Article re drugs policies

[Aerie]

The difference between gambling and illicit drugs with regards to football is that gambling has the potential to make the game unfair, illicit drugs don't. Therefore, in purely football terms, gambling is more dangerous to the game itself.

The difference between gambling and performance enhancing drugs is very little. Both have the potential to make the game unfair.

An argument could be made that illicit drugs do enhance performance, but at the moment they are not listed in such a way, so that is beside the point.

[smac]

Personally, I am unsure if publically "naming and shaming" of drug addicts serves any purpose other than to satisfy voyeurism.

A player named in such a way is not going to be inclined to seek help - more likely to go into hiding or even go "on a bender".

Can't see too much positive out of it.

[Cambridge Clarrie]

Agreed. Publicly naming is not beneficial to the situation.

[Dogwatcher]

Agreed also.

[LPH]

Personally, I am unsure if publically "naming and shaming" of drug addicts serves any purpose other than to satisfy voyeurism.

A player named in such a way is not going to be inclined to seek help - more likely to go into hiding or even go "on a bender".

Can't see too much positive out of it.

Or catch a plane to USA

[smac]

Personally, I am unsure if publically "naming and shaming" of drug addicts serves any purpose other than to satisfy voyeurism.

A player named in such a way is not going to be inclined to seek help - more likely to go into hiding or even go "on a bender".

Can't see too much positive out of it.

Or catch a plane to USA

Ben had a publicly (and we assume privately) supportive family. Ben didn't seek help, help was thrust* upon him by his family and the club. He was lucky, IMO.

[CENTURION]

Personally, I can't see what the problem is, after all, they're not performance enhancing, therefore they're not drug cheats. It's ok to smoke a pack of Winfield a day, it's ok to drink a carton of Crownies a night, so what's the big deal in dropping the odd goog on the way out to HQ? They're only harming themselves.

The clubs don't want players taking them for that very reason,plus they're illegal.
And the fact their image has to be user friendly, not drug associated.
That's why they are banned.
Drugs are traditionally trouble, which is why the image of the AFL must be anti-drug.
There is no other way aorund it.

I'd rather be in a room full of people off their tits on Meth &/or Ecstacy, than be in a bar full of pissed blokes! A LOT less aggression & tension!

[LPH]

Personally, I can't see what the problem is, after all, they're not performance enhancing, therefore they're not drug cheats. It's ok to smoke a pack of Winfield a day, it's ok to drink a carton of Crownies a night, so what's the big deal in dropping the odd goog on the way out to HQ? They're only harming themselves.

The clubs don't want players taking them for that very reason,plus they're illegal.
And the fact their image has to be user friendly, not drug associated.
That's why they are banned.
Drugs are traditionally trouble, which is why the image of the AFL must be anti-drug.
There is no other way aorund it.

I'd rather be in a room full of people off their tits on Meth &/or Ecstacy, than be in a bar full of pissed blokes! A LOT less aggression & tension!

Not sure the RAH emergency department would agree there !!

[spell_check]

No, it's NOT the same.

The AFL & the AFLPA have an agreement with signaturies from BOTH sides on Dug Testing/Results.

My understanding is that NO SUCH ARRANGEMENT EXISTS in terms of Gambling @ present.

You are comparing 'apples to oranges' as it were.

Go You Blues !!

So naming and shaming an 18 year old for two $5 bets is ok with you? Gambling and drugs both have potential to ruin lives.

[Wedgie]

Comparing a gambling addict to a drug addict is like comparing a chocaholic to an alcoholic.
Absolutely ridiculous and anyone that does compare them is a dickaholic.

[spell_check]

I am comfortable with being a dickaholic if I think that the AFL are happy to publicise one part of a players private life (gambling) while another aspect (drugs) cannot. Ok fair enough that naming players who are in drug rehab is too intrusive into a players life, but I'll use Kieran Jack's example again - why it is fair on him that he is shamed for two five dollar bets? That's like the common paparazzi trying to get a scoop on what Paris Hilton ate at a restaraunt on a particular evening.

[spell_check]

And IIRC Jack wasn't betting on matches to do with his team. He hadn't even played a senior match with the Swans yet! So why is it fair that his named is dragged through the mud for? Couldn't the players named go through "rehab" as well, just like the drug takers? From all accounts he didn't have a problem to being with! I am definitely not saying that gambling and drugs are exactly the same thing - the fact is, the AFL were quick to name those players when they should have gone down the same path as what the players under drug scrutiny should have.

[Wedgie]

Why are you talking about Jack?
Jack to my knowledge isn't a gambling addict.
I thought we were talking about addicts?

[spell_check]

Why are you talking about Jack?
Jack to my knowledge isn't a gambling addict.
I thought we were talking about addicts?

That's my point. He wasn't. So why was his name released by the AFL for, when players with bigger problems aren't?

[Wedgie]

Why are you talking about Jack?
Jack to my knowledge isn't a gambling addict.
I thought we were talking about addicts?

That's my point. He wasn't. So why was his name released by the AFL for, when players with bigger problems aren't?

I agree that Jack's name shouldn't have been released but to me that's not the point.
I think betting agencies should be like Doctors and client information treated confidentially but by law that's not the case.

And as I said when driving down Hanson Rd the other day behind my 2 friends Charlie and Victor Wong who turned left.
Two Wongs don't make a right.

[spell_check]

Why are you talking about Jack?
Jack to my knowledge isn't a gambling addict.
I thought we were talking about addicts?

That's my point. He wasn't. So why was his name released by the AFL for, when players with bigger problems aren't?

I agree that Jack's name shouldn't have been released but to me that's not the point.
I think betting agencies should be like Doctors and client information treated confidentially but by law that's not the case.

And as I said when driving down Hanson Rd the other day behind my 2 friends Charlie and Victor Wong who turned left.
Two Wongs don't make a right.

And that's where my main issue is, with the laws. I can't change them of course, but that's where my main gripe* is.

[Wedgie]

And that's where my main issue is, with the laws. I can't change them of course, but that's where my main gripe* is.

Fair enough, then I'll agree with your main gripe/point* and I'll retract my dickaholic*!
(It wasn't personally directed at anyone as I only skimmed over posts in this topic - no offence meant, its too bloody hard keeping up with topics these days on this site as its so bloody popular!)

[spell_check]

And that's where my main issue is, with the laws. I can't change them of course, but that's where my main gripe* is.

Fair enough, then I'll agree with your main gripe/point* and I'll retract my dickaholic*!
(It wasn't personally directed at anyone as I only skimmed over posts in this topic - no offence meant, its too bloody hard keeping up with topics these days on this site as its so bloody popular!)

The fact that the webiste gets many hits* and viewings* is great!

[Psyber]

What's the difference between a gambling addiction and a drug addiction then?

fantastic point. answer :society completely scared of drugs. not so much gambling.

both are addictions and they should be treated the exact same way.

$40000 fine halfed incase Ward and Goodwin do it again DISGRACE!!!!. How about if they do it again youll rip up their afl contracts.

Interesting to note the players association had no dramas with the gamblers names being leaked thru the media. Or Aker drug allegations being leaked. Players getting suspended for 7 games on no evidence. But a medical report found on the ground by a member of the public is the final straw.

Agreed - total bans on both - random police inspections - public naming and heavy fines!

This could then be followed up for recidivists with 3 months confinement to a rehabilitation institution and compulsory group therapy.