Very strange things are happening at the Cronulla NRL club. The board has been making decisions with the Chairman overseas and no CEO on duty in the club (subsequently fixed by an NRL appointment). The board brought in an advisor who told players who have been identified (but not in public and without specification of their crimes) that they should “roll over” and take a six month ban from the game or risk being rubbed out for two years if they are found out in the course of further investigation.
This all reeks of violation of due process. There is need to defend the players and possibly the clubs, and maybe there will be scope to seek compensation from people and agencies that have overstepped the mark. Players, especially young players, and destitute clubs like Cronulla do not have the resources to fight legal battles which could easily cost hundreds of thousands of dollars.
A coalition of clubs and concerned people could establish a fighting fund with donations from the fans. It would only take $10 or $20 from every follower to lay the foundations of a healthy fund. The players and the club need support from the best legal eagles and medical authorities that money can buy. No doubt a great deal of help will be provided pro bono but if legal proceedings become protracted the costs could be very high.
Other NRL clubs are in the spotlight and who knows what other sports may end up in this situation, given the hyperbolic claims about widespread doping, match fixing and criminal activities in Australian sport.
This looks like a helpful briefing on the chemical and legal background to the case.
The senior players should stand up and act like leaders. Why don’t they stand up for their clubs and its traditions?
Token
9 Mar 13 at 9:05 am
Sorry. Don’t agree.
I saw the mate maaaate brigade on Nine’s Footy Show Thursday night – doing what they usually do, which is to run defence for the “kids” and “young blokes” caught up in another NRL scandal. Daryl Brohman said that of course when somebody gives you a cup of pills at a club you just swallow them, no questions asked. Well no, Daryl – you don’t if you’re an adult. Blabbermouthed former taxi driver – now blabbermouthed, van Dyke-bearded idiot, Ray Hadley – ran the same line.
They’re never men, these players. They’re always victims.
C.L.
9 Mar 13 at 10:05 am
Call me a conspiracy theorist, but it is so strange that this “investigation” was first “announced” by the Labor Government. Co-incidence? I would not put anything past this Government.
Having said that, I am appalled at what Cronulla club has done. I don’t even follow the Sharks! This is some type of political game that STINKS. Why doesn’t the club just say to ASADA, put up or shut up? Why has the club rolled like that? I would be prepared to donate $20 to the club. Tell them to start a fighting fund.
OzzieGal
9 Mar 13 at 10:07 am
Who cares? I can’t stand NRL. If the whole game goes bankrupt it wouldn’t worry me.
samuel j
9 Mar 13 at 10:07 am
It seems to me to be a fishing expedition where the players have been told that if they have done anything wrong they should plead guilty. It looks like something out of Kafka’s The Trial.
Matt Rogers was on Gold Coast radio saying that the players should take full responsibility for what goes in their body. Then when asked about his career he said the suppliers at his former club had a good reputation and wouldn’t have done anything wrong – i.e. it appears he just took the supplements he was given and trusted the reputation of the club’s medical staff and suppliers that everything was legal. Rogers certainly didn’t talk about any independent measures he took to ascertain the legality of the supplements he was given.
gary
9 Mar 13 at 10:21 am
Even though I’m about as interested in rugby league as samuel j, this saga is a fascinating study of humanity.
I watched Channel 10 (Sydney) news at 5pm last night. They extended their News by half an hour to telecast the press conference that Cronulla set up for 6 pm.
It did not start until 6.20 pm (in my view demonstrating the sheer arrogance of the Cronulla executives involved). We only got to see a couple of questions before the extra half hour expired, so we didn’t see Trisha Kavanagh’s (Laurie Brereton’s wife) extraordinary performance.
The first people who should have fallen on their swords were the Board (from the absent Chairman down). No, they will keep their positions apparently and scapegoat their underlings.
Last night’s arrogance was incredible. There was no explanation of what the sacked officers and coach were supposed to have done.
This whole thing smacks of a Spanish Inquisition. “We won’t tell you what heresy you are accused of, just confess to save your souls before we garrot you”.
Just look at the bodies involved – full of Federal bureaucrats – ACC, ASADA. No accountability, no openness. Not suable for defamation. I’m disgusted with the bureaurcrats and the shitty Cronulla Board.
whyisitso
9 Mar 13 at 10:30 am
Maybe it’s time to stop the war on drugs in sport.
