Leo snubs the media

[hammo]

Leo Barry is a member of union called the AFL Players Association (AFLPA). For better or for worse, that union has directed players not to talk to Seven Network Broadcasters. He is not say, on a John Howard directed WorkChoice Agreement, that permits him to follow his and his employers' merry lead, regardless of what may be in the ultimate best interests of all of the AFL players.

If Leo Barry had have spoken to Network 7 he would have been a scab,and he would have undermined the whole basis for the AFLPA's existence, and the services it has for many years provided to its members.

What a load of crap. Leo could have answered whatever questions he wanted - regardless of who his union or employer is. He chose to join the ban just as others I'm sure are still answering questions.

The AFLPA is not the BLF - players who "break solidarity" are not scabs. How ridiculous.

[Legs Akimbo]

No it doesn't.

Why and Who would it be a serious issue for?...because ATM with Joey Johns coming out - it appears to be rampant. It seems that most can just keep it under a hat.

I would hazard a guess that you think drugs are pretty harmless substances. Well, Bloody Hell, I believe some are and some are not. For example, ice is a terrible, destructive blight upon society and I've had some friends lose their way badly on speed and LSD.

But this discussion is not about the relative merits or demerits of various drugs. If it were found that say, 70% of AFL players were users of recreational drugs, then it follows:

1. These substances are illegal, so therefore players would be breaking the law. Already one player has bein investigated for dealing;
2. It would most likely by symptomatic of a broader societal issue in that age group. AFL players are a sample of high income earners aged 18 to 35;
3. Again, like it or not, footy is an important part of our community and players are under the glare of the media (I avoid the use of the term 'role model'). Whilst the Government is spending millions of our dollars trying to educate the community about drug use, the very loud message coming from the game of AFL would be 'it's okay to do drugs.'

So that's my view, perhaps you can be more informative and set the debate by indicating why this is a non-issue as you appear to be suggesting it is.

P.S. - It is a serious issue for me, as a parent of four. I did smoke a lot of drugs at uni and I believe my kids have to make their own choices in life, but would it bother me that my kids receive positive reinforcement about drug taking because their hero is a guy who smoke's crack or snorts cocaine and says it's okay? Yes it would. I admire the AFLPA and AFL for their drug code, but to make turn it from 'good idea, flawed execution' to 'good idea, great execution' they need only change the three strikes to two strikes. That would make all the difference.

[Bloody Hell]

Fair call, allow me to rephrase

"Rampant drug use in the AFL WOULD be a serious issue..."

Why?

Res Ipsa Loquitor

No it doesn't.

Why and Who would it be a serious issue for?...because ATM with Joey Johns coming out - it appears to be rampant. It seems that most can just keep it under a hat.

[general mac]

Leo Barry is a member of union called the AFL Players Association (AFLPA). For better or for worse, that union has directed players not to talk to Seven Network Broadcasters. He is not say, on a John Howard directed WorkChoice Agreement, that permits him to follow his and his employers' merry lead, regardless of what may be in the ultimate best interests of all of the AFL players.

The whole basis of union existence is derived upon one simply word: "solidarity". It is a concept that hasn't served workers in western democracies too badly in the past 150 years or so. It also has plently of relevance in relation to sportsman based unions such as the AFLPA. One may not agree with ALL the decisions made by the AFLPA in the past few years; the three strike drug policy being a notable example. However, I can assure you that the AFLPA has been very helpful to AFL player in relation to the provision of services around Australia for many years.

If Leo Barry had have spoken to Network 7 he would have been a scab,and he would have undermined the whole basis for the AFLPA's existence, and the services it has for many years provided to its members.

What he said.

Especially this part :

"It is a concept that hasn't served workers in western democracies too badly in the past 150 years or so."

[top40]

Embarrasingly petulant display by Leo Barry. Shame.

There are plenty of legal ways to stop these sort of publications, and those have already been done, so there is no need for players to act like children now.

