T. Tuck Over Dose - 12 weeks for 3rd Strike

Remove this Banner Ad

Re: T. Tuck overdoses - 3rd Strike Being Reported

Here I've got my dream job playing AFL football for a living, I've got the admiration and respect of thousands of supporters, I'll get opportunities for a privileged life with lots of freebies and access to the coolest places and people etc.etc.etc or I can do drugs.
It's an easy choice for most people.

There is no accounting for the stupid people of the world.

Well said. Of course, most people have to worry about personal accountability. League footballers these days don't.
 
Seems like alot of people are overlooking the issue of a young man with severe depression too stubborn to ask for some help or admit it to himself, self medicating with illicit drugs.

Its sadly quite commonplace in society.
 

Log in to remove this ad.

Seems like alot of people are overlooking the issue of a young man with severe depression too stubborn to ask for some help or admit it to himself, self medicating with illicit drugs.

Its sadly quite commonplace in society.

What it is, is sadly an "easy" out (depression) for people in society to use to explain why they are taking illicit drugs.

Matthew Newton is another example of late.

It's time to get tough with these people. They choose to make these choices and live the lifestyles they currently live. They must be bound to the consequences that come with these choices. It is piss weak that the AFL did not have the "balls" to BAN Tuck for a minimum of 2years, considering in just about every other code worldwide, if you are found guilty on a FIRST offence, you receive and automatic 24month ban. This bloke has had THREE chances!

Travis Tuck may be a wonderful young lad but the fact of the matter is, just like everyone else in society that has gone down this path before him, he needs to be dealt with accordingly and be punished. Examples must be made, otherwise the lesson is not being learned.
 
What it is, is sadly an "easy" out (depression) for people in society to use to explain why they are taking illicit drugs.

Matthew Newton is another example of late.

It's time to get tough with these people. They choose to make these choices and live the lifestyles they currently live. They must be bound to the consequences that come with these choices. It is piss weak that the AFL did not have the "balls" to BAN Tuck for a minimum of 2years, considering in just about every other code worldwide, if you are found guilty on a FIRST offence, you receive and automatic 24month ban. This bloke has had THREE chances!

Travis Tuck may be a wonderful young lad but the fact of the matter is, just like everyone else in society that has gone down this path before him, he needs to be dealt with accordingly and be punished. Examples must be made, otherwise the lesson is not being learned.

Actually, AFL is the only competition in the world where he would have received any suspension.
 
Actually, AFL is the only competition in the world where he would have received any suspension.

Really?

Then why did the AFL have to wait until he re-offended a THIRD time, after being caught by police to act?

I must really not understand these policies that are "best practices worldwide", when the evidence is clearly damning and suggests it is a farce.
 
Re: T. Tuck overdoses - 3rd Strike Being Reported

Firstly, taking drugs has nothing to do with depression..while there may be the odd person with depression taking drugs..it's generally a cop out excuse like having a rough upbringing.

People who knowingly take drugs despite knowing the inherent risks will get no sympathy from me.

And yes people who smoke all their lives and get Lung Cancer have only themselves to blame.

Ofcourse they have. You make bad decisions you reap bad consequences. It's their fault for making poor life choices. Just because they get cancer doesn't mean it's off-limits to criticize their actions.

...and that's not stupid?
Stupid, moronic,idiotic, loser, imbecilic, you pick or insert the correct adjective. They get no sympathy from me. Life is precious and to waste it for nothing when you are otherwise successful, it beggars belief. I had a mate who was really successful in the corporate world, got tangled up with smack (H),couldn't help himself lost it all, what a loser. I don't feel sorry for "losers by choice".
10 years ago like the quoted I was ignorant about depression, my view was that they should harden up and the thought of suicide just didn’t make sense. .

Now after suffering for 6 years and being treated for clinical depression I have some understanding.
Some facts- you don't chose depression, in my case it was genetic and started in my 30's like my father and grandfather before (who I recently found out suicided). Yes it can be triggered by drug use but not in my case. It’s interesting to note the mental problems that have occurred on the Ablett side of the family.

You can’t just muscle or HTFU out of it. It is caused by a chemical imbalance in your brain where the receptors for “happiness” shut down. You get to a point when the fun things in life no longer exist. It can be totally debilitating both mentally and physically.
In my case it slowly built over years, like the frog in the saucepan of cold water you don’t realise its happening.
You can end up not enjoying any of the things that once you loved, nothing makes you happy and you live in a world of profound sadness, I can only explain it as you feel like you would at a friends funeral but its 24x7. Your grumpy. I started drinking myself into oblivion when I went out with my mates just to get free or release the pain, you turn to drugs again just to numb yourself. You can’t sleep, your decision making process goes to shit, you take risks and death just doesn’t seem that bad an option. In the end you withdraw from life, family and friends. The OD on GHB by himself is a textbook example of the state you get into.

I was lucky, one day at the supermarket with the kids I just started was balling my eyes out over that fact that they didn’t have the bread I wanted. Yes the most trivial thing can get you down. There I was in the supermarket with my kids crying uncontrollably when a lady that worked in mental health helped me with the kids and offered to talk over coffee. That was the day I was saved. Within a month I was on medication the fog had lifted and my wife was lovingly embracing me as her husband that had been missing for 6 years.

