Latest news with #MickintheMorning
West Australian
28-05-2025
- Sport
- West Australian
Nick Riewoldt says AFL players union's opposition to tougher drug policy exposed in Bailey Smith controversy
St Kilda legend Nick Riewoldt has criticised the AFL Players Association for its stance on the controversy surrounding Bailey Smith's 'nose beers' social media post, citing the league's lax drug policy. The 24-year-old has been cautioned by the AFL for the post, and the league has informed Geelong that their superstar recruit—according to 7NEWS chief AFL reporter Mitch Cleary — is 'on his last warning.' Smith has been a headline magnet since entering the AFL, but the hype has intensified this year in his first season with the Cats. In 2022, Smith was banned for two matches after admitting to using an illicit substance. A fan commented, 'nose beers after the game mate,' to which Smith replied, 'na bro, after the flag maybe tho.' 'Nose beers' is slang for cocaine. The comment was later deleted, but not before it was widely circulated. Outgoing AFL Players' Association CEO Paul Marsh defended Smith as a 'breath of fresh air' for the AFL due to his unfiltered comments, while AFL CEO Andrew Dillon said Smith was a role model and that his flippant comment was not up to the standard expected of the league's stars. Riewoldt said the AFL's lax and secretive drug policy was partly to blame for the Smith controversy. 'I find myself torn by this. The AFL, from what I'm told, is pushing for a stricter drug policy, which aligns with Andrew Dillon's comments. The AFLPA is railing against that, so Paul Marsh supporting Bailey is consistent with what we've seen,' the Channel 7 AFL analyst said on Triple M's Mick in the Morning. 'The AFLPA essentially protects and condones players taking 'nose beers' — cocaine — under the current drug policy. There are so many loopholes in it. 'Until we get a stricter drug policy that comes down harder — particularly on players who take drugs recreationally, not because they have a problem — then spare me the fake outrage over social media posts. 'Paul Marsh said we're potentially only a few weeks away from a new code, but the AFLPA is reluctant to go harder due to concerns about leaked information and targeted testing. But again, spare us the outrage until you take real action.' Marsh said that Smith made an 'error.' 'What I will say about Bailey is that I think he's a breath of fresh air for the industry. The industry is crying out for players to show their personality, and people flock to him,' he said. 'Sometimes players make errors of judgment — Bailey's made one here.' Dillon said the AFL don't 'want to see it again'. 'Bailey is a role model and needs to be aware of that when engaging publicly or on social media,' he said. 'He made the comment, issued an apology, and I absolutely don't condone it. Drug use is serious and shouldn't be joked about. If he had his time again, I doubt he'd do it.' Since joining Geelong in a blockbuster trade last off-season, he's been in the spotlight but has largely let his football do the talking. The midfielder has surged into Brownlow Medal contention and looks set for his first All-Australian blazer. However, he has also been fined multiple times for obscene gestures, including flipping the bird in consecutive weeks. With 7NEWS
Perth Now
28-05-2025
- Sport
- Perth Now
AFL great calls out the REAL problem with Smith's drug joke
St Kilda legend Nick Riewoldt has criticised the AFL Players Association for its stance on the controversy surrounding Bailey Smith's 'nose beers' social media post, citing the league's lax drug policy. The 24-year-old has been cautioned by the AFL for the post, and the league has informed Geelong that their superstar recruit—according to 7NEWS chief AFL reporter Mitch Cleary — is 'on his last warning.' Smith has been a headline magnet since entering the AFL, but the hype has intensified this year in his first season with the Cats. In 2022, Smith was banned for two matches after admitting to using an illicit substance. A fan commented, 'nose beers after the game mate,' to which Smith replied, 'na bro, after the flag maybe tho.' 'Nose beers' is slang for cocaine. The comment was later deleted, but not before it was widely circulated. Outgoing AFL Players' Association CEO Paul Marsh defended Smith as a 'breath of fresh air' for the AFL due to his unfiltered comments, while AFL CEO Andrew Dillon said Smith was a role model and that his flippant comment was not up to the standard expected of the league's stars. Riewoldt said the AFL's lax and secretive drug policy was partly to blame for the Smith controversy. 'I find myself torn by this. The AFL, from what I'm told, is pushing for a stricter drug policy, which aligns with Andrew Dillon's comments. The AFLPA is railing against that, so Paul Marsh supporting Bailey is consistent with what we've seen,' the Channel 7 AFL analyst said on Triple M's Mick in the Morning. 