Channel 7 - have your say

[Bloben]

Re: Channel 7 apology

Is it a matter of what stance each club has though? I thought it was ALL players (via the Players Assoc).

You are probably correct. Just think these are the clubs where players have publicly announced that they are following the advice of the AFLPA

 

[Bolt1493]

Re: Seven's ratings slump as it seeks peace with AFL

Making alcohol (which is clearly addictive for many) illegal wouldn't solve the problems associated with it - Ice is illegal but it still posses a big problem for many people. The flaw in your arguement about accepting the consequences of your actions is that in many cases it's other people who have to suffer the consequences of those actions (drug related robberies etc). Make no mistake, I know that alcohol is a huge problem - all I'm saying about that is that making it illegal wont make those problems go away.

Having said that, I can see why ice and speed is illegal and choose to neither use it or condone others that do.

I'm not asking you to incriminate yourself here but would your views on illicit drugs be driven by more personal reasons as opposed to what might be better for the wider community? I know that people can drugs pretty easily if they want them but would you prefer that your son or daughter could just go down to the local chemist and purchase a hit or two of smack? I wouldn't.

Still a muddled rationale. Alcohol & tobacco are the biggest killers & the most likely cause of illegal activity. But making them illegal will not solve the problem. But keeping ice & speed illegal does help the problem? Sorry you cannot have it both ways.

As for the personal shot - cannot be bother replying for me personally but I will say that the ABS figures are 33% of all adults in the age group of 14 - 49 have used an illicit drug. So there is a 33% chance you are right. As there is a 33% chance that you are an illegal drug user.

Now as to the last one. This is fairly obvious. Let us suppose my daughter (God forbid) is a drug addict. Do I want her to get legal heroin of known purity at a low fixed price and were she could receive help for her addiction or to go to a scummy dealer who deals heroin of unknown purity and cuts it with who the f**** knows at 10 times the legal price. Add to that the money goes up the chain to the Tony Mokbels of this world. Well I know which one I prefer - may it never happen - amen

 

[Waverley73]

Re: Channel 7 apology

You are probably correct. Just think these are the clubs where players have publicly announced that they are following the advice of the AFLPA

Fair enough - players from the other clubs probably just haven't been asked yet I suspect. I'm pretty sure I read somewhere that Tom Harley supports it so if we're counting put Geelong in there.

 

[The Majestic]

Re: Channel 7 apology

Is it a matter of what stance each club has though? I thought it was ALL players (via the Players Assoc).

It's the players yes, but the clubs have apparently supported the stance the players have taken.

 

[nobbyiscool]

Re: Channel 7 apology

well, i've read probably half of this thread...

i can't believe some of the things that have been mentioned in passing:

- that there is no public interest. utter crap! as if you don't all want to know who it is!

- that people's private medical records are private. so... we're all for keeping the secrets of illicit drug users, but when a club tries to deal with it publicly (west coast) we'll bag the player? that does not make sense- these 2 guys are in the same class of character as cousins.

- that players have a right to privacy. no, they don't- the highly paid players sell their right to privacy. they get paid well because they're the best players, and so we're more interested in them. shane warne used to think he had a right to privacy. so did paris hilton and kate moss.

- players should boycott channel seven. seven were reporting on what was a public interest story. it is absolutely the same thing as the throng of media who gathered in perth when the cousins story broke. i didn't see any media trying to claim a moral high ground there.


i want to make it clear- i don't like channel 7. i've hated dylan howard since i met him carrying on as though he was king of the world in a hobart night club years ago when he worked for southern cross television.

but what shocks me is the complete and utter hypocrisy of this whole situation. no one who said anything negative about cousins has ANY right to criticise channel 7 in this case.

 

[Phil McCreviss]

Re: Channel 7 apology

well, i've read probably half of this thread...

i can't believe some of the things that have been mentioned in passing:

- that there is no public interest. utter crap! as if you don't all want to know who it is!