Allow all athletes to take any/all performance drugs, with a testing system with open list constantly updated so no one is under performing or dis-advantaged.
When everyone is on equal drug list, then we might see a difference that can be identified as a natural ability.
handjive
9 Mar 13 at 10:35 am
The WADA “catch-all” clause doesn’t miss much,if you happen to be given to actually eating food occasionally you could be pinged.
Lew
9 Mar 13 at 10:47 am
I’d like to see the individual players contracts to see what happens if the refuse the ” supplements “.
Big fines ( by my standards ) I suspect.
jumpnmcar
9 Mar 13 at 10:57 am
So tell me what are the Cronulla Sharks players being pressured to confess to:
‘I took a pill (amongst many) that was sanctioned by my Club’s coach and medical team that may or may not be regarded as a banned substance under WADA rules. I am not a scientist nor had the means to determine the compounds in the substances I was given as part of my training. I like all players accept that my coach and my medical team supply supplements that are legal, safe and not in breach of WADA rules. For that I accept a 6 month ban from my profession.
To avoid such issues in the future, I and all players will be required to hire my own medical team to check supplements supplied by the club’s coach and medical team.’
This is beyond farcical. This is blatantly unjust.
ian
9 Mar 13 at 11:29 am
If ever a Royal Commission or ‘corruption’ enquiry were needed, it would be to investigate the complete TRASHING of Australian sport by the Federal Government, based on ZERO evidence.
Conspiracy theories aside, timing of the unprecedented A.C.C. investigation into ALL Australian sport, coincided nicely with the “NSW Labor” ICAC corruption scandal. And now ASADA’s probe into Cronulla, based on speculation, seems to synchronise ever so sweetly with Julia Gillard’s disastrous Rooty-Hill experiment.
In the era of the 24 hour news cycle, attention grabbing headlines, especially those centred around sports, appear to be the perfect diversion for a Government and its leader who themselves seem to make attention grabbing headlines every ’12′ hours, for all the wrong reasons.
Jamie Spry
9 Mar 13 at 11:34 am
Why is the ACC investigating sport doping? I thought my dad fled Communism to avoid these kinds of secret bureaucracies making unspecified allegations where everyone in the organisation tells you to fall on your sword for the greater good. This is reprehensible. We all have a stake in stopping this totalitarianism. What ‘crime’ will be next? Holding the wrong political, environmental or economic opinion?
John Comnenus
9 Mar 13 at 11:47 am
The players are not hapless “underlings.”
They’re grown men.
C.L.
9 Mar 13 at 12:14 pm
ian – the drug taking rules (ignorance is no excuse) are precisely so athletes can not use the “I was told they were ok” line. Otherwise every athlete caught using performance enhancing drugs would use it and it would be next to impossible to disprove as someone else would be paid to take the fall for them. If a competition wants to minimise the amount of performance enhancing drugs used in their sport then it simply can’t have that exception.
jumpncar – they could have gone to the authorities that monitor use of drugs in sports and told them they were being forced to take medication and were not being informed what it was. If they really didn’t know what they were taking then they were either greedy or stupid to take unknown pills. The club doesn’t have their long term health as a priority, only their short term performance.
Chris
9 Mar 13 at 12:21 pm
Yet when they enter this environment, usually under scholarship, they aren’t old enough to vote or drive a car.
And certainly not smart enough to decipher the contracts they are bound by.
jumpnmcar
9 Mar 13 at 12:23 pm
That’s right, but they’re very, very young men who do tend to take what they have been persuaded to see as professional advice from people in authority in trusted positions.
My point however was that if you are going to hold players to account, the responsibility must start at the top. The Board had a responsibility to ensure that untoward conduct is not undertaken by its subordinate officers. As President Truman said “the buck stops here”. They were obviously oblivious to what was going on and only found out two years later. There’s far too much scapegoating in our society today.
One admirable quality that British Ministers of the Crown used to have was to resign if their departments made very poor decisions.
whyisitso
9 Mar 13 at 12:29 pm
chris
The ” supplements ” are normally in powdered milk form not pills.
If the players ( as young as 16 ) are contractually bound to participate in a “club wide nutrition program ” how do they avoid it.
