Australian Crime Commission investigation into sport

[Forward Press]

I'm not fat, you bastard.

Whilst I agree with Chief's point that large organisations will always be reactive to situations like this, Demetriou has been adamant on many topics, including this particular issue. And by adamant, I mean that he has either denied its existence or claimed that the current policies were sufficient.

nek minut...

He expressed concern about sports scientists a long time ago, when clubs started to spend big on them. I daresay if he pushed for action back then people would be roasting him for unfairly impinging on a club's right to spend money in their football department however they see fit.

It's damned if you do, damned if you don't.

 

[LouisCK]

I actually think Demetriou has been possibly the best administrator the AFL has seen. He's not perfect, but I'd like to see some of you fat bastards running the comp!




Inb4isthatyouAndy?

If you value money, sure.

But f you value a fair and just competition...

Let's go back through the past, to 2001, and have a look at every flag won:

2001-2003: Brisbane won with an unfair salary cap advantage
2004: Port won - legitimate flag even considering their draft picks etc as an expansion team
2005: Sydney won with an unfair salary cap advantage
2006: West Coast won with a bunch of their senior players displaying highly dubious behaviour towards illicit drugs - is it much of a stretch to suggest they wouldnt mind using PED's as well?
2007: Geelong won and there's a cloud hanging over them right now, nothing concrete of course. there's also the F/S rule they massively benefitted from before being revised because of how badly it was implemented
2008: Hawthorn, illicit drug rumours/issues persist. Likely legitimate
2009: Geelong, see above
2010: Collingwood - seem legit, but they recieve an excellent schedule every season
2011: Geelong, see above
2012: Sydney, see above

Out of the last 12 flags, only 25% would appear legit. And all three still have mild question marks hanging over them.

We can do the same with wooden spoons since 05:

2012: GWS - looked to tank a game against GC late in the year to secure last place
2011: Suns - legitimately dreadful, compromised draft due to expansion anyway
2010: West Coast - likely didn't tank, but try explaining their sudden rise up the ladder the year after
2009: Melbourne - tanked
2008: Melbourne - legitimately shit
2007: Richmond - tanked
2006: Carlton - were shit thanks to already cheating on the cap, tanked in 07 though.
2005: Carlton - See above

At least 5 cases of tanking, and three compromised drafts. Oh yeah Collingwood tanked 05 too, so make that 6.

Are these the signs of a competition that is run well? As long as by 'well' you mean 'fair, equitable and the best team wins' then I can't see how anyone could say AD has done a good job.

Factor in various issues with sexual assaults, violence, salary cap cheating, gambling, alcohol abuse etc. and its clear the league has completely lost its moral fibre under AD.

Has a great bank balance though, and I guess that's all that counts now right?

 

[Higgs Boson]

If you value money, sure.

But f you value a fair and just competition...

Let's go back through the past, to 2001, and have a look at every flag won:

2001-2003: Brisbane won with an unfair salary cap advantage
2004: Port won - legitimate flag even considering their draft picks etc as an expansion team
2005: Sydney won with an unfair salary cap advantage
2006: West Coast won with a bunch of their senior players displaying highly dubious behaviour towards illicit drugs - is it much of a stretch to suggest they wouldnt mind using PED's as well?
2007: Geelong won and there's a cloud hanging over them right now, nothing concrete of course. there's also the F/S rule they massively benefitted from before being revised because of how badly it was implemented
2008: Hawthorn, illicit drug rumours/issues persist. Likely legitimate
2009: Geelong, see above
2010: Collingwood - seem legit, but they recieve an excellent schedule every season
2011: Geelong, see above
2012: Sydney, see above

Out of the last 12 flags, only 25% would appear legit. And all three still have mild question marks hanging over them.

We can do the same with wooden spoons since 05:

2012: GWS - looked to tank a game against GC late in the year to secure last place
2011: Suns - legitimately dreadful, compromised draft due to expansion anyway
2010: West Coast - likely didn't tank, but try explaining their sudden rise up the ladder the year after
2009: Melbourne - tanked
2008: Melbourne - legitimately shit
2007: Richmond - tanked
2006: Carlton - were shit thanks to already cheating on the cap, tanked in 07 though.
2005: Carlton - See above

At least 5 cases of tanking, and three compromised drafts. Oh yeah Collingwood tanked 05 too, so make that 6.

Are these the signs of a competition that is run well? As long as by 'well' you mean 'fair, equitable and the best team wins' then I can't see how anyone could say AD has done a good job.