- that people's private medical records are private. so... we're all for keeping the secrets of illicit drug users, but when a club tries to deal with it publicly (west coast) we'll bag the player? that does not make sense- these 2 guys are in the same class of character as cousins.

- that players have a right to privacy. no, they don't- the highly paid players sell their right to privacy. they get paid well because they're the best players, and so we're more interested in them. shane warne used to think he had a right to privacy. so did paris hilton and kate moss.

- players should boycott channel seven. seven were reporting on what was a public interest story. it is absolutely the same thing as the throng of media who gathered in perth when the cousins story broke. i didn't see any media trying to claim a moral high ground there.


i want to make it clear- i don't like channel 7. i've hated dylan howard since i met him carrying on as though he was king of the world in a hobart night club years ago when he worked for southern cross television.

but what shocks me is the complete and utter hypocrisy of this whole situation. no one who said anything negative about cousins has ANY right to criticise channel 7 in this case.

Another West Coast supporter bringing Cousin's in to this. There is one big difference mate - Cousin's personal medical records weren't stolen from a clinic so therefore the circumstances cannot be compared.

 

[EOP26]

Re: Channel 7 apology

curtains. shade. blinds. blindfold. dirty sunglasses.

see things in whatever shade you wish. be Arsene Wenger if you wish.

I'd be just as disgusted if players from my club were in the same situation. particuarly senior/hero/role models players.

And ftr, I don't talk any differently on here than I do at the pub, with friends, family, at the football or anywhere. I have a viewpoint. Like it or not. I really couldn't give a ****.

Unfortunately when it comes to this incident, for whatever reason I'm not sure I can take your viewpoint seriously.

Your parents show be your hero/role models...

 

[Waverley73]

Re: Seven's ratings slump as it seeks peace with AFL

Still a muddled rationale. Alcohol & tobacco are the biggest killers & the most likely cause of illegal activity. But making them illegal will not solve the problem. But keeping ice & speed illegal does help the problem? Sorry you cannot have it both ways.

As for the personal shot - cannot be bother replying for me personally but I will say that the ABS figures are 33% of all adults in the age group of 14 - 49 have used an illicit drug. So there is a 33% chance you are right. As there is a 33% chance that you are an illegal drug user.

Now as to the last one. This is fairly obvious. Let us suppose my daughter (God forbid) is a drug addict. Do I want her to get legal heroin of known purity at a low fixed price and were she could receive help for her addiction or to go to a scummy dealer who deals heroin of unknown purity and cuts it with who the f**** knows at 10 times the legal price. Add to that the money goes up the chain to the Tony Mokbels of this world. Well I know which one I prefer - may it never happen - amen

I'm pretty sure we don't disagree with each other as much as it might of first seemed. I too was aged between 14 and 49 once (still are in fact) and the stats are there for all to see. I wasn't having a shot at you and aren't nieve to the realities of what happens in the real world - just curious as to what your view on that was.

My point regarding the legality of heroin (or other illegal drugs) I believe it would be easier for sons / daughters to become addicted in the first place if you could get it at the local bottleshop along with your slab / vodka cruisers. I don't condone funding of organised crime scum like those you've named or the using of the drugs that help this funding. Your point about that you'd prefer if your daughter was a drug addict to get her supply from a safer (and legal) source as opposed from some ******** in an alleyway is quite valid (in that you are thinking about the welfare of your child) but it doesn't address my point that I believe if it was legal in the first place it would make being an addict easier. I guess I'm thinking of it from a more preventative aspect.

 

[vinnie]

Players shouldn't be taking it upon themselves to punish channel seven - leave it to the public who will turn off the station if ti matters.

Players shouldn't bite the hand that feeds them. If seven didn't lead the $780 million bid to prop up the league their club wouldn't have the extra millions each year.