It’s like the horse being shot for being doped and the trainer let off scott free.
jumpnmcar
9 Mar 13 at 12:30 pm
Interesting analogy with members of Parliament (grown men and women). They vote on legislation they can’t possibly have had time to read let alone understand. I defy anyone for example other than a highly experienced tax accountant or lawyer to read the Tax Act and understand what it means. My job did entail working with tax accountants, and I often had to read the relevant section of the Act to determine my company’s liability or suggest a course of action. In more than one instance I read the relevant section of the Act very carefully, thought I understood it, but on later consulting our tax experts, it actually meant the direct opposite of what I had thought it meant.
whyisitso
9 Mar 13 at 12:38 pm
jumpncar – make a private report to ASADA (or even the newspapers) saying they are being asked to take supplements without being told what is in them. They have a right to know what they are being asked to consume.
Though I do agree that those higher up the food chain in the club deserve to be held account too. But its the usual way – its the people at the bottom who cop the most blame when its often a larger cultural/procedural issue of the organisation at fault (most people are just sheeple and will do what they’re told).
Chris
9 Mar 13 at 12:40 pm
As if these guys understand pharmacology.
Have the charges been laid out or are they still facing the Star Chamber treatment?
Same here. Stories like these make my father shiver.
Token
9 Mar 13 at 12:49 pm
NRL is a great game for Rugby players who cannot count above 5.
Leave it alone
Woolfe
9 Mar 13 at 1:01 pm
This is exactly what happened to Lance Armstrong. Whether you believe him or not. A crime only exists where there is evidence of a crime.
Vilified and tried with no proof. The guy did not fail one drug test in 30 years… But they still hounded him and finally stripped him of his titles.
….. and then, on condition that he confesses publicly, they said that they would let him race again and hinted at reinstatement, etc. Which he did.
This is what the Spanish inquisition used to do. If you were put to the question, then you had no option but to confess your sins… What they consisted of was up to you.
… But confess them you did.
So much for our much vaunted modern Western civilization….. on the face of it, we are still nothing more than the tax slaves and playthings of our elite ruling classes. We have no freedom. We mollify ourselves that we do, because we are too gutless to defend our freedom.
J.H.
9 Mar 13 at 1:07 pm
BoltA gets on the bandwagon.
Poor Old Rafe
9 Mar 13 at 1:08 pm
The bit I have trouble understanding is exactly how this is a police/law matter?
If substances are against the law (and I might add, if the only reason they are against the law is they violate a sporting code then they are on thin ice already) then, in the apparent spirit of the law, its usually the dealers/pushers who are focused on.
Its sport, games, about as deserving of the full majesty of the law as a game of marbles.
A violation against a set of sporting rules is trivial, and needs to be treated as such. This running for QCs’ to cover their asses is disgusting.
thefrollickingmole
9 Mar 13 at 1:19 pm
This is not about whether using TB-4 is a criminal or even regulatory offence. It isn’t.
This is a matter of private contracts.
The players are adults and the basis of the anti-doping codes is strict liability, not mens rea. As an athlete you are personally responsible for controlling what you eat, drink or have injected.
If the players didn’t like those terms, they had the freedom to refuse them and find another line of work.
But if you sign the contract, then you shouldn’t cry foul when people expect you to uphold your end of it.
You don’t get to abrogate contractual terms just because you don’t like them.
Jacques Chester
9 Mar 13 at 1:20 pm
If any private organisation dripped fed allegations and circumstantial evidence which brought the reputation of another organisation into disrepute then if over time the allegations are not substantiated then demafation preceedings are most likely to occur and if guilty fines and penalties are imposed. But a government funded body such as ASADA can make public allegations and release circumstantial evidence knowing that it has the full resources of the government behind it. So effectively it is protected from defamation. Whether Cronulla or their players have committed an offence, I don’t know. But I thought the crown/state had to prove guilt. Even if you don’t like NRL it is disturbing and could be used as a model by other authorities in future.
Bear Necessities
9 Mar 13 at 1:21 pm
I’m a pedantic prick about this because, to register as a weightlifter, I agree to follow the same rules. Trying to pass off professional athletes as legal children, totally lacking in moral agency, is farcical.
That said, ASADA’s evidence might be a total farce too. Let’s wait for the hearings.