Factor in various issues with sexual assaults, violence, salary cap cheating, gambling, alcohol abuse etc. and its clear the league has completely lost its mora fibre under AD.

Has a great bank balance though, and I guess that's all that counts now right?

Hey, I'm a lawyer

 

[Forward Press]

Are these the signs of a competition that is run well? As long as by 'well' you mean 'fair, equitable and the best team wins' then I can't see how anyone could say AD has done a good job.

Factor in various issues with sexual assaults, violence, salary cap cheating, gambling, alcohol abuse etc. and its clear the league has completely lost its moral fibre under AD.

Has a great bank balance though, and I guess that's all that counts now right?

Leaving aside that giant rant about legitimate premierships and tanking (bottled anger much?), a great bank balance counts for a lot. Because, you know, he's the administrator?

I fail to see how you can make Demetriou responsible for a player committing sexual assault or getting on the booze either. Are the clubs also not responsible for fostering a positive culture? Or, perhaps, the individuals themselves are responsible for getting shitfaced on weekends? Those issues are more social issues that are not confined to the AFL.

 

[LouisCK]

Leaving aside that giant rant about legitimate premierships and tanking (bottled anger much?), a great bank balance counts for a lot. Because, you know, he's the administrator?

I fail to see how you can make Demetriou responsible for a player committing sexual assault or getting on the booze either. Are the clubs also not responsible for fostering a positive culture? Or, perhaps, the individuals themselves are responsible for getting shitfaced on weekends? Those issues are more social issues that are not confined to the AFL.

Anger? It's apathy towards a sport I used to like a lot more. And no, you can't leave it aside as it was the basis of my whole point.

 

[Forward Press]

Anger? It's apathy towards a sport I used to like a lot more. And no, you can't leave it aside as it was the basis of my whole point.

It's because the same exercise can be done for most premierships in the past too, before Demetriou started in the AFL. Utterly pointless and it again makes him unfairly responsible for a side deciding to cheat the salary cap, for example. Why aren't those clubs being blamed for having their captain doing a runner from the booze bus?

If you're saying 'well the AFL has too much controversy nowadays' - consider the rise of social media, instantaneous access to info and news reports on Andrew Walker's hat. I bet you think the crime rate has exponentially risen in recent times too.

If you also think that the AFL somehow has responsibility for organised crime infiltrating the sport, then I really can't help you there.

 

[QS]

I still remember when Peter Matera and Chris Lewis walked up to the dais after our 1992 premiership clutching Emu Export tinnies.

Those days are long gone mate.

For better or for worse, FP?

 

[Forward Press]

For better or for worse, FP?

Better - players don't drink that shit anymore
Worse - players don't drink in public anymore

 

[Sharks On A Plane]

I notice they both kept solemnly returning to the phrase 'the world has changed', as if it somehow excuses the AFL for being asleep at the wheel.

Given that there have been drugs in sport for as long as I can remember, what exactly is it that has changed?

 

[blackcat]

I suspect if it was completely systematic, happening on a big scale at all clubs, and officially sanctioned by management, there'd be more whistleblowers than just Kyle Reimers. All 800-odd AFL players + hundreds of staff can't all be blackcat 's Type-A personalities that will do whatever it takes.

But there'd be plenty of players (or groups of players) who'd be right into this stuff of their own volition, for sure. Often working with a team sports scientist or two, I reckon.

footballers are not gonna sacrifice any advantage are they. (lost me long reply)

re: cycling as example. If the team uses the same supplier(s) outside the club for their IGF, if they go to the same cosmetic doc or anti aging youth and vitality clinic in brighton for the doctors wives, if they share their botox sources (sic, metaphor), if they get the advice from a club official, if they attempt to maintain this chinese walls for plausible deniability, is this a defacto institutional program I ask you. ???

1000 pro cyclists in europe, 100 in US, 10,000 soccer players, top 200 tennis.

how many whistle blowers? less than you can count on one hand. of those players. but google Andrew Ille and google Marcelo Rios. Why has Linda Pearce never siad anything about that. gatekeepes buddy, gatekeepers.

 

[Randomizor]

I notice they both kept solemnly returning to the phrase 'the world has changed', as if it somehow excuses the AFL for being asleep at the wheel.

Given that there have been drugs in sport for as long as I can remember, what exactly is it that has changed?

