL players are now on their second strike.

These tests are for illegal drugs such as amphetamines, not performance enhancing drugs.

The AFL carried out more tests in 2012 - 1979 up from 1489 - but the percentage of failure still increased from .4 per cent to 1.31 per cent.

The failed test percentage is the worst since the second year of testing (2006).

Demetriou and AFLPA boss Matt Finnis both described the results as disappointing.

Start of sidebar. Skip to end of sidebar.

End of sidebar. Return to start of sidebar.

But Demetriou said the rise in positive tests was an indication the policy was working by providing the opportunity to change player behaviour.

"It's not devastating,'' Demetriou said.

"This policy allows us to ensure that we remain vigilant, that we continue the education programs, we put these new amendments in place so that we can improve on these results.

"You may think that a significant increase is devastating, but from our perspective it means we have identified more people that we can shift their behaviours.''

MORE: AFL ponders finals wildcard

The AFL today released the latest drug testing results and the proposed amendments to the illicit drugs policy based on the work of the IDP working party, formed after a summit on February 1 prompted by Collingwood president Gary Pert's warning of "volcanic'' behaviour by players.

The contentious three-strikes policy is set to remain but clubs will have more freedom to target test their own players.

The proposed amendments include:

A PLAYER will be permitted to self-report illicit drug use only once during his AFL career.

CLUBS, based on their own observations, will be able to request the AFL medical directors to conduct additional target testing of a player or players.

CONTINUE the move to more target testing at more targeted times.

INCREASED level of hair testing during the high-risk off season.

Demetriou said the rise in tests was in line with the AFL's expectations, pointing to the increase in testing and greater player numbers in the competition.

"It's in keeping with what our expectation was, particularly post our briefings with the Victoria Police and Australian Crime Commission,'' he said.

"But I think there are significant enhancements to the policy. We have done significantly more tests.

"When we first started the policy in 2005, we did 472 tests and we had 19 positives. Last year we did 2000 tests and we have had 26 positives.

"We have got another 100 players playing the competition than we did when we first started in 2005.

"We know we have got more players, we have got more testing, we have got more target testing, we are able to identify more players that we can help.''

AFLPA Matt Finnis said the proposed changes to the policy were "sensible''.

"It's obviously disappointing for is to see a rise in the number of positive tests, but I think the results are a reminder that illicit drug use is a significant problem across society and football cannot afford to be complacent,'' Finnis said.

"The players continued to be committed to the policy, we think the amendments to the policy are sensible but they also maintain a commitment to the fundamental pillars of the policy, which is confidentiality, detection and rehabilitation and trying to change behaviours over time.''

http://www.heraldsun.com.au/sport/a...licit-drug-tests/story-e6frf9jf-1226644351195
 

Smiley

Bench
Messages
3,026
Speaking of drugs in sport, in TFC there's an article saying there's been the biggest result for AFL players testing positive for illicit drugs, mainly cocaine.

Why are they allowed to keep it all in house and hushed up when players like Sailor had to take a 2 year ban for the same offence?

And then they (the AFL) lecture the rest of the country that their drugs policy is the best going around? Makes no sense.

http://forums.leagueunlimited.com/showthread.php?t=420450

Wendell tested positive on gameday. Automatic 2 years under the WADA code.
 

Perth Red

Post Whore
Messages
70,348
Lol, only in afl gaga land would you see a massive increase in drug use as a positive! I wonder if the wada prick will come out and express his disappointment at the Afl's cavalier attitude to player drug abuse?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Latest posts

Top