Jacques Chester
9 Mar 13 at 1:22 pm
It would appear that the chemical compound in question was legal when it was taken.
The compound has never been proven to enhance performance. It has been demonstrated to assist recovery from injury.
So players without the expertise to analyse a chemical compound description and bound by contract to a club do what a certified club official instructs them are punished.
Not only punished while innocent but commanded that they cannot speak about it or defend themselves. So ASADA blackens their name and reputation for the rest of their lives and does so through prevention of human rights.
Jack
9 Mar 13 at 1:28 pm
Jack, the question of whether a substance is regulated by the TGA is completely orthogonal to the question of whether it is covered by the WADA rules.
Athletes are always at all times strictly liable. There is no wiggle room.
Jacques Chester
9 Mar 13 at 1:30 pm
Well said, Jacques.
C.L.
9 Mar 13 at 1:47 pm
I’m no fan of rugby league, and without wanting to offend those who can’t stand Ray Hadley – I actually heard an interesting comment from him last night on 2GB (sorry, yes I listen…)but it was along the lines of – they wouldn’t have been game to try this on one of the stronger clubs who have professional managers & boards.
I want to know who or what is driving this – yes there are drugs in sport we all know this, but why the mini dramas? Why isn’t the information coming out & don’t tell me confidentiality – these are businesses and government departments are hitting the weaker clubs first – what is going on??
Dianne
9 Mar 13 at 2:18 pm
Now that’s something that will require patience. Cronulla will certainly be history by then.
That encapsulates the entire problem. No player has been charged, formally accused or whatever. All we have is innuendo and rumour. The whole thing is a total denial of natural justice. How typical of federal bureaucrats.
One bureaucrat even had the gall to criticise players for having a chat with one of the so-called co-operators, now with another Club, presumably trying to get at what they’ve been accused of, as no-one else has deigned to tell them.
whyisitso
9 Mar 13 at 2:19 pm
It’s obviously being treated as an offence. And if it’s not an offence, why the hell are federal bureaucrats getting involved in contractual matters between private parties (players and clubs)?
Jacques and C.L., your positions are as clear as mud.
whyisitso
9 Mar 13 at 2:24 pm
Are contracts between individual players and clubs in the public domain?
whyisitso
9 Mar 13 at 2:26 pm
Obviously ASADA have irrefutable evidence. Statutory declarations by those supplying illegal substances, positive blood tests, records of discussions with staff complicit in doping.
Can we see it please.
Steve MacNeil
9 Mar 13 at 4:20 pm
Not only that. The offenders should be charged if they have committed an offence. If they have just broken a contract, butt out bureaucrats.
whyisitso
9 Mar 13 at 5:00 pm
jacques
Strict liability (ie honest ignorance of taking a supplement that may breach WADA rules is no defence) is an easy rule to impose and easy for authorities to prosecute but is to onerous to be realistically practical in this situation (assuming that the players were doing as instructed by team staff).
Just think of what it means if a player has to satisfy himself that there is no possible illegal substance in the supplements he is taking in a team program. In a team environment with highly paid professional coaches and medical staff every player in that team as a first step would have to be categorically told by the coaching/medical staff that every supplement they are given does not breach WADA rules. But this would not be sufficient under the impossibly onerous strict liability principle because the coaches/medical staff could be mistaken or telling lies. Each player would then have to have the supplements tested himself to determine what the supplements contain and whether the compounds breach WADA rules. This is not practical in the real world. Sure where players take supplements outside the team environment, then the onus is fully on them to satisfy themselves that the supplements are not illegal. But within the team program, the strict liability onus on each player is neither workable nor fair to the players. But of course it makes it easy for authorities to prosecute players and impose bans.
Where there has been an established breach within the team program of supplements, the coach and medical staff should be penalised and the team forfeit game points. However to ban the players for months in this situation would be unjust. More importantly, player bans are meant to be a deterrent and in this situation, there is no deterrent effect as the players have done all they reasonably could to stay within the rules.
ian
9 Mar 13 at 5:45 pm
What’s driving this is the 14 September election. Just another engineered distraction.
Louis Hissink
9 Mar 13 at 7:25 pm
Ian,
Bans are sometimes, rarely, adjusted if it can be legitimately shown that you were deceived by medical staff.
