TOPIC:

Dirty Weekender wrote: So mid week and out of season recreational drug use ASADA inform and hand over to AFL to deal with until 3 strikes are confirmed but game day infraction is immediately under ASADA's jurisdiction.

Now that is clear I can only wonder what circumstances would arise if a player is caught in possession of recreational drugs and or illicits for that matter on game day even if they aren't in his blood work. Do they then inform the police? Legitimate question when considering where the boundaries of responsibility for the guardians of our game end. Would they be compelled to call police on game days but hand over to the AFL on any other day of the year?

Maybe they should have been checking Benny's bags, pockets and wallet instead of blood/urine a decade ago. Would hate to think what may happen if a satchet bag containing recreational drugs was accidentally dropped from say a wallet in the change rooms by a naughty player or club employee only to be found by one of those sent to randomly test players. Would common sense apply or would the whole team playing that day, coaching staff and medical staff inclusive, cop an infraction if nobody fessed up. Ignorance is no excuse apparently.

I think that is a hypothetical question most employers could think about.

Not sure if you know but a criminal possesion conviction for any recreational drug is one strike. Cant think of the Hawthorn player a few years ago but Im sure he got his third strike from a possession conviction and got a ban from ASADA.

anchorman wrote: And it being on bigfooty makes it valid!!!!!Is that a Victorian site Unka?
Again all just speculation. Lets wait and find out if it is true as we should have on the issue at hand now.

Nahh bigfooty is a site FOR ALL footyfans irerespective of which state a/man. No it doesnt make it valid at all!!, just amsuing to a degree

www.bigfooty.com/forum/categories/afl-teams.3/

Barney wrote:

Dirty Weekender wrote: So mid week and out of season recreational drug use ASADA inform and hand over to AFL to deal with until 3 strikes are confirmed but game day infraction is immediately under ASADA's jurisdiction.

Now that is clear I can only wonder what circumstances would arise if a player is caught in possession of recreational drugs and or illicits for that matter on game day even if they aren't in his blood work. Do they then inform the police? Legitimate question when considering where the boundaries of responsibility for the guardians of our game end. Would they be compelled to call police on game days but hand over to the AFL on any other day of the year?

Maybe they should have been checking Benny's bags, pockets and wallet instead of blood/urine a decade ago. Would hate to think what may happen if a satchet bag containing recreational drugs was accidentally dropped from say a wallet in the change rooms by a naughty player or club employee only to be found by one of those sent to randomly test players. Would common sense apply or would the whole team playing that day, coaching staff and medical staff inclusive, cop an infraction if nobody fessed up. Ignorance is no excuse apparently.

I think that is a hypothetical question most employers could think about.

Not sure if you know but a criminal possesion conviction for any recreational drug is one strike. Cant think of the Hawthorn player a few years ago but Im sure he got his third strike from a possession conviction and got a ban from ASADA.

I think that was Travis Tuck

anchorman wrote: So what's the big deal about RUMOURS on BF!!!Why are they funny.
I haven't been to BF for about two years so I don't bother about it. Prefer to stay here.

No big deal at all, just sayin the "rumor" on here was right, maybe the rumors on BF are right too a/man. Just stirrin the pot ( opps pun unintended)

anchorman wrote: We all understand that he took a pain killer and it was not a recreational drug don't we!

Very clear on that Anchor....little off topic yet relevant discussion with Barney....it gets interesting when you compare penalties for testing positive to a banned substance within a painkiller to a recreational drug then compare the penalties dependent on whether it was a game day or not. Seems extremely wrong to me that we punish & treat players who may have inadvertently taken the wrong tablet to relieve a head or stomach ache for example, the same as a player who deliberately takes a banned substance to gain advantage. In Crowley's case he has been around the system long enough to know better and to go through the club doctor but if reports are true that all he has done is take a pain killer with the intention of relieving pain it seems mighty harsh that he'll get 2 years and its career over. As I said in an earlier post how is that any different to 17 cortisone injections in a single week. I wonder why some pain killers and not others allow the body to do things they would normally do naturally with this pain relief medication yet the banned ones having exactly the same effect are considered to make one superhuman. If I didn't know any better I'd be suggesting some decisions by WADA regarding patented drugs on the banned list are totally reliant on how much "assistance" they receive from powerful interested pharmaceutical lobbyists but until Wikileaks comes to the party I guess I'll have to give them the benefit of the doubt.

For what it's worth Anchor I hope Crowley has just been extremely foolish in taking a pain killer to relieve an ailment and there was no sinister intention in this action. It sucks that you can lose your job and reputation for taking a pain killer to relieve pain created by the hostile environment players are expected to work within. My thoughts go out to him, his family and close ones this being the case as even though it is the rules it seems grossly unfair when compared to other industries.

I'm a freo supporter and I have always liked Crowley.

But one doesn't take a medication without club doctors sanction.

Dumb.

Should have retired - all that will happen now is that this issue will become his remembrance and a big distraction to the club - not to mention the lost opportunity to recruit another player.

He has let us down

So is it just accepted he took a painkiller because that is what he said he did? Or is it concrete 100% proof he took this painkiller. Is the painkiller in question just a convenient answer under the circumstances, like an international cricketer who uses his own mother as the alleged source of an illegal dhioretic, or a footballer caught with cocaine only to say he was holding it for a freind. It seems a common theme that when sport stars are pinged, there is an immediate answer to the allegation ready and waiting in their back pockets.

In this day and age, and with the countless knowledge AFL players have about not taking a substance of any kind under any circumstance without checking first, how is it possible even a player with the most limited intellect, could possibly overlook this most basic of basic rules. Either way now, he has a real battle ahead and I feel we may not see him play AFL again. Just another bloody waste.

I guess we will have to wait until the hearing for the facts to come out Jardine. But like you I am struggling to comprehend how a 31 yo player who has seen what has happened to others wouldn't realise the consequences of actions like this. You could maybe understand a young kid making this mistake....

I feel for the bloke. Regardless of people's opinions or suspicions, having an AFL career is something most of us have only ever dreamed about. To potentially lose it like this, is just gut wrenching for him. But it is what it is. There isn't much negotiation if samples are confirmed. I still can't understand why he was allowed to play finals last year. Given he got done in round 17. Can anyone enlighten me ??

jardine wrote: I feel for the bloke. Regardless of people's opinions or suspicions, having an AFL career is something most of us have only ever dreamed about. To potentially lose it like this, is just gut wrenching for him. But it is what it is. There isn't much negotiation if samples are confirmed. I still can't understand why he was allowed to play finals last year. Given he got done in round 17. Can anyone enlighten me ??

This is from the AFL website

Crowley's positive sample was taken after Fremantle's round 17 clash against Greater Western Sydney on July 13.

According to a timeline released by the AFL, that sample wasn't tested until August 11. Crowley was notified of a positive 'A' sample result for a 'specified' substance on August 18.

His 'B' sample was tested on September 11 and he received a show-cause notice on September 18 - five days after Fremantle's last game of the 2014 season.

Under the AFL Anti-Doping Code, a player who tests positive to a specified substance may, if they choose, continue to play and train as normal until the result of an Anti-Doping Tribunal.

Crowley kept playing until the end of the season and accepted a provisional suspension, which started on September 25 last year.

The testing of Crowley's 'B' sample was the reason for the delay in issuing the infraction. Crowley himself wasn't formally notified he had tested positive until September, after the Dockers' season had ended at the hands of Port Adelaide.