'The AFLPA essentially protects and condones players taking 'nose beers' — cocaine — under the current drug policy. There are so many loopholes in it. 'Until we get a stricter drug policy that comes down harder — particularly on players who take drugs recreationally, not because they have a problem — then spare me the fake outrage over social media posts. 'Paul Marsh said we're potentially only a few weeks away from a new code, but the AFLPA is reluctant to go harder due to concerns about leaked information and targeted testing. But again, spare us the outrage until you take real action.' Nick Riewoldt has gone on the attack over the AFL's drug policy. Credit: Josh Chadwick / Getty Images Marsh said that Smith made an 'error.' 'What I will say about Bailey is that I think he's a breath of fresh air for the industry. The industry is crying out for players to show their personality, and people flock to him,' he said. 'Sometimes players make errors of judgment — Bailey's made one here.' Dillon said the AFL don't 'want to see it again'. 'Bailey is a role model and needs to be aware of that when engaging publicly or on social media,' he said. 'He made the comment, issued an apology, and I absolutely don't condone it. Drug use is serious and shouldn't be joked about. If he had his time again, I doubt he'd do it.' Since joining Geelong in a blockbuster trade last off-season, he's been in the spotlight but has largely let his football do the talking. The midfielder has surged into Brownlow Medal contention and looks set for his first All-Australian blazer. However, he has also been fined multiple times for obscene gestures, including flipping the bird in consecutive weeks. With 7NEWS
7NEWS
06-05-2025
- Sport
- 7NEWS
Nick Riewoldt accuses players of baffling stance on AFL illicit drugs policy: ‘Might save lives'
The AFL's attempt to remodel its outdated illicit drugs policy continues to drag on, and questions are being asked about the AFL Players' Association role in the protracted negotiations. It was thought by many in the industry that a deal would have been struck by now and the policy would have been released, but the two parties are still struggling to agree on all the details. Veteran AFL journalist Caroline Wilson said on Channel 7's The Agenda Setters that the 'AFL had lost a lot of bargaining power' after Sport Integrity Australia was handed 51 names of players to target test during the 2024 season. 'It's extraordinary that we're still talking about this. About six weeks ago, I said the AFL and the players were close to a deal but 14 or 15 months after it was put back on the agenda, still no deal,' Wilson said. 'The AFL Commission are getting impatient because (outgoing CEO) Paul Marsh leaves the Players' Association in the coming weeks, and they want to deal before Paul Marsh is gone.' Wilson also revealed that there will be no $5,000 fines in the first instance which the AFL had been pushing for in February, and the circle of players to be tested would not be significantly widened. 'Frankly, it's a bit of a mess,' Wilson said on The Agenda Setters. 'Not all the players are aligned in wanting a slightly softer welfare based policy, but Paul Marsh is ruling the roost ... so those who are vehemently anti drugs I don't think are being heard.' AFL legend and Agenda Setters panelist Nick Riewoldt said he couldn't understand why some players and the Players' Association were pushing back on changes to the policy. 'It is a shocking look for the players. This reeks right now,' Riewoldt said on The Agenda Setters. 'If the players are pushing back against a tougher drug code, this code is so old, society has moved so fast since this code was introduced. 'It is such a bad look for the players because it reeks of, 'Leave us alone, we want to take drugs'. That is what it looks like.' Kane Cornes said he was sick of the players' arguments against a stronger policy. 'Just don't do it and your reputation will be ruined by not participating in this program,' Cornes said. Riewoldt said it was also a safety issue. 'Why wouldn't the AFLPA be strong on this and say, 'Hey players, we're here to represent you and represent your interests. This is in your interest,' because, you know, we're not just talking about something illegal, we're talking about something dangerous,' Riewoldt said. 'The fentanyl epidemic. That's a real thing like. This (policy) might actually save lives, so I can't understand why the players would be pushing back against a tighter code.' Riewoldt doubled down on the comments on radio. 'It is time for a refresh, but the players are pushing back. Or at least the majority of players - it's being reported - are pushing back on a tighter code,' he said on Triple M's Mick in the Morning. 'The AFL leaked the target testing names to the drug-testing authorities – of players. So, the AFLPA and the players are pushing back on the AFL, saying, 'We don't want a tighter code because we don't trust you.' 'I think this is where the AFLPA need to be stronger; a stricter, tighter drug code for the players has to be a good thing, doesn't it?'