 

[nobbyiscool]

Re: Channel 7 apology

Another West Coast supporter bringing Cousin's in to this. There is one big difference mate - Cousin's personal medical records weren't stolen from a clinic so therefore the circumstances cannot be compared.

mate, i can say with 100% honesty that this has nothing to do with me supporting west coast.

at the time when this story was jumped on, it was not known that the records were stole- so that is irrelevant.

the thing that makes me cry 'hypocrisy' is that west coast were proactive (well- kind of, they were 6 months late in being proactive)- yet they got caned for not doing enough to support their player, and cousins was accused of being a cheat with people suggesting he should've been forced to sit out a year- despite the fact that he has never tested positive. US, the PUBLIC were all over the story- and most of the (melbourne centric) media were critical of him.

yet, at the same time EVERYONE is quick to defend people who have tested positive twice, and everyone is doing everything they can to supress the names.

again- i'm not saying the names should be released. i am saying that the hypocrisy of so many people on here staggers me that they'll flame cousins whilst pretending to defend these 2 players.

it is a pathetic, cynical attempt at taking moral high ground- and other media agencies should not throw stones. hutchison went to LA. hun want these names unsupressed. hun and the age were part of the action to release the names of the 3 last year.

they are all responsible for this.

 

[doodlefeatures]

It was actually channel 9 who put up the $780mil bid, 7 had the right to match it and they did...pity they didn't have any money left over to emply decent commentators, some HD cameras and some effects mics

 

[Scotland]

Re: Channel 7 apology

Another West Coast supporter bringing Cousin's in to this. There is one big difference mate - Cousin's personal medical records weren't stolen from a clinic so therefore the circumstances cannot be compared.

Another Hawthorn fan ignoring the comments of West Coast fan and responding with 'yeah, but the circumstances are different'.

Ben Cousins visits a rehab clinic. Players 'x' and 'y' visit a rehab clinic. Sounds like 3 AFL players visiting a rehab clinic to me. Still don't see how Channel 7's unethical and potentially illegal behaviour changes these facts.

 

[DarthTed]

Re: Seven's ratings slump as it seeks peace with AFL

This is an example of very muddled thinking. So anything the government of the day says is wrong - is automatically wrong? There is no need for you to think about it and come to your own conclusion?

So alcohol kills and destroys many more lives than illegal drugs but it should not be illegal? But a less harmful substance - e.g. Ecstasy (you can go read the ABS studies on this if you do believe me - E is about a 1000 times less likely to cause death but that is only one interpretation of the stats) should be illegal and is wrong merely because the government says so. Get your own decision making process in place & perhaps then you discuss controversial items in a sane manner. You are an example of how we get ridiculous state power owing to the war on a word.

Do those stats take into account the difference in numbers using alcohol v ecstacy? Or just the raw numbers?

 

[doodlefeatures]

Re: Channel 7 apology

mate, i can say with 100% honesty that this has nothing to do with me supporting west coast.

at the time when this story was jumped on, it was not known that the records were stole- so that is irrelevant.

the thing that makes me cry 'hypocrisy' is that west coast were proactive (well- kind of, they were 6 months late in being proactive)- yet they got caned for not doing enough to support their player, and cousins was accused of being a cheat with people suggesting he should've been forced to sit out a year- despite the fact that he has never tested positive.

yet, at the same time EVERYONE is quick to defend people who have tested positive twice, and everyone is doing everything they can to supress the names.

again- i'm not saying the names should be released. i am saying that the hypocrisy of so many people on here staggers me that they'll flame cousins whilst pretending to defend these 2 players.

West Coast knew about what Cousins was up to, Worsfold even said so, the club in question this time around didn't know that their players had been to this clinic, and possibly still don't know officially as they're not allowed to ask them.

 

[Bolt1493]

Re: Seven's ratings slump as it seeks peace with AFL

My point regarding the legality of heroin (or other illegal drugs) I believe it would be easier for sons / daughters to become addicted in the first place if you could get it at the local bottleshop along with your slab / vodka cruisers. I don't condone funding of organised crime scum like those you've named or the using of the drugs that help this funding. Your point about that you'd prefer if your daughter was a drug addict to get her supply from a safer (and legal) source as opposed from some ******** in an alleyway is quite valid (in that you are thinking about the welfare of your child) but it doesn't address my point that I believe if it was legal in the first place it would make being an addict easier. I guess I'm thinking of it from a more preventative aspect.

