News Willie Rioli: tampered with drug testing sample; tests positive for cannabis

[Rob]

one smokes a bit of pot, the other is a proven drug cheat

Crowley smokes pot?

 

[Numero Uno]

Crowley smokes pot?

PEDS = drug cheat = Crowley

ask your mum to explain

 

[Forward Press]

While it is a prohibited substance, yes.

Cannabis is being treated differently around the world nowadays compared to 'harder' drugs, though.

Since it's a prohibited substance on match day it wouldn't fall under the three strikes rule anyway, but just wondering what the wider view is on cannabis as a whole - I'm not naive enough to think Rioli was the only one in the squad that might enjoy smoking weed.

 

[Stevi_Tigers]

Don't care for the Freo fans gladly partaking in schadenfreude.

However, in the broader context, aside from the tampering with the sample - do those same fans want players suspended for cannabis use? Genuine question.

If you test positive on match day absolutely if smoking weed is more important to you then playing at the highest level go stack shelf’s in a factory and play local footy

 

[Randomizor]

PEDS = drug cheat = Crowley

ask your mum to explain

Pot = PED = drug cheat = Rioli

 

[Numero Uno]

Pot = PED = drug cheat = Rioli

got it...like most freo supporters you're a hypocrite

 

[imperial_oz]

The AFL has a three strikes policy when it comes to illicit substances, though. In other circumstances, Rioli may have a got a strike in private and we all move on, none the wiser.

Comparing the AFL to a regular workplace isn't always appropriate.

That's nonsense.

The three strikes policy only applies to out of competition testing. An in-competition test (matchday test in the case of the AFL) is an explicit violation of the code and attracts the penalties prescribed under the code that Rioli signed up for.

 

[Randomizor]

got it...like most freo supporters you're a hypocrite

Nope just following your logic. If you don’t like it then you’re the hypocrite mate.

 

[Ron The Bear]

Cannabis is being treated differently around the world nowadays compared to 'harder' drugs, though.

It's pretty harmless until the next Cy Walsh.

Apparently the cannabis positive won't come into it due to ASADA rules. He'll be sentenced for the more serious offence, which is the tampering.

 

[Forward Press]

That's nonsense.

The three strikes policy only applies to out of competition testing. An in-competition test (matchday test in the case of the AFL) is an explicit violation of the code and attracts the penalties prescribed under the code that Rioli signed up for.

I said 'in other circumstances' (ie not on matchday), and already acknowledged it does not apply here.

Sorry for the confusion.

There is a growing movement for the legalisation of marijuana, just wondering how this fits in.

And to clarify - I don't think Rioli should in any way cop leniency for this. Do the crime, do the time.

 

[Numero Uno]

Nope just following your logic. If you don’t like it then you’re the hypocrite mate.

but but but its only a painkiller = every freo fan = hypocrite

 

[Rusty Brookes]

Pot is a PED and the rules have changed hence 4 instead of 2 years. The rules that Willie would have known.

The research I read suggests the jury is very much out on whether mary jane is performance enhancing

Cannabis and the Health and Performance of the Elite Athlete - PMC

Cannabis (marijuana) is undergoing extensive regulatory review in many global jurisdictions for medical and nonmedical access. Cannabis has potential impact on the health of athletes as well as on performance in both training and in competition. The ...

www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov

However it is clear as day either way, that it is also banned in competition

What is Prohibited

www.wada-ama.org

In other words, he's stuffed. Probably nothing malicious in his action (my guess is he had a bong on the day before the game and panicked when he realised he could be done for having it in his system) but it was a deliberate attempt to try and pervert a drug test. Being caught with a banned substance on match day just makes it worse.

 

[Forward Press]

It's pretty harmless until the next Cy Walsh.

Apparently the cannabis positive won't come into it due to ASADA rules. He'll be sentenced for the more serious offence, which is the tampering.

Yeah I don't agree with full decriminalisation of marijuana but the reality is that it might be inevitable in many developed countries. It's a 'softer' drug but it's still harmful. Rioli rightly should cop a higher penalty for the tampering.

 

[Randomizor]

but but but its only a painkiller = every freo fan = hypocrite

You’re the one claiming there’s a difference between Crowley and Rioli. But following your logic there’s no difference. That’s hypocritical.

