Sean Kenny Dowell

[Chip and Chase]

Downside of legalisation maybe that the regulating authority then becomes at risk of litigation for any detrimental effects that the drugs have on the user.

Like the class actions launched by smokers and drinkers against the government for the detrimental effects of those drugs ?

 

[Woodsie]

Like the class actions launched by smokers and drinkers against the government for the detrimental effects of those drugs ?

A difference is that alcohol and smokes have been legal for ever, and it could be argued that the Govn has taken no detrimental action .. as opposed to a Govn "acting" to legalise/decrim products with known detrimental effects.

I have no idea, just raising the spectre of duty of care.

 

[yokahontas]

Downside of legalisation maybe that the regulating authority then becomes at risk of litigation for any detrimental effects that the drugs have on the user.

Was going to say the same as @Chip and Chase - he beat me to it.

It'd be no different to any number of legal substances that can have negative effects if you use too much, use it wrongly, use it despite a medical condition etc. You just put warning labels on the packaging to cover your arse - even the energy drink I'm drinking right now has warnings and dosage information. A line of coke would do the job better and faster though...

 

[yokahontas]

A difference is that alcohol and smokes have been legal for ever, and it could be argued that the Govn has taken no detrimental action .. as opposed to a Govn "acting" to legalise/decrim products with known detrimental effects.

I have no idea, just raising the spectre of duty of care.

The test case would be something like the legalisation of cannabis that's taken place recently in various parts of the U.S. - or, further back, the end of prohibition. If you were going to properly regulate stuff like cocaine or ecstasy, there would have to be approval by a governing body like the Therapeutic Goods Administration anyway, so the opportunities for arse covering are there.

 

[EaglesDontTweet]

Who has he hurt ?? HIMSELF that's who. So don't whinge and whine about being busted when you know the likely outcome. If you want to do drugs socially then that's fine by me, but don't sign a contract to say you won't and then get all indignant when you do and you get punished.

Why should any of them expect special treatment because the rest of society can do what they please without the scrutiny that RL players are subjected to ? The rest of us aren't paid well above average wage due to corporate sponsorships that demand that the stakeholders in their business adhere to some sort of code of conduct that reflects the values that they want their customers to believe they hold important. I'd bet that there is a good chance that there are employees of the NRL and their associated sponsorsing companies who have done, or are still doing, cocaine. Law of averages is well and truly on my side there, that's the hypocrisy that we are all aware of. But the bottom line is that if you want the cash then you have to play by the rules - or at least be a bit smarter about breaking them.

That was the most eloquent presentation of the reason why football players are held accountable and to a higher standard compared to others that I have read. Well said C&C.

 

[Little Grubber Kick]

Maths may be wrong, but the sentiment is right.

Buying coke kills Columbians.

Is that a mushroom cloud I'm seeing over the "who has he hurt" fallacy?

 

[Ryan]

Who has he hurt ?? HIMSELF that's who. So don't whinge and whine about being busted when you know the likely outcome. If you want to do drugs socially then that's fine by me, but don't sign a contract to say you won't and then get all indignant when you do and you get punished.

Why should any of them expect special treatment because the rest of society can do what they please without the scrutiny that RL players are subjected to ? The rest of us aren't paid well above average wage due to corporate sponsorships that demand that the stakeholders in their business adhere to some sort of code of conduct that reflects the values that they want their customers to believe they hold important. I'd bet that there is a good chance that there are employees of the NRL and their associated sponsorsing companies who have done, or are still doing, cocaine. Law of averages is well and truly on my side there, that's the hypocrisy that we are all aware of. But the bottom line is that if you want the cash then you have to play by the rules - or at least be a bit smarter about breaking them.

I get it. I understand what you're saying, and I'm not disputing that. All I'm saying is that should in this case it cost SKD a career? I've never been in the position personally, but what happens if say an every day person goes to a concert, has a bag of cocaine on them, and gets caught by the police?

Do they lose their job, with no chance at redemtion?

I just think there needs to be quantification around the outcome of these things, and it needs to be set realistically. Why does Proctor get two weeks, and SKD a lifetime?

For mine, this comes down to two things.
1. Consistency
2. Fair time, for said crime.

