what? and spend the next 6 months hearing Ricky Nixon complain that the AFL should have stipulated the exact sie anf geological make up of the rocks, while arguing that anyone who refuses to throw a rock is preventing Ben from making a full recovery and signing his death sentence while those who do throw rocks are preventing Ben from making a full recovery and signing his death sentence. No thanks.

You think you're angry now, wait till the president of the players association gets involved.

I wish those two would go and play lawyers in someone else's game. Surely rugby league need a couple of blokes who can use a thesaurus to try and sound smart.

Geez.... just after your comment about Rugby League and a thesaurus, too.

Are Smug and Fev trying to both avoid detection with the new do's?

Bring on the draft I say...at least there will be some news about Freo. We got at least a bakers dozen to fill on the list...

I dont buy papers anymore. But I will have a flick thru if one of the rags are lying around work. Nothing but Ben and Toast spin. Can you believe on the news they were showing potential Ben VS. the Toast match dates depended on which team he ends up at??

Thank god for Dockerland.

After a while Gover you get to call him Shane.

Actually, it's

"thank Shane for God"...


but you learn as you go.

Okay this from Brendan Gale re Ben Cousins saga.


http://www.radioaust...u/news/stories/200811/s2424931.htm?tab=sport

Integrity?

Sanctity??

Geez, Brendon Gale's been looking in some sort of magic mirror if his opinion of himself is that inflated...


which is all he's on about, isn't it?

Was he of the mind that Ben would come back and there would no extra conditions attached to him being re registered?

Perhaps he should apply for a position on the AFL commission if he wants to run the league.

If I were the players union rep, I'd be worried about a bloke who has clearly transgressed tainting the majority of my members instead of spending all my time helping the privileged few become more privileged.

Do you all think its now inevitable that the AFL will have to "toughen up" its drug policy as consequence of people not being able to distinguish between the imposed special conditions placed on Benny and the current AFL illicit drug policy?

That is to say, the masses will think "Oh the testing laws are so weak at present they couldn't apply them to Cousins"?

I think Gale is inadvertantly putting pressure on every other player by not distinguishing Cousins' circumstance with that of every other AFL footballer.

It's already happened, hasn't it? Instead of blaming the Eagles for ignoring the obvious warning signs, they believe the line - there was nothing we could have done because he didn't test positive. Once you've accepted that premise, the only conclusion you can make is that the system is flawed. Never mind the fact that there were big flashing signs every 6 months from the day Cousins passed out at his 21st birthday party.

And with everyone involved hiding behind the letter of the law instead of accepting responsibility, apportioning blame and not knowing when it's time to leave the stage, you end up with a choice between draconian laws or putting up with cheats.

Gale should have protected this particular member years ago. He should have made sure Cousins' employer was looking after his health and not exploiting him for their own success.

Barge poles are out already....


http://www.realfooty...usins-thwarted/2008/11/20/1226770650664.html

"The Age understands that Kangaroos chief executive Eugene Arocca contacted the club's major backer this week in the knowledge that the AFL would give Cousins the green light to play again, only to be told that Mazda had serious issues with the 2005 Brownlow medallist."

This little excerpt is illuminating, I thought...

"Brisbane has become cold on the idea of drafting the former champion midfielder, who confessed that he had been a drug addict for 10 years"

10 years! What was going on down there?

If Mazda made a V8 ute I would be looking into their yards next year.

Personally I think that it is unfair that cousins has all this extra testing. Yes he has admitted he was a drug addict and he is supposedly recovering. As much as I hate West Coast and Nixon you have to give him the benefit of the doubt. I think that maybe he should accept a voluntary 1st strike and be dealt with under the current policy. Of course the AFL should target test him more often because he would be a higher risk but they have a policy that they believe is sufficient.

I think the big difference here is that everyone knows he has done drugs because he has admitted it. I wonder what the situation would be if everyone that had tested positive before, or even twice before, were known to the general public.

Everyone knew he'd done drugs a long, long time before he got around to admitting it.

He admitted it because he was found out to a point where even his most determined supporters weren't swallowing the lies any more. You can accuse Cousins of a lot of things but I doubt there's been a point in his life where you could accuse him of being honest.