Football codes need to just say no … to beer

None of which is to make light of these grave allegations, of course. There is simply no point in having a testing regime at all, if the whole thing is contrived to operate on the premise that a “wink is as good as a nudge to a blind bat”, and what the public don’t know won’t hurt ’em!

The best and most salient point that has been made supporting Wilkie is that the testing regime is ultimately there to protect the health of the players and if it is not working then their health is endangered, etc ...

But, um, here’s the thing.

If an alien was sent to earth right now and given the curious task of protecting those strange earthlings who like to jump around and run into each other while the crowd roars, who thinks that the alien’s starting point would be working out ways to eliminate the white powder that some of them snort up their noses?

Are you serious?

You can’t be.

To reprise a theme, when you look at demonstrable damage done by drugs to footballers and footballing folk, does cocaine even begin to compare to the damage done by that other well-known drug called alcohol?

Oh, stop it.

Yes, I know one’s illegal, and the other’s not! We’ve been through that twice, remember? But that is no answer. You’re an alien! You’re looking at this purely from the point of view of the mental and psychological health of the players.

So I’ll ask again. Every time you see an off-field atrocity registered against a footballer’s name – be it domestic violence, sexual assault, violent assault, dog-molesting, car accidents, verbal abuse, marital and familial breakdown, and so on and so forth, on and on into the ever etcetera – I put it to you that alcohol is nearly always a factor.

And cocaine-fuelled atrocities? Well, I guess there was that time that ... yeah, nah, that was grog. But hang on, what about the time that ... oh, bugger, that was alcohol, too. Ah, but who can forget when ... no, you’re right, that was alcohol, too.

I am not being a smart-arse. Name one time, just one time, that taking a surfeit of cocaine has been proven to be at the base of shocking behaviour, or even serious ill-health?

Try it like this: if you were running the Professional Footballers’ Atrocities Generator in the industrial zone out Mascot way, and you had the choice of throwing cocaine or alcohol into the fuel tank to get it up to maximum power, which one would you dinkum throw in, alcohol or cocaine?

You know the answer, and so do I.

This is why the alien is so confused. While one drug is promoting endless hand-wringing, the other drug is not only not being suppressed, it is being promoted, and is a major source of revenue for the football codes. When players win, they get soaked in it, sprayed all over with it as the cameras roll. When they lose, it is regarded as quite acceptable, even expected, to have that drug all night long.

Alcohol is the one doing the damage, not cocaine.

(And I’m not wagging a moralising finger against alcohol here, by the way – I have spilt more grog than you’ve drunk.)

None of it makes sense.

And obviously, this all fits into the wider debate of the lunacy of our drug laws.

As I have said many times, our drug laws don’t work, never have worked, never will work. If it were up to me, I would change them tomorrow to recognise that when millions of people want drugs that the law says are illicit, it is actually more sensible to change the laws than to presume you’ll change the people. You won’t.

And just as those drug laws are unworkable in wider society, with billions of dollars spent for no results – you can get drugs delivered to your door in this town quicker than you get pizza – they’re equally unworkable in football. I would gently suggest this is why the testing regime may well be as farcical as Andrew Wilkie says it is.

None of the officials want to say out loud what they know to be the truth: the major problem that comes with cocaine use for footballers is not atrocities or ill-health, it is simply the hullaballoo that comes with them. And that is why there is an inclination to see nussink, hear nussink, know nussink.

So it should be open slather, then? Nuh. I’ve said this many times, too. To those on the edge of the drugs world wondering if they should or shouldn’t indulge: have a good look around you, at those who take drugs regularly and those who abstain. Spot the difference? There is no question that the best option is to stay away from drugs entirely.

But if the key star that football wants to steer by is the health of its players, getting them off the grog is the first and most important thing, and the first step along that path is stopping all sponsorship.

...

...

(Crickets.)

Sports news, results and expert commentary. Sign up for our Sport newsletter.