The Australian Football League (AFL) has a ‘three strikes’ policy on recreational drugs. If you get caught/tested 3 times, you will be named publicly and penalised. This policy was part of an illicit drugs code of conduct agreed to by players, and it was voluntary agreed to by the Players Association.
Last week, the Australian Television Network 7 aired a controversial story alleging that there are recreational drug-users in the Australian Football League. Network 7 supported this story by using medical records they ‘bought’ off a mystery woman who claims she found them lying in the gutter outside a rehabilitation clinic. These documents asserted that two players from one particular club were up to 2 strikes on the 3 strike policy. The names of the players/club aren’t released at the moment due to an Victorian High Court injunction on the story.
To make it interesting, Network 7 currently hold the rights to televise AFL games in Australia.
How far is too far?
The reaction to this has been fairly uniform: anger and indignation towards Network 7 from a multitude of different walks of life…
- Naturally, the AFL has condemned the Network. AFL Chief Executive Andrew Demetriou has slammed Seven, stating that it was ‘obscene’ that the Network purchased the documents.
- Victorian Health Services Commissioner Beth Wilson has expressed outrage at 7, stating that there are at the very least severe ethical questions about purchasing documents which may have been stolen. She also asserted that everyone - regardless of fame - should be able to regard personal medical information as private.
- Victorian State police raided Seven’s Melbourne offices as part of an investigation into the possible theft of medical documents. They have seized a number of documents under warrant.
- The AFL Players Association are considering not attending post-match interviews hosted by 7, and a ban of the Brownlow Medal event (the AFL’s Best & Fairest award - the league’s equivalent to an MVP) which will be hosted by Network 7 in September. AFLPA chief executive Brendon Gale stated that membership (players) felt extreme outrage and disgust with the network, and wanted action taken against them.
- Eddie McGuire, Collingwood Football Club president & media mogul, stated
“I think it is a shocking thing to happen to people, not from a football point of view but just from a civil libertarian point of view, where their health documents have been paraded before the media.”
- In an interview with radio station Triple M, Collingwood captain Nathan Buckley warned that there could be a negative reaction from players: they might abandon the illicit drug code of conduct altogether. Buckley cited a concern of the breach in confidentiality as the main issue players have with both the AFL & those involved in testing.
From my perspective way over here in Japan, Network 7 has overstepped what’s ethical. There are definitely times when the line between ‘newsworthy’ and ‘invasion of privacy’ gets blurred, but the Seven Network have simply gone too far in pursuit of headlines.
Welcome to trash journalism at it’s worst.
:: 
:: 
:: 
:: 
:: 
:: 
:: 
:: 
:: 
:: 
oh no! recreational drug users! OMG! no way….c’mon…there’s been recreational drug users since before mankind was mankind…..it is easy to determine the difference between recreational drugs and performance enhancing drugs even though for example tht U.S. NFL does not differentiate, the Canadians did a number of years ago when they returned a medal to a snowboarder that tested positive for THC, after originally taking it, then determining it was ok because THC is not performance enhancing, Duh people, it’s not that hard to determine the difference, good story….!
The plot continues to thicken and the AFL, it’s players and now channel 7 are tarnished once again.
The use of rec drugs is imo not a medical issue, it is a breaking of the law and should be dealt with as such. All players testing positive to ANY drug should be stood down from playing for some period.
With the way that the AFL has a 3 strikes policy makes it available for players to flaunt the system and have a good time … not once, not twice but 3 times before serious action is taken and that just isn’t good enough.
Channel 7 has no right to play a major hand in these matters but I hope that this incident forces the AFL’s hand into making better and firmer decisions with regard drugs within the AFL.
Good article Malice and gee this sport needs a lot of cleaning up while there is still some cred left.
Very pertinent points raised here. Channel 7 just seems to be sinking further and further into the quagmire of trashy journalism. Sure, drugs in sport is wrong, but who died and made them Grand High Inquisitor? It’s not right.
I have to agree with GT - it’s not a medical issue but a legal one. And if players are going to bring their club and the sport into disrepute by behaving illegally, then the League should deal with them.
But the media’s job in a democracy is to “keep the bastards honest” by reporting wrongdoers. So I don’t think Channel 7 has done much wrong.
GT… thanks for the vote of confidence, but don’t you think you’re ignoring a lot of the issue, other than “Gee… the players were taking drugs”. Ignore the legalities over how they obtained the records, the ethical violation, and the repercussions that might follow?
Not that I agree with them being able to take drugs, but at least the system in place works towards rehabilitation. It’s certainly better to have a system than not, and if the AFLPA walks away from it, then it’s set back 20 years.
Errr… Aurelius. So, if you have something I want, I can pay someone to steal it from you… and it’s ok?
You cannot make a statement like:
“it’s not a medical issue but a legal one”
then follow it up with:
“So I don’t think Channel 7 has done much wrong” - they paid someone for documents they knew may well be stolen.
It’s a lose-lose situation. The drugs policy as it stands is poor. Yes, it is better than none at all, but not much. Looking at it purely from a players’ health and wellbeing perspective, by the time a 3rd positive is discovered it is more than likely that a serious substance abuse problem has set in. After all, how unlucky would a player need to be if the only 3 times they have ever used drugs are the times they get tested within 48 hours of taking it? (most illicit drugs are undetectable from urine tests within 48-72 hours depending on metabolic rates etc) Especially given that we know on average a player will be tested for illicit substances only once a year. Sure, there are exceptions where certain players have been tested 3+ times a year, but that then means that 2 other players haven’t been tested at all, and so it goes..
Ch7 stooped very low to get the info, and will face the consequences whatever they may be, whether it’s boycotts of telecasts, legal action etc, but it is obvious this system isn’t working and has little support.
There is no perfect solution, but the way I see it a better policy needs to be found for the average persons’ faith to be restored. It is hard for a person earning $35k a year trying to feed 2 kids and pay a mortgage to understand the ‘need’ of a 20-ish year old earning 10 times that to take drugs to escape, or have fun, blow off steam, or whatever other reason is put up.
The bottom line is Ch7 went too far in it’s quest to chase the drugs story.
WithMalice, there’s a difference between paying someone to steal something and paying someone for information which *may* be stolen. And with a lot of “leaked” information that the media obtains, there are questions over its origins or the legality of how they obtain it. When a public servant leaks a story about government corruption, there may be laws broken, but very rarely does anyone question the “greater good” of exposing such stories. To beat the media for exposing a problem within the sport is just shooting the messenger.
When I said it’s a legal issue, I was saying that the issue of the players’ use of recreational drugs is a legal issue - in much the same way that any other illegal activity they participate in is a legal issue.
‘May’? Seriously you’re not that obtuse… are you?
You figure that 7 weren’t aware all the way?
This wasn’t a leaked document, this was a case of a ‘mystery woman’ selling documents that ’she’ claimed were ‘found in the gutter outside a rehabilitation center’… please.
Greater good? Where’s the greater good? What will probably eventuate is that the AFLPA will walk away from the agreement altogether - how’s that a ‘greater good’? The players will probably boycott all things Network 7 - including interviews post-game, and the Brownlow count - greater good? Shooting the messenger… err… they have broken laws (probably), and have sunken to new lows ethically (definitely).
I knew what you meant in regards to the ‘legal issue’… I was pointing out that it was more than a little ridiculous to point to one part as being a ‘legal issue’ whilst ignoring the legalities of the other part of it. You either look at it all, or ignore it all. But you can’t have both.
Thankyou for the clarification WithMalice in sorting out that the information was found rather than stolen. Which raises the question though of what law the journalists may have broken?
lol… now I know you’re being merely obtuse. Last refuge?