Daily Mail
06-05-2025
- Sport
- Daily Mail
Footy great Nick Riewoldt slams AFL players for making shock move that screams 'leave us alone, we want to take drugs'
St Kilda great Nick Riewoldt has reignited debate over the AFL 's illicit drugs policy, calling for a stricter, more transparent code that names players who fail multiple drug tests - and slamming today's stars for seeming to hold out for just the opposit. Riewoldt, who played 336 games for the Saints, slammed the AFL Players Association's resistance to a stricter drug policy, claiming it says terrible things about today's stars, especially in light of scandals like Demons star Joel Smith getting a four-year ban after allegedly testing positive to cocaine. 'It's a shocking look for the players,' he said on The Agenda Setters. 'This reeks of players pushing back against a tougher drug code. Society has moved so far since this code was introduced. 'It reeks of "leave us alone, we want to take drugs". That's what it looks like.' Riewoldt went into more detail on Triple M's Mick in the Morning, explaining that the current model isn't fit for purpose in 2025. 'Society and issues around drug-based has moved so far since that code was introduced,' he said. 'It is time for a refresh, but the players are pushing back. Or at least the majority of players - it's being reported - are pushing back on a tighter code. 'The AFL leaked the target testing names to the drug-testing authorities – of players. So, the AFLPA and the players are pushing back on the AFL, saying, "We don't want a tighter code because we don't trust you". 'I think this is where the AFLPA need to be stronger; a stricter, tighter drug code for the players has to be a good thing, doesn't it?' Co-host Titus O'Reilly asked Riewoldt what he meant by 'stricter'. 'Fines for testing positive, naming of players (testing positive)… just greater ramifications around a positive test,' said Riewoldt. 'The removal of the loopholes that have allowed players to self-report and essentially get a get out of jail free card any time they take drugs.' 'The other thing that's pretty sketchy is the landscape of taking drugs. We're not just talking about illegal behaviour; we're talking about dangerous behaviour. 'You read all the time about these fentanyl issues, and you think you're taking one thing, but you're taking another. 'A stricter drug code could only be a good thing for the players and the player's health and long-term prospects from a health and wellbeing point of view.' Molloy then asked what basis would a player be targeted for more testing and also suggested that naming players is a 'strong call'. Riewoldt explained that doing so would keep teams and players honest - players would only be outed after two strikes. 'If a player tests positive to an out-of-season test or a hair test, they go into the targeted testing capsule, and then they're just subject to more tests,' he said. 'There's accountability and an educational set-up that occurs as well. The code as it stands is outdated. 'Not (naming) on the first go. The trouble now is that you read 'ankle injury' or 'finger injury' (on the injury list), and there's every chance that's not the case. 'Now, everyone is tarred with the same brush, and we've all heard the rumours. In this situation, only those who have tested positive will be named for that.'
News.com.au
06-05-2025
- Sport
- News.com.au
Nick Riewoldt calls for players to be named in new illicit drugs policy
Nick Riewoldt has called for the AFL