The world

 

[Chief]

He expressed concern about sports scientists a long time ago, when clubs started to spend big on them. I daresay if he pushed for action back then people would be roasting him for unfairly impinging on a club's right to spend money in their football department however they see fit.

It's damned if you do, damned if you don't.

However:

• Choice A yields criticism.
• Choice B yields criticism AND you have to deal with a major crisis.

He made choice B.

 

[blackcat]

I notice they both kept solemnly returning to the phrase 'the world has changed', as if it somehow excuses the AFL for being asleep at the wheel.

Given that there have been drugs in sport for as long as I can remember, what exactly is it that has changed?

dont wory, George Bush told us the world changed on 2001. Sep 11.

The World is still flat folx, keep calm, nothing to see here.

 

[Forward Press]

However:

• Choice A yields criticism.
• Choice B yields criticism AND you have to deal with a major crisis.

He made choice B.

Do you think Demetriou should've pushed for closer AFL examination and vetting of sports scientists (and perhaps capping football department spend), or something similar back then?

That was in hindsight the better way to go - but I don't think any of us back then would've expected the revelations from this ACC investigation, right?

 

[whiteoak]

He expressed concern about sports scientists a long time ago, when clubs started to spend big on them. I daresay if he pushed for action back then people would be roasting him for unfairly impinging on a club's right to spend money in their football department however they see fit.

It's damned if you do, damned if you don't.

Hindsight and all that...

The point is that he is now trumpetting tremendous changes and funding to the Integrity department, when, if he was SO concerned by the influence of sports scientists some time ago, he could have implemented changes to justify his opinion of them.

Anyway, moot point is moot.

 

[Forward Press]

Hindsight and all that...

The point is that he is now trumpetting tremendous changes and funding to the Integrity department, when, if he was SO concerned by the influence of sports scientists some time ago, he could have implemented changes to justify his opinion of them.

Anyway, moot point is moot.

Back then, perhaps the resistance from the clubs that were spending big on sports scientists (which, by extension, are the large well-resourced clubs) was too much to overcome?

But yeah, it's moot now.

 

[DerpWerls]

Couldn't care less about drug use in other sports. I assumed all along that many Australian sports used PED's just like the rest of the world (Athletics, Cycling, Swimming etc).

 

[Dundalis]

Hindsight and all that...

The point is that he is now trumpetting tremendous changes and funding to the Integrity department, when, if he was SO concerned by the influence of sports scientists some time ago, he could have implemented changes to justify his opinion of them.

Anyway, moot point is moot.

I wouldn't have thought you would inject significant funds into something like that unless you were certain it was in fact a major issue. In other words had some evidence, which has now been provided.

 

[se17enteen]

I hope Australian golfers are not involved.

 

[whiteoak]

I wouldn't have thought you would inject significant funds into something like that unless you were certain it was in fact a major issue. In other words had some evidence, which has now been provided.

Again, it's a hindsight argument.

But there was plenty of anecdotal evidence about and most certainly precedents of insidious behaviour/prosecutions of sports scientists internationally. Which is where, I would believe, he garnered his initial opinion on the subject.

 

[liam_13]

Factor in various issues with sexual assaults, violence, salary cap cheating, gambling, alcohol abuse etc. and its clear the league has completely lost its moral fibre under AD.

Under Demetriou:
1) racism is all but non-existent in AFL, and when it does raise its head the player or spectator or official is widely condemned and swiftly dealt with
2) there is a Dreamtime game that honours one of the most downtrodded minorities in Australia that is also a massive contributor to AFL
3) there is womens round (and that is not just PR - think of all the women on boards, as officials, at clubs - women have much more respect in the game these days)
4) minor gambling incidents have been dealt with harshly

I don't think the game's moral fibre is worse than the 70's, 80's and 90's.

And drugs have been in the AFL for years - Warwick Capper admitted he took stuff.

 

[incaciawin]

Just saw Goodesy on the news, Glass and Embley today too.

A few clubs pretty confident they're fine.

Only time will tell. At the moment it's only Essendon likely in the shit though.

Seem to recall a guy called Lance Armstrong thought all was fine for a long time too.......

 

[LouisCK]

There is good and bad on the moral/social issues, fair enough

The compromised nature of the competition (and the constantly changing rules) are a massive red mark though.

 

[blackcat]

However:

• Choice A yields criticism.
• Choice B yields criticism AND you have to deal with a major crisis.

He made choice B.

evo Hard_to_Beat

 

[blackcat]

Seem to recall a guy called Lance Armstrong thought all was fine for a long time too.......

bingo