But mere non-curiousity will not excuse you. Merely accepting anything given to you at face value will not excuse you. As the athlete you are considered responsible for every substance introduced to your body.
Whenever my doctor says “I am going to prescribe …”, the first thing I do is check the WADA list. Whenever there’s a hot new supplement to try, the first thing I do is read the label closely and then check the WADA list. I passed on pretty much an entire generation of stimulants (DMAA) because WADA banned them immediately for in-competition use.
If a prescription is for a legitimate medical purpose and it’s listed, you can receive a Therapeutic Use Exception. If it’s for an emergency life-saving purpose, TUEs can be granted retrospectively.
If it’s not for a legitimate medical purpose, then stiff shit. Strict liability, you should have checked.
The code is very clear and when you sign the contract, you agree to be bound by it.
What I personally would prefer is to stop the increasingly stalinist charade and bring these substances out into regulated usage. In an open framework where medical supervision won’t cost anyone their job. Some PEDs show great promise in reducing harm to and suffering of athletes and prolonging athletic careers. By the time you’re punishing people for trying to reach a healthy baseline, the whole thing is a joke. The idea of jailing people for refusing to incriminate themselves for the integrity of sport is a “cure” just so wildly disproportionate to the ill that I don’t know how to characterise it.
But the policy is one matter, failing to uphold a contract is a different matter. They are different matters and ought to be addressed differently.
Jacques Chester
9 Mar 13 at 9:18 pm
The public never hears the full story but what if the ACCC had phone taped a supplements person and his colleagues and caught all the illegal activity on tapes. They would then pass it on to ASADA and what can ASADA do. I cant believe that players ,CEO’s and coaches are still saying like Lance Armstrong and Marion Jones ” I’ve never failed a drug test or our players have never failed a drug test” ASADA has said they can detect the drugs.Managers should be informing their clients to say no comment, i know your trying to do a job but I cant comment at this time.
Bobby
10 Mar 13 at 12:07 am
Jacques Chester
An extermely valid point. It really is the business of the athlete to “know” as best they can what supplements/drugs they are being given.
The only way i can see ignorance being remotely a defense is if an athlete was deliberately deceived by the person giving the drugs.
Thats a huge area of clear cut ethics on behalf of the peoples administering the drugs, with no upside if they get caught.
thefrollickingmole
10 Mar 13 at 12:44 am
We are told to get a second opinion any time we are concerned about advice from a doctor, generally one would only do this if the issue is large, dangerous, complicated or expensive, or the advice is not orthodox for the condition.
I would not expect sports players to get a second opinion on conditioning or rehab regimes prescribed by prima facie reputable and qualified personnel appointed by a club unless there was something very odd going on, which now we are told was indeed the case. BUT WHAT WAS IT?
I think that in 2011 the players had no reason to suspect that anything illegal was prescribed. The rules have changed on peptides since 2011 and the mode of administration at that time was critical in determining whether the use was legit or not.
As I said at the beginning, it is not news to find a few rogues out of a thousand or so fiece competitors in the first grade of AFL and NRL, never mind lower grades and other sports. There is no story unless club administrations are implicated on a serious scale.
As for organized crime and match fixing, those furphies have apparenlty died on the vine. How surprising.
The deeper issue in this growing reach of statutory organizations with draconian powers and the possibility of political agendas run by power-crazed parties and the hacks they parachute into organizations like Fair Work and IR bodies, the Grievance Industry with all its agencies, super funds and et etc. Someone name a few more.
Rafe
10 Mar 13 at 11:08 am
PS. Go the Eels!
But check what that guy from Cronulla is prescribing for them!
If this was racing you would call for a swab.
Rafe
10 Mar 13 at 11:11 am
Interesting to explore more about some some trigger events. 1. Jason Clare with Carl on 9 said that it was the ACC Chairman’s decsion to go live with the broadcast not the Polititions – like to hear from the Chairman on that one – mmmhh ACC is covert organsiation and doesnt want to taint evidence – they are also fighting for survival. 2. ASADA’s bid for coercive powers (like those of ACC) is being debated in Senate – good timing to highlight importance of these powers. 3. Trish Kavanagh has ties to labour party through husband Laurie Brereton and frends Bob Carr. Just sounds like to much political intesrference to me.
Tim Davies
11 Mar 13 at 12:36 pm