 |
|
|
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
think positive 
Side By Side
Joined: 30 Jun 2005
Location: somewhere
|
| Post subject: |  |
|
| neil wrote: | | Neil Appleby wrote: | | neil wrote: | | Neil Appleby wrote: |
What actually happened in Vegas is one of the reasons the new policy has been introduced. I'm with you to a degree though. If the players want to drink and take drugs during the off season, I can't see why the club should be interested. Player welfare should be the driving force here, but they are very young men and don't always know what's best for them. |
But we do |
1 Not what I said Neil, but do you think Keeffe and Thomas made wise decisions?
These guys, kids many of them, are not always big on the 'wise'. The problem with illicit drugs for footballers is exactly that there is no guarantee of product.
Players have decisions to make and it really isn't that difficult I don't think.2 For example, my club offers me a contract for two years worth say $200,000 a year and that contract has certain behaviour provisions built in. If I sign then I accept the rules. The club that offers me 3-4 times the salary of any other industry has high expectations.3 If I choose to break the rules and I get found out, then I suffer the consequences. |
1 Did Keefe and Thomas make wise decisions? No and they were caught
It was the off season and they were not at training
2 While companies can have these requirements the testing is done at the work site generally when you arrive. They do not have an entitlement to turn up at your place when you are on holidays/weekend/time off. Nor do you have to provide information about where you are .
3 As i posted earlier different drugs stay in the system longer and so it becomes safer, from a testing point of view, to use harder drugs that cannot be detected than smoke a joint. |
Why do they need drugs at all?
They have to be tested out of season, otherwise how many would be on the juice out of season, beefing it up for the main event?
They chose to risk their $200,000 a year contracts, and the lost. Stupid, just stupid. A few years of behaving and they set themselves up. How many young footy players earning that money, would be earning that money in another job? Along with the perks you have to accept the limitations. I really don't think saying no to illicit drugs is such a hardship.
Gees I reckon some of you guys would through ripper parties! Don't bother to invite me. I wouldn't chuck my life away on a quick thrill.
_________________
You cant fix stupid, turns out you cant quarantine it either! |
|
|
|
 |
stui magpie 
Prepare for the worst, hope for the best.
Joined: 03 May 2005
Location: In flagrante delicto
|
|
|
|
|
Dangles
Balmey Army
Joined: 14 May 2015
|
| Post subject: | |
|
| think positive wrote: | | neil wrote: | | Neil Appleby wrote: | | neil wrote: | | Neil Appleby wrote: |
What actually happened in Vegas is one of the reasons the new policy has been introduced. I'm with you to a degree though. If the players want to drink and take drugs during the off season, I can't see why the club should be interested. Player welfare should be the driving force here, but they are very young men and don't always know what's best for them. |
But we do |
1 Not what I said Neil, but do you think Keeffe and Thomas made wise decisions?
These guys, kids many of them, are not always big on the 'wise'. The problem with illicit drugs for footballers is exactly that there is no guarantee of product.
Players have decisions to make and it really isn't that difficult I don't think.2 For example, my club offers me a contract for two years worth say $200,000 a year and that contract has certain behaviour provisions built in. If I sign then I accept the rules. The club that offers me 3-4 times the salary of any other industry has high expectations.3 If I choose to break the rules and I get found out, then I suffer the consequences. |
1 Did Keefe and Thomas make wise decisions? No and they were caught
It was the off season and they were not at training
2 While companies can have these requirements the testing is done at the work site generally when you arrive. They do not have an entitlement to turn up at your place when you are on holidays/weekend/time off. Nor do you have to provide information about where you are .
3 As i posted earlier different drugs stay in the system longer and so it becomes safer, from a testing point of view, to use harder drugs that cannot be detected than smoke a joint. |
Why do they need drugs at all?
They have to be tested out of season, otherwise how many would be on the juice out of season, beefing it up for the main event?
They chose to risk their $200,000 a year contracts, and the lost. Stupid, just stupid. A few years of behaving and they set themselves up. How many young footy players earning that money, would be earning that money in another job? Along with the perks you have to accept the limitations. I really don't think saying no to illicit drugs is such a hardship.
Gees I reckon some of you guys would through ripper parties! Don't bother to invite me. I wouldn't chuck my life away on a quick thrill. |
The majority of people who have tried drugs haven't chucked their life away. It's just that the media like to focus on the minority who have. If you listen to the media's reporting of ice you'd think that "everyone" who tries it ends up destroying their lives but it's simply not the case. Look at the AFL for example, over one hundred players have tested positive for illicit drug use. How many of them have ended up like Ben Cousins? |
|
|
|
|
neil 
Joined: 08 Sep 2005
Location: Queensland
|
| Post subject: | |
|
| think positive wrote: |
Gees I reckon some of you guys would through ripper parties! Don't bother to invite me. I wouldn't chuck my life away on a quick thrill. |
I dont do drugs
However drug addiction is a medical problem rather than a criminal problem
My criticism is that it is safer to use harder drugs than soft drugs
_________________
Carlscum 120 years being cheating scum |
|
|
|
|
Neil Appleby 
Joined: 11 Feb 1998
Location: Melbourne
|
| Post subject: | |
|
| neil wrote: | | Neil Appleby wrote: | | neil wrote: | | Neil Appleby wrote: |
What actually happened in Vegas is one of the reasons the new policy has been introduced. I'm with you to a degree though. If the players want to drink and take drugs during the off season, I can't see why the club should be interested. Player welfare should be the driving force here, but they are very young men and don't always know what's best for them. |
But we do |
1 Not what I said Neil, but do you think Keeffe and Thomas made wise decisions?
These guys, kids many of them, are not always big on the 'wise'. The problem with illicit drugs for footballers is exactly that there is no guarantee of product.