So either both are drug cheats or you consider it “just a bit of pot” or “just a painkiller”. Take your pick.

At any rate, this is a thread about Rioli’s violations and likely long punishment. Crowley has nothing to do with it.

 

[imperial_oz]

I said 'in other circumstances' (ie not on matchday), and already acknowledged it does not apply here.

Sorry for the confusion.

There is a growing movement for the legalisation of marijuana, just wondering how this fits in.

And to clarify - I don't think Rioli should in any way cop leniency for this. Do the crime, do the time.

Yep. Non-match day would be a strike and nobody would be told about it.

As for the legalisation of marijuana, I don't think that should even be a consideration here. Without going into the medical arguments over whether it's harmful or not, I would still be looking at treating it as a strike because of the implications of metabolites showing up on a game day test. THC metabolites can be detected for several months from memory and it would be incredibly unprofessional of any footballer to risk an entire 'lucrative' career for a quick bong.

I will also clarify, I am extremely opposed to the legalisation of marijuana

 

[Numero Uno]

You’re the one claiming there’s a difference between Crowley and Rioli. But following your logic there’s no difference. That’s hypocritical.

So either both are drug cheats or you consider it “just a bit of pot” or “just a painkiller”. Take your pick.

At any rate, this is a thread about Rioli’s violations and likely long punishment. Crowley has nothing to do with it.

most people without a biased agenda dont equate pot with PEDS

 

[Taylor]

most people without a biased agenda dont equate pot with PEDS

Neither do those for people taking an opiate.

 

[kingswood71]

Nope. They are two separate violations of the code and both must be decidedat the AFL Tribunal.

He will have to serve only one penalty and it will be the bigger penalty that applies

Edit: I re-read your post. Again, no. 10.6 should apply because the effect of a substitution or attempted substitution would undermine the effect of the anti-doping controls. He actually has been cited by ASADA for tampering, so definitely 10.6

edit 2: I just checked and yes, it's a prohibited method that applies. He's still looking at 4 years because he has no case for unintentional

Hahaha edit 3: I don't think 17.6(b) can apply as he didn't make any admissions prior to the notice of an adverse finding. Added to which, that isn't the evidence on which the adverse finding was issued but in fact was based on the report by one of the testers

ha ha Lots of edits
Sorry but I meant 17.6c...

 

[The Joker]

but but but its only a painkiller = every freo fan = hypocrite

One is an illegal drug the other is a banned substance!

Worlds apart!!!

 

[Numero Uno]

Neither do those for people taking an opiate.

thumbs up for outing yourself as a hypocrite then

 

[Numero Uno]

One is an illegal drug the other one is a banned substance!

Worlds apart!!!

lol Im sure that level of logic works on the freo board

 

[hoianbulldog]

......, uumm, why ASADA? These tests are user-pays, the AFL pays for them. ASADA just collect them according to protocol. The AFL signed up to WADA code. So, effectively it’s the AFL ridding the AFL of PEDS.

I doubt the afl would have input to who or when a player gets tested. This isnt standard and poor's we're talking about.

 

[The Joker]

lol Im sure that level of logic works on the freo board

What, fact?

Nah, them campaigners dribble almost as much shit as you!

 

[kingswood71]

but but but its only a painkiller = every freo fan = hypocrite

Salty and obsessed.
Jog on light weight.

 

[Forward Press]

Yep. Non-match day would be a strike and nobody would be told about it.

As for the legalisation of marijuana, I don't think that should even be a consideration here. Without going into the medical arguments over whether it's harmful or not, I would still be looking at treating it as a strike because of the implications of metabolites showing up on a game day test. THC metabolites can be detected for several months from memory and it would be incredibly unprofessional of any footballer to risk an entire 'lucrative' career for a quick bong.

I will also clarify, I am extremely opposed to the legalisation of marijuana

Michael Phelps has a famous photo of him smoking from a bong while he was in college and on the verge of a professional career iirc.

The reality is that marijuana has a growing acceptance (even if personally I don't) and I was wondering how the anti-doping authorities would respond to this. As someone mentioned earlier alcohol had already been taken off the list.