Leo Barry is a member of union called the AFL Players Association (AFLPA). For better or for worse, that union has directed players not to talk to Seven Network Broadcasters. He is not say, on a John Howard directed WorkChoice Agreement, that permits him to follow his and his employers' merry lead, regardless of what may be in the ultimate best interests of all of the AFL players.

The whole basis of union existence is derived upon one simply word: "solidarity". It is a concept that hasn't served workers in western democracies too badly in the past 150 years or so. It also has plently of relevance in relation to sportsman based unions such as the AFLPA. One may not agree with ALL the decisions made by the AFLPA in the past few years; the three strike drug policy being a notable example. However, I can assure you that the AFLPA has been very helpful to AFL player in relation to the provision of services around Australia for many years.

If Leo Barry had have spoken to Network 7 he would have been a scab,and he would have undermined the whole basis for the AFLPA's existence, and the services it has for many years provided to its members.

[reigning premier]

If a player was drug tested at a booze bus and was found to have used an illicit drug it would have been in the news instantly.

Cousins running from the booze bus was on the news before he got home.

Yeah, but he did go for a couple of cans afterward..... Needed a drink after all that running.

[Sanecow]

massive amount of straw man nonsense

Rent-a-crowd.

[Legs Akimbo]

Please explain.

Fair call, allow me to rephrase

"Rampant drug use in the AFL WOULD be a serious issue..."

Why?

Res Ipsa Loquitor

[general mac]

Uh, no. It's a fairly easy chain to follow that Australian tax dollars go to the AFL; AFL funds go to clubs; Club funds go to players. Public interest.



The Australian public is spending millions of dollars supporting AFL clubs. Not divulging that some of your club's players are on drugs is IMO "conduct that is misleading".

This is the problem with the new corporate paradigm and it's partially educated apologists.

Public money is being used to subsidize everything we already have, like football, Oil companies and defense companies, media companies ect ect

When it suits the small minded moral majority (EG: you),
and the mainstream media who cater to them, they squeal some premanufactured idiom such as: " Uh, no. It's a fairly easy chain to follow that Australian tax dollars go to the AFL; AFL funds go to clubs; Club funds go to players. Public interest"

Then they/you, call for all kinds of witch hunts in the name of "public interest".

But you are missing the point; by buying into the hysteria you have forgotten that it is less in the public interest to have a public expose' of an evil doer (in this case drug using) individuals, than it is to have public money going to things that society really needs such as public hospitals, public schools and affordable housing and affoardable entertainment like football shown on free to air TV.

By joining in the moronic moral chorus, you allow the status quo to remain, whereby society blames a few small crimes and misdemeanors for the whole of societies problems, while the perpetrators of high crimes like your modern conservative government and their corporate masters get off scott free. They leave failed wars, failed coporate governance and a failed population in their wake.
Meanwhile the "public money" is in the Swiss BANK !!!!

But does any of this outrage anyone in the corporate media ???

Yet if one high profile footballer tests positive to an illicit substance: WATCH OUT !!!

Save your petty moralism for your next visit to America; it will be more welcome there.

[swantastic]

Please explain.

Pauline is that you?

[Bloody Hell]

Rampant drug use in the AFL is a serious issue for the whole community...

Please explain.

[Mr_Juicy]

The action is being taken by players to punish Channel 7 for publishing details of (stolen) confidential player medical records. It has nothing to do with alleged or actual drug use.

I can't believe the amount of fools going around who think otherwise.

[Sanecow]

If you want to be a pedant, go ahead but the fact is that around a freaking third of my money goes to the Government before I get to spend a cent and then they take another @@@@ing bite when I spend what little is left. I'd be interested to hear where you think the money the government spends comes from.

[royboy42]

[QUOTE=Sanecow;329448]Uh, no. It's a fairly easy chain to follow that Australian tax dollars go to the AFL; AFL funds go to clubs; Club funds go to players. Public interest.


ummm what tax dollars go to the afl???lots of tax PAYERS dollars, but no tax derived dollars..yr argument is , at best,weak. No public interest!

[barry]

Embarrasingly petulant display by Leo Barry. Shame.

There are plenty of legal ways to stop these sort of publications, and those have already been done, so there is no need for players to act like children now.