But they are easy to get anyway so keeping them illegal does not prevent addiction. Also there is some argument that keeping it illegal and not running real education programs (the current stuff is a joke) means there are more users not less. Again you lump heroin & speed injectors with all other illicit drug users. Most illicit drugs are not physically addictive (although they can be physically damaging - as whiskey is to me, 2 shots and I am gaga, not good for an Irishman) and the current policies and moral outrage cause more harm than good.

Anyway back on point Your club probably has a player among the 30-40 tested positive. Even if not, you better believe there are probably 5-10 players on your list that have tried something at some stage. I have heard enough story and seen some dodgy actions of various players - not all true or even partially true. We have all done things that can be seen as morally incorrect. No-one can cast the first stone. Especially not me as I am an Eagles fan.

 

[Scotland]

Re: Channel 7 apology

West Coast knew about what Cousins was up to, Worsfold even said so, the club in question this time around didn't know that their players had been to this clinic, and possibly still don't know officially as they're not allowed to ask them.

West Coast had their suspicions what Cousins was up to. He has never tested positive to an AFL drugs test, and West Coast are not allowed to test him themselves.

Still, that wouldn't get in the way of a few 'they condone drug use', 'they stuck their heads in the sand', 'they didn't do enough for their player' cheap shots, now did it?

 

[Bolt1493]

Re: Seven's ratings slump as it seeks peace with AFL

Do those stats take into account the difference in numbers using alcohol v ecstacy? Or just the raw numbers?

I am actually understating the difference in deaths but didn't want to get into a long discussion about the statistical variations because it is not so straightforward. You would have to allow for frequency of usage, whether illicit drugs are linked with deaths caused by inappropriate use of prescription drugs or accidental perscription drug deaths. It is not easy and the figures are often buried in the official ABS numbers. you do have to dig for them and decide on the validity yourself. Everyone uses them to support there own arguments. The deaths directly attributable to E are very low - but there are car crashes were Alcohol and other substance have been used, etc.

 

[DarthTed]

Re: Channel 7 apology

well, i've read probably half of this thread...

i can't believe some of the things that have been mentioned in passing:

- that there is no public interest. utter crap! as if you don't all want to know who it is!

- that people's private medical records are private. so... we're all for keeping the secrets of illicit drug users, but when a club tries to deal with it publicly (west coast) we'll bag the player? that does not make sense- these 2 guys are in the same class of character as cousins.

- that players have a right to privacy. no, they don't- the highly paid players sell their right to privacy. they get paid well because they're the best players, and so we're more interested in them. shane warne used to think he had a right to privacy. so did paris hilton and kate moss.

- players should boycott channel seven. seven were reporting on what was a public interest story. it is absolutely the same thing as the throng of media who gathered in perth when the cousins story broke. i didn't see any media trying to claim a moral high ground there.


i want to make it clear- i don't like channel 7. i've hated dylan howard since i met him carrying on as though he was king of the world in a hobart night club years ago when he worked for southern cross television.

but what shocks me is the complete and utter hypocrisy of this whole situation. no one who said anything negative about cousins has ANY right to criticise channel 7 in this case.

The public being interested and whether it's in the public interest are two different things. Players have "sold" their right to privacy due to the money they make? What utter crap!

 

[estibador]

Re: Seven's ratings slump as it seeks peace with AFL

Substances deemed acceptable by the law and society in general would seem to indicate that you are wrong.

In different countries some recreational drugs are legal. Do they suddenly become morally acceptable like alcohol and tobacco? What's accepted by society is often more to do with what's legal or not than any informed rational analysis. And what's legal or not tends to be based more on historical usage than any rational analysis.

