Nick Riewoldt, famous AFL great and fellow panelist on “The Agenda Setters,” has publicly expressed his outrage at the act. He should be especially concerned about the pushback from AFL players to the proposed changes to the illicit drugs policy. Riewoldt made it clear that this goes beyond just policy changes, calling it a deep-seated safety issue. His comments come against the booming landscape of the growing, albeit overdue, criticism towards the league’s approach to drug use among players.
Riewoldt went on to explain why the players’ position doesn’t make sense, especially in light of some of the risks incurred by illicit drug use. He stated, “Why wouldn’t the AFLPA be strong on this and say, ‘Hey players, we’re here to represent you and represent your interests. This is in your interest,’ because, you know, we’re not just talking about something illegal, we’re talking about something dangerous.”
Former Port Adelaide double premiership star and current commentator Kane Cornes joined Riewoldt in voicing the niggling frustrations. He blasted the legal arguments advanced by several players opposing a tougher policy. He made the case that engaging in illegal behavior would permanently tarnish their reputations. Cornes remarked, “Just don’t do it and your reputation will be ruined by not participating in this program.”
These debates about the illicit drugs policy have lasted more than a year. Riewoldt said they were about to complete a deal six weeks ago. The specifics remain up in the air. The AFL had originally wanted to introduce fines of up to $5,000 for first-time offenders, but that idea has been withdrawn. Wilson pointed out that financial penalties would no longer be imposed for first-time violators.
Riewoldt highlighted that the current code is outdated, stating, “If the players are pushing back against a tougher drug code, this code is so old, society has moved so fast since this code was introduced.” He stressed that with the current fentanyl crisis and all of its consequences, though, there is a clear need for reform. He articulated, “This (policy) might actually save lives, so I can’t understand why the players would be pushing back against a tighter code.”
Not all players are on the same team as those pushing for a kinder, gentler welfare-based approach. Caroline Wilson wrote on the power of Paul Marsh to shape the players’ view. During her comments, she suggested that the anti-drug use perspective is not being well represented in the current conversations.
Now, it’s overdue for a refresh and the players are fighting back. Riewoldt went on to say that players, the majority of them, are resisting a more draconian code. Accounts point to a major source of this burgeoning resistance—their rank and file. He painted an even more troubling scenario, saying, “It just stinks of, ‘Get off our backs, we want to do drugs. That is what it looks like.”
Cornes and Wilson are unanimous on the need for much stronger leadership from the AFL Players Association (AFLPA) on this issue. Wilson stated, “I think this is where the AFLPA need to be stronger. A stricter, tighter drug code for the players has to be a good thing, doesn’t it?”
Conversations about the future direction of the illicit drugs policy are still happening within the AFL. Safety of players and issues regarding their public image continue to be serious issues. Riewoldt is urging a reconsideration of the existing system. This mirrors a larger societal trend and draws attention to the major health crises we face with drug use today.