People make mistakes mate. I shudder to think the vortex world these players would get caught up in, everyone telling them how amazing they are, ego's stroked, lots of money, excess time. I know, I know, not excuses, but it would be crazy.

 

[Woodsie]

@Ryan This is why someone like SKD loses his job. He signed a contract saying he wouldn't do it ... It can cost the club money


The Daily Telegraph is reporting both clubs have been informed by Infinity Group Australia that they are withdrawing their sponsorship becuase of the recent events.

Infinity was about to provide Cronulla with $700,000 over the next two years and ripped up its $300,000 contract with the Roosters.

The news came after Cronulla under 20s player Jesse Savage was also found guilty of possession of 1.4 grams of cocaine outside a Cronulla nightclub on Sunday.

 

[Ned]

Yeh but blood diamonds are harder to snort

It depends on the equipment you have available!!

 

[Ryan]

@Ryan This is why someone like SKD loses his job. He signed a contract saying he wouldn't do it ... It can cost the club money


The Daily Telegraph is reporting both clubs have been informed by Infinity Group Australia that they are withdrawing their sponsorship becuase of the recent events.

Infinity was about to provide Cronulla with $700,000 over the next two years and ripped up its $300,000 contract with the Roosters.

The news came after Cronulla under 20s player Jesse Savage was also found guilty of possession of 1.4 grams of cocaine outside a Cronulla nightclub on Sunday.

Yeah, that's not good - at all. Probably a point I didn't consider in this to be honest. That not only affects the Chooks and Sharks, but the NRL overall.

Ok @Chip and Chase , mate - I concede on your point, given this - apologies mate.

I guess their actions DO affect those around them both directly, and indirectly. Silly boys. I sincerely hope our boys are avoiding this at all costs.

 

[SeaEagleRock8]

Probably a point I didn't consider in this to be honest.

haha, I hope I get the chance to meet you one day in person, you lay it all out there.
ps I once saw some bloke I think on my way out of a Manly game (or way in) riding a gaudy yellow motorcycle (or maybe just gaudy yellow leathers) and in my mind, as I sat in my blue falcon blasting eagle Rock, I said to myself, 'Ryan!'
(If that wasn't you I still consider you worth meeting anyway, lol)

 

[globaleagle]

The Daily Telegraph is reporting both clubs have been informed by Infinity Group Australia that they are withdrawing their sponsorship becuase of the recent events.

Infinity was about to provide Cronulla with $700,000 over the next two years and ripped up its $300,000 contract with the Roosters.

The news came after Cronulla under 20s player Jesse Savage was also found guilty of possession of 1.4 grams of cocaine outside a Cronulla nightclub on Sunday.

As some Journo said....

So if the players want their salaries tied to the games revenue...will they agree to take the hits (like you mentioned above) when they occur?


I mean..the obv answer is no they wont so I think there's still some 'negotiating' to do.

burp

 

[Ryan]

haha, I hope I get the chance to meet you one day in person, you lay it all out there.
ps I once saw some bloke I think on my way out of a Manly game (or way in) riding a gaudy yellow motorcycle (or maybe just gaudy yellow leathers) and in my mind, as I sat in my blue falcon blasting eagle Rock, I said to myself, 'Ryan!'
(If that wasn't you I still consider you worth meeting anyway, lol)

Ummm....wtf....I had a yellow Ducati Monster, and would often ride it down to watch the footy !! Hahahaha

 

[patorick2010]

When are these NRL players going to learn?

Maybe next year.

 

[Chip and Chase]

Yeah, that's not good - at all. Probably a point I didn't consider in this to be honest. That not only affects the Chooks and Sharks, but the NRL overall.

Ok @Chip and Chase , mate - I concede on your point, given this - apologies mate.

I guess their actions DO affect those around them both directly, and indirectly. Silly boys. I sincerely hope our boys are avoiding this at all costs.

I don't get the faux outrage from sponsors either really. Normally they are looking for a reason to get out and are just waiting for a convenient excuse, which fools like SKD provide.

 

[wombatgc]

I don't get the faux outrage from sponsors either really. Normally they are looking for a reason to get out and are just waiting for a convenient excuse, which fools like SKD provide.

Exactly what I was thinking. There holier than thou outrage is a joke. Meanwhile the CEO of sponsor is just racking up his third line.