One of the great inconsistencies in the drugs morality debate is that tobacco is legal everywhere in the world. It's most addictive drug on the planet, it has no positive effects until you become addicted and require it to soothe your cravings, and it's one of the leading causes of cancer in the world. And when people are suddenly forced to go without it they can often find it difficult to function at their normal capacity.

It ticks nearly every box to qualify as one of these evil illegal drugs (and a rather pointless one too as far as effects go) yet it is legal and therefore morally acceptable, despite the fact that it probably kills as many people as all these other drugs (excluding alcohol) put together.

 

[DarthTed]

Re: Seven's ratings slump as it seeks peace with AFL

I am actually understating the difference in deaths but didn't want to get into a long discussion about the statistical variations because it is not so straightforward. You would have to allow for frequency of usage, whether illicit drugs are linked with deaths caused by inappropriate use of prescription drugs or accidental perscription drug deaths. It is not easy and the figures are often buried in the official ABS numbers. you do have to dig for them and decide on the validity yourself. Everyone uses them to support there own arguments. The deaths directly attributable to E are very low - but there are car crashes were Alcohol and other substance have been used, etc.

That's what I figured, numbers that can be massaged to support all arguments. At least on the surface. Bit too much effort to go into for this type of discussion!

 

[Leather Poisoning]

The players have SOLD their rights to privacy!!!!!!!!!!!

Because you and I like to watch them play a sport we also have the right to find out details of their medical records?????

How does that make sense!?

 

[Valve Bounce]

We seem to have gone a long way from Channel paying $3000 for confidential files stolen from a clinique and then making part of them public.

I understand that charges could be laid against Channel 7 for this. Now it has been my understanding that ignorance is not a defence when a person is caught with stolen property.

The more Channel 7 tries to defend themselves, the bigger the hole they seem to be digging themselves into.

We can hypothetically draw a parallel here to a situation where a high profile figure (say an MP) suffers from depression and goes to a doctor for treatment. The confidential files are then stolen and sold to a television station which then broadcasts this information because they think this person should not be in the position to be in charge of an important portfolio.

Does the end justify the means?

 

[Valve Bounce]

The players have SOLD their rights to privacy!!!!!!!!!!!

Because you and I like to watch them play a sport we also have the right to find out details of their medical records?????

How does that make sense!?

It doesn't - that's crazy talk.

 

[Leather Poisoning]

We seem to have gone a long way from Channel paying $3000 for confidential files stolen from a clinique and then making part of them public.

I understand that charges could be laid against Channel 7 for this. Now it has been my understanding that ignorance is not a defence when a person is caught with stolen property.

The more Channel 7 tries to defend themselves, the bigger the hole they seem to be digging themselves into.

We can hypothetically draw a parallel here to a situation where a high profile figure (say an MP) suffers from depression and goes to a doctor for treatment. The confidential files are then stolen and sold to a television station which then broadcasts this information because they think this person should not be in the position to be in charge of an important portfolio.

Does the end justify the means?

No. The hypothetical MP in question would unfortunately bring themselves undone through bad performance, IF the depression affects his work. Since there is only a correlation (not a proven link) between depression and work performance, there is a possibility an MP can suffer from depression (depending on how you classify it) and still perform well. Therefore, if the records were accessed and he was fired due to a misunderstanding of his abilities (and a prejudice of depressed people) that would be massively unfair.

 

[Choota]

Buying confidential medical records is a disgrace. The Channel 7 Report detailed not only allegations of drug use but actually made mention of the psychological factors that led said players to drug abuse. It is an unacceptable, disgusting act by the Seven Network and illegal in so many ways - invasion of privacy and purchasing stolen goods for starters.

Those records could have contained anything. Personal health is private and should always remain private. I simply can't believe that some people fail to see the seriousness of this offence. Stupidity, I guess.

As for the secondary issue, regarding drugs, it's a concern for the club involved. Drugs are a problem in society as a whole and the AFL is no different to this. Obviously said club would rather it's players not be involved with drugs. But divulging private medical records is a disgusting breach of ethics and the law by the Seven Network and they should be criminally punished for their crime.