Players have decisions to make and it really isn't that difficult I don't think.2 For example, my club offers me a contract for two years worth say $200,000 a year and that contract has certain behaviour provisions built in. If I sign then I accept the rules. The club that offers me 3-4 times the salary of any other industry has high expectations.3 If I choose to break the rules and I get found out, then I suffer the consequences. |
1 Did Keefe and Thomas make wise decisions? No and they were caught
It was the off season and they were not at training
2 While companies can have these requirements the testing is done at the work site generally when you arrive. They do not have an entitlement to turn up at your place when you are on holidays/weekend/time off. Nor do you have to provide information about where you are .
3 As i posted earlier different drugs stay in the system longer and so it becomes safer, from a testing point of view, to use harder drugs that cannot be detected than smoke a joint. |
Perhaps it wasn't clear about what I meant by 'off season'. I meant the holiday period; that period where the players are on holiday from the club. That time, whatever you wish to call it, is private time. Players should be free to do as they please within the law, or if it's not within the law, tread carefully.
I'm really torn on this issue though. I'm inclined to think that if you choose to play AFL, a job you love, a job for which you are paid handsomely, a job where you are feted and admired, a job you have dreamt of all your life, then you abide by your club's wishes. Take illicit drugs and you risk your career and it's a very real risk, just ask Lachie Keeffe. During your annual leave is about the only time it should even be considered by any smart young player.
_________________
After the epic draw comes the decisive knockout!
Collingwood rules the world again and Mick Malthouse fulfils his destiny with the twenty ten premiership and can you hear the people sing! |
|
|
|
|
AN_Inkling
Joined: 06 Oct 2007
|
| Post subject: | |
|
^^Or any smart, older well respected player like Luke Hodge? Not illicit drugs, but there are those who would say that alcohol has a greater negative impact on performance. Drinking eight days before a final? Puts it into perspective a bit, players are not robots and will sometimes do things which they and the club wish they hadn't.
_________________
Well done boys! |
|
|
|
|
think positive
Side By Side
Joined: 30 Jun 2005
Location: somewhere
|
| Post subject: | |
|
| neil wrote: | | think positive wrote: |
Gees I reckon some of you guys would through ripper parties! Don't bother to invite me. I wouldn't chuck my life away on a quick thrill. |
I dont do drugs
However drug addiction is a medical problem rather than a criminal problem
My criticism is that it is safer to use harder drugs than soft drugs |
Illicit. You know what the word means yeah?
Drugs become a medical problem when it gets to the addiction stage, before that, it's a criminal problem.
Seriously, god help us all, with the next generation growing up in a world of "it's not my fault".
Well who's $£$%^%%$ fault is it then?
_________________
You cant fix stupid, turns out you cant quarantine it either! |
|
|
|
|
think positive
Side By Side
Joined: 30 Jun 2005
Location: somewhere
|
| Post subject: | |
|
| AN_Inkling wrote: | | ^^Or any smart, older well respected player like Luke Hodge? Not illicit drugs, but there are those who would say that alcohol has a greater negative impact on performance. Drinking eight days before a final? Puts it into perspective a bit, players are not robots and will sometimes do things which they and the club wish they hadn't. |
He's 31, past the he's a kid excuse. .068 is not just a little over. It's a lot over. Captain of the club, suspended already cos he's a $£$%^%%$ tool, a week before finals, in the same month one of his coaches sons was killed in an alcohol and other drug related crash.
No excuses.
_________________
You cant fix stupid, turns out you cant quarantine it either! |
|
|
|
|
neil
Joined: 08 Sep 2005
Location: Queensland
|
| Post subject: | |
|
The problem is skinfolds drink alcohol even without going all Luke Hodge you put on weight (fat) try something illicit and keep the correct skinfolds.
Whatever skinfolds actually are, beer is important.
As long as you dont go all Luke Hodge
Not sure which is worse from the clubs perspective coming back for preseason all skinfold correct from Colombian nose powder or fail skinfolds from spending a beer soaked car free holiday
_________________
Carlscum 120 years being cheating scum |
|
|
|
|
AN_Inkling
Joined: 06 Oct 2007
|
| Post subject: | |
|
| neil wrote: | The problem is skinfolds drink alcohol even without going all Luke Hodge you put on weight (fat) try something illicit and keep the correct skinfolds.
Whatever skinfolds actually are, beer is important.
As long as you dont go all Luke Hodge
Not sure which is worse from the clubs perspective coming back for preseason all skinfold correct from Colombian nose powder or fail skinfolds from spending a beer soaked car free holiday |
This is what I was talking about. It's accepted that alcohol will almost certainly have a greater impact on performance, and yet one of the most respected players n the game is drinking 8 days before a final. I was leaving the DUI completely out of it. Illicit drugs which likely have minimal, if any, impact on a player's performance and preparation on the other hand are treated quite differently.
Holding people up to unrealistic standards never works, we need to understand that sometimes players won't prepare themselves perfectly. Maybe that's having a drink when they shouldn't have or eating the wrong kind of food one week. It's disappointing but not the end of the world. From a footballing perspective illicit drugs are no worse and are probably better. There is nothing to support random testing of players outside of match day other than the game's brand. Players are and should be responsible for their own health and safety when away from the club, attempting to regulate their every waking moment will just lead to bigger problems.
_________________
Well done boys! |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
You cannot attach files in this forum
You can download files in this forum
|
|
The Rules
FAQ
Usergroups
Calendar
Search
Log in
Register