Those who have dealt with this awful illness will understand, I suggest the quoted read up on it before they type such rubbish again.

 
because that's the policy. Jesus Christ are you thick?

After the first strike, the player is counselled and given rehab. That's the whole point

Exactly. The policy is rubbish. It is what is being argued.

It reeks of "cover-ups", rather than sending the tough message.

The AFL do not want to expose the drug culture that is incredibly rife in the code. This is why such a "policy" about 3 strikes/confidentiality exists.

How can people not see this?
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

Exactly. The policy is rubbish. It is what is being argued.

It reeks of "cover-ups", rather than sending the tough message.

The AFL do not want to expose the drug culture that is incredibly rife in the code. This is why such a "policy" about 3 strikes/confidentiality exists.

How can people not see this?
I don't understand how people aren't getting what's being disputed. Yeah sure that's the rules. But it's stupid and sending out the wrong MSG. Ps: lance uppercut u know about gbh first hand and it's effects don't u?
 
What it is, is sadly an "easy" out (depression) for people in society to use to explain why they are taking illicit drugs.

Wow! Like Wow! I am not sure if you are trying to down play the seriousness of depression or saying that you believe there is no depression and its just a sham to fool the public.

Lets assume you mean the latter. I highly doubt they would play that game and if it turned out to be the case, I for one would be hugely offended and let the league, club and anyone else involved know that feeling. In reality, I think the chances of it not being the case are about 1 billion to 1!

So lets look at the the other side. Man, what a comment! God I wish having depression was an "easy" out! Just something you could turn on when it suited you and turn off when you didn't need the excuse any more! Sadly, that is light years away from the truth about depression (and by depression, I mean Clinical Depression as it has been reported that Travis is suffering).

Clinical Depression is to my knowledge, mostly, a inbalance of chemicals in the brain. It means you don't look at the world in the same way that others do. It can stop suffers from feeling any join no matter how good or bad there life is! It can make it hard to have any motivation, impossible to get out of bed in the morning, not through lazyness, but to get up means another day of facing demons in your own head. Demons that have no logic being there.

Some may say to Depression suffers "Why don't you just be stronger and snap out of it?" To say that, is like saying to a Diabetic why don't you just get your body to start producing more insulin! Its not something they are in full control of.

With much support and care, you can control depression to a degree. Medication can help but is often difficult to find the right mix. Even with the fine work of many organisations (like Beyond Blue) and through people telling their stories (like Nathan Thompson) there is a better understanding of the disease in the community, but I still think that there is a perception of weakness and I could understand that Travis might of worried about that perception in a Footy club environment.

So onto the drugs side. Well this is something I have (thank god) little to no personal experience with. I support for someone with a mental illness but they haven't dabbled in illicit drugs as an escape from the darkness of depression. Definitely illicit drugs don't help the situation and should be discouraged but, especially if the person hadn't been diagnosed with depression at the point they found drugs or experimented, I could see the false escape that drugs give someone could be a relief for them. I am not saying this to legitimize drug use, but we have to understand how others feel/think in order to support them,understand them. So if Travis did find drugs as an escape, he might of continued to use, possibly heavily, as the escape was bliss above that which another, non-depressed person might feel, but still dangerous, perhaps more then a non-depressed person.

So the drug policy, from all reports, caught Travis and found and helped to treat his issue. Would this have worked if it was a first time named policy? I don't know but would doubt. From what I have heard, it seems his first two strikes came within the course of 6 months (I could be very wrong on this), but if that is the case, diagnosing of his issues would still of been taken place and so the chance of having already turned the issue around, I would imagine, would have been low. But it seems that after the second strike, he spent 10 months without using illicit drugs or at least, without getting caught.

Last week, it seems he received challenging news that he had been dropped from Box Hill Finals squad. You could see that this might have been devastating and that this could trigger the demons again even though he had been handling it. He used again, and it was with bad effect. That Bad effect isn't that he was caught but that he had medical issues.

So now it is out in the open, but he is 10 months better off then he was when he got his 2nd strike.

So to say depression is an "an "easy" out", I wish it was true. I wish it was true the moments that I have had, supporting my loved one when I was frighten that if I feel asleep through tiredness, I might not see them again! If you ever find that switch to turn it on and off at will, please let me know first of all!!!!!!!
Molly
PS. Sorry for the sermon/rant but this sort of comment hits very close to home and I don't mean as I am a Hawks supporter.
 
Exactly. The policy is rubbish. It is what is being argued.

It reeks of "cover-ups", rather than sending the tough message.

The AFL do not want to expose the drug culture that is incredibly rife in the code. This is why such a "policy" about 3 strikes/confidentiality exists.

How can people not see this?

a "tough message" isn't what this is about. Why should it be what it's about?

The AFL institued the policy to try and deal with an issue that exists in the wider community, to try and help people with issues.

