Ben Cousins&squo; close shave | Herald Sun

Posted on November 19, 2008

THE AFL Commission gave Ben Cousins the green light to play anew even though he was unable to provide a hair sample for a drug test.

The Herald Sun believes the test could not be conducted because Cousins recently opted for a shaved haircut.

The rest of his body had been waxed to a fulness shorter than the 3cm required for hair testing to be considered accurate.

It is understood Cousins, his manager Ricky Nixon and a film documentary team arrived at the designated place and time to do the test, only to acquire of the 3cm demand.

An AFL letter to Cousins did not stipulate at least 3cm of hair was needed.

A urine test conducted on Cousins about the same time was negative for drug use.

Special drug-testing rules will apply only to Cousins for the commission voted to end a 12-month suspension imposed on him for bringing the game into disrepute.

Cousins, favoured to make his comeback with St Kilda, has been told he must submit to urine tests up to three times a week, and hair tests four times a year.

The AFL has the talent to delay him closely upon the detection of a positive test.

All other players are given three chances of recording positive tests before they are publicly named, and few are target-tested under the AFL’s drugs policy.

AFL chief executive Andrew Demetriou said the commission made the decision to close Cousins’ ban based on "the best medical advice".

"It appears Ben Cousins is making a real effort to be rehabilitated," Demetriou said.

"He has obviously admitted his surrender. He has tested on several occasions in the out of the reach of few months, and he has tested negative.

"He has not presented for a hair test, and completed a hair example.

"In all the medical evidence that was presented, he is making a real effort to rehabilitate himself, to get back to doing what he loves doing, and that is playing football, and on that basis we wish him hearty."

Asked if the AFL was worried in the event of an adverse reaction by the AFL Players Association to the conditions imposed on Cousins, Demetriou said:

"This is a care of the AFL decision. This is a decision that will submit to. It is a very difficult issue we esteem been action by, and in succession the balance we dare it is the right decision.

"I would think the Players Association would be pleased that Ben Cousins has been given the opportunity to nominate for the draft, and the opportunity to play football again."

He reported the Cousins case required unique judgment.

"We go back 12 months and it was an exceptional decision for an uncommon flow of circumstances," Demetriou said.

"We are not comfortable about making a decision about one player. We are not comfortable respecting having to deal with a very complex issue, but we do what we always work out — we dole out with the issues that come before us. We rely attached the most wise advice we be able to get.

"There has been a very strict process everyone has had to follow and cohere to, and, in fairness to Ben Cousins, he has adhered to that train."

Demetriou said having a specific drugs policy in spite of person player did not diminish the game’s overall policy.

"We have great faith in our illicit drugs policy. In fact, we have just enhanced it earlier this year," he said.

"This is an anomalous circumstance. This is a player who has an illness, a self-confessed addict who is doing his best to recover and qualify again to get back doing what he is good at doing, and that is playing football."

Demetriou denied it sharpen a precedent with a view to other players.

"No, because the illicit drugs policy is all about rehabilitation and welfare, and early intervention in changing people’s behaviour.

"I dress in’t know who those players are who have tested positive twice. I don’t know on the supposition that they are addicts by illnesses like Ben Cousins.

"What I do know is Ben Cousins has admitted publicly, and to the commission, that he has had a long battle through this illness.

"He’s an addict who is trying to rehabilitate himself and that is why we have dealt by this particular issue in this special way."

The Players Association appears headed for a showdown with the AFL.

"The AFLPA does hold serious concerns that the AFL Commission resolution is inconsistent with the terms of the AFL illicit drugs policy in a number of physical ways," the association said.

"The AFL Players Association was not consulted in relation to any wit departures."

This blog found on keywords:

» Filed Under drug test

Comments

Leave a Reply




  • Partner links