Today Tonight takes moral high ground

[zakus]

I have heard hardly anything about the AFL actaully doing something about the problem besides there stupid little '3' strikes your still not out policy.

So players in rehab is doing nothing.

 

[Fossie 32]

Will the players ban the police because they are investigating one for drug dealing?

I don't agree with 7 being party to revealing medical records - but the players were in the wrong in the first place....but the latter is less important 'by a factor of 50' according to spinster Demitriou on AW.

 

[Crosby87]

They had some good points. If one club has 7 players found taking drugs, it means its a huge issue. Yet everyone blocks there ears and starts taking shots at channel 7. I have heard hardly anything about the AFL actaully doing something about the problem besides there stupid little '3' strikes your still not out policy.

That's not the issue. The issue is the way Seven opted to go about it, and how they've handled it since.

The issue is that the information should never have been leaked. Sure, the underlying issue is that there are players using drugs, but you would have to be very, very naive to think that's not the case at just about every AFL club. The thing is, though, you need some proof to make a story out of it - and how they obtained that proof is the issue.

Bottom line is that the privacy of the players has been disrespected. The media think that because the game has grown to the extent that it has, that they have a right to do whatever is necessary to "break the big story". Just watch how they handled themselves at the Brendan Gale press conference. There's no respect there at all.

And they can say it all they want, but these are people who - for the most part - haven't pulled on a boot at the professional level, yet they somehow see fit to make themselves out to be bigger than the players and the game itself. And that's ridiculous.

In the end, these are people who are entitled to private lives. If they break the law off the field, they should be dealt with like the lot of us. But the liberty we have that they unfortunately don't is that we're not scrutinized as publicly for our wrongs as they are. And the sole reason that happens is because the media needs to sell their papers and get their ratings, and will do anything they can just about to get that big story.

Because for whatever reason, we need to know about it. It's amazing how on the one hand "it's just a game", and on the other it's playing with people's lives. But whatever. What's even more amazing is the reaction of people. A football player using drugs? No! People act as if they've just found out there's no Santa.

 

[Mancey]

Using the Wendell Sailor/Ben cousins comparison was the biggest joke.

Apparently Dell would have got 3 chances, for testing positive in competition for coke if he played in the AFL.

Once again TT...bzzzt.

 

[DarthTed]

are not club doctors constantly asked about player injuries by the media? doesn't peter larkin often report on players medical conditions?

Not even close to the same thing, injury news is released by the players and the clubs. Peter Larkins makes his assessments based on talking to clubs and also his own knowledge. Hardly the same as a drug issue.

 

[ashley12]

Today Tonight only exists, as cannon fodder for The Chasers!!

Cant wait for the chaser to show new episodes again. dedicate a whole episode to the afl and the drug incidents

 

[markr]

Will the players ban the police because they are investigating one for drug dealing?

They aren't. They got a tip, looked in to it and couldn't find anything to back it up and dropped the whole thing. Pesky "proof" and "evidence" getting in the way of a good story again.

 

[wozzie]

Mate most West Coast supporters are seething at the hypocrisy shown both by the AFL and the ALFPA.

If there are currently two players attending a rehab centre, why are they allowed to continue to play? The AFL insisted on having the final say on when Cousins could come back to play (even though it was the club who suspended him). I cant see how Cousins is suspended, yet two other players can continue to play while attending a rehab centre!!!

Where was the players association when Braun had his name aired on national TV as a drug cheat, by Channel 7 no less. He was named on the psychic abilities of another player with no evidence what so ever, let alone documented medical records.

Where was the players association when Chad Fletcher had his name bandied around based on rumour? Then the media cried out to view his private medical records to prove he was innocent of said rumours like they had a right to know what he did on his holiday FFS.

Everyone talks about the right to privacy with medical records, fair enough. Did anyone care that the tapes that Daniel Kerr was heard talking on were supposed to be sealed? They were recorded after getting special warrants, they are never supposed to be heard in a public forum. I gather the fact that someone in the police force leaked them is the reason that their public airing has never been investigated? Not much difference between this and the medical records where I'm standing, but its West Coast so its OK.

Hypocrisy indeed.

Couldn't agree more, I am not a West Coast supporter, but I am seething at the double standards that has been shown by the AFL and even the Players Association this year in particular. Privacy of a person undergoing treatment, yeh like following BC to America, yeh like shoving a microphone in his face anytime he walked out, yeh like criticising the way he was dressed for crying out loud. Booing him everytime he gets the ball. Yet these other people still have the full protection of "our drugs policy". Daniel Kerr's?? How did those tapes become public? What investigation there?
DOUBLE STANDARDS ALIVE AND WELL IN AFL.

 

[eros]

Yes...the players are outraged ( and upto a point fair enough), but those that are concerned for their fellow players welfare should be more concerned at the numbers actually delving into drugs and being allowed to get away with it so often.

They are - that is why they agree that players should be tested for illicit drugs out of competition. So that if they test positive, they can be given advice and/or a rude shock that might lead them to take action and alter their behaviour. Action that, apparently, the players at the centre of this controversy were taking. Who knows - perhaps if that action wasn't taken then they might end up with a really big problem, like a certain high profile footballer from the west who never tested positive and so was never given the early scare/advice. Maybe if he was on his second strike at the beginning of 2006, things would not have escalated to the point they did in early 2007.

Whether we agree with the policy of not, that is the logic behind it, from the player's point of view. Early warnings to, hopefully, prevent more serious problems later on.

 

[countryeagle]

I'm confused, I know it was channel 7 that paid for the records but to my knowledge it was actually channel 10 that broke the story first!! How did they get hold of the story? Are the players going to boycott them as well

 

[Embers]

I'm confused, I know it was channel 7 that paid for the records but to my knowledge it was actually channel 10 that broke the story first!! How did they get hold of the story? Are the players going to boycott them as well

Someone from Channel 7 told Channel 10 knowing a injunction was soon to come. Its better Channel 10 speaks about it then no one at all in the end

 

[Fossie 32]

Will the players ban the police because they are investigating one for drug dealing?

I don't agree with 7 being party to revealing medical records - but the players were in the wrong in the first place....but the latter is less important 'by a factor of 50' according to spinster Demitriou on AW.

Apparently this is not right but the Hun ran an article about it yesterday when the issue was a month old and not being investigated.