How you could think it would help people by naming and shaming them, and banning them I have no idea.

In any case, you still seem to be missing the central point, that the AFLPA have to consent to the policy, and why would they want their members to be traumatised by being shamed or worse, kicked out of the comp?

I don't understand how people aren't getting what's being disputed. Yeah sure that's the rules. But it's stupid and sending out the wrong MSG. Ps: lance uppercut u know about gbh first hand and it's effects don't u?

"sending out a message" is the biggest load of shite going around. It's simplistic.

Re: GBH, what has that got to do with anything?
 
personally, i think the message sent out by banning him - "if you have mental health/drug dependancy problems fu, you're on your own" is a far more damaging one.
 
Re: T. Tuck overdoses - 3rd Strike Being Reported

10 years ago like the quoted I was ignorant about depression, my view was that they should harden up and the thought of suicide just didn’t make sense. .


Inspirational! I just hope some of the Depression septics can read this and maybe a few will see the light on this, or at least not be so quick to comment!
 
Exactly. The policy is rubbish. It is what is being argued.

It reeks of "cover-ups", rather than sending the tough message.

The AFL do not want to expose the drug culture that is incredibly rife in the code. This is why such a "policy" about 3 strikes/confidentiality exists.

How can people not see this?

Are you stupid?

The policy goes over an above the standard drugs policy and tests our players out of competition for 'illicit' drugs. No other sport in the world does this.

If they test positive 'in competition' (ie. within 12 hours of a match) they get the mandatory 2 year ban as per the WADA drugs policy. Had any of Tucks 3 strikes ocurred on match day, he would have got 2 years - just like any other player.

Seriously, go educate yourself in the other threads before dribbling rubbish.
 
Well lance u would know... U don't chase away the blues with a depressent. So anyone trying to justify his usage with "he's depressed and self medicating" is totally off the mark. Especially with juice. U would know how much ur heart rate drops when ur on juice. Anyone who takes juice also knows this. So, he was not self medicating. He was just a juice junkie (maybe just for a night) who blew out from taking too much. Sound about right?
 
a "tough message" isn't what this is about. Why should it be what it's about?

The AFL institued the policy to try and deal with an issue that exists in the wider community, to try and help people with issues.

How you could think it would help people by naming and shaming them, and banning them I have no idea.

In any case, you still seem to be missing the central point, that the AFLPA have to consent to the policy, and why would they want their members to be traumatised by being shamed or worse, kicked out of the comp?



"sending out a message" is the biggest load of shite going around. It's simplistic.

Re: GBH, what has that got to do with anything?

Damn right, it is supposed to be simplistic. Black or white. Not grey. If you offend or re-offend, you are out. You do the crime, you do the time.

After all, what is this all about if it isn't about sending a tough message to everyone who wants to use illicit drugs?

By all means, stand by players, offer them help/support and treatment but an example needs to be made of them first so others thinking about going down the same path, think again because the consequences should be severe.



MOLLYFUD, in response to your post, depression seems to be an "easy" out of late for many people worldwide, not just in sport (well and truly after they have been caught in the act multiple times or when the **** gets seriously out of control i.e. Matthew Newton). I'm not knocking the illness because it is clinically proven to exist but I have my doubts about it's "use". Young Travis may have depression, nobody knows as to whether or not he does or doesn't but it is too easy to just blame "depression" all of a sudden when this boy has re-offended THREE times without anyone knowing (apart from AFL doctors) and until he was caught by police publicly.
 
Damn right, it is supposed to be simplistic. Black or white. Not grey. If you offend or re-offend, you are out. You do the crime, you do the time.

After all, what is this all about if it isn't about sending a tough message to everyone who wants to use illicit drugs?

and therein lies your fundamental inability to understand what is going on here.

The AFL are not the Victoria Police.

The AFL drugs policy is about player welfare, not sending a tough message.

You just don't get it
 
Are you stupid?

The policy goes over an above the standard drugs policy and tests our players out of competition for 'illicit' drugs. No other sport in the world does this.

If they test positive 'in competition' (ie. within 12 hours of a match) they get the mandatory 2 year ban as per the WADA drugs policy. Had any of Tucks 3 strikes ocurred on match day, he would have got 2 years - just like any other player.

Seriously, go educate yourself in the other threads before dribbling rubbish.

Thommo, you are a good poster and I respect you but you cannot sit there and feed me this rubbish about the policy going "above and beyond the standard drugs policy" because no other sport in the world does this. Quite frankly, no other sport in the world offers THREE chances to repeat offenders, keeps their employers in the dark about it and damages the very brand that an organisation is trying to build.

What this policy is all about, is saying to players that it is ok if you choose to dope, offend and then re-offend because we will keep it all confidential, you will continue to be able to play football without your employers knowing you are on the verge of an implosion that is damaging for everyone and too late (see Ben Cousins) and the punishments will be minor unless you completely embarrass "us" (the AFL) in which we will then get you back.

I understand "thems the rules" but the policy needs a revamp.
 

Remove this Banner Ad

T. Tuck Over Dose - 12 weeks for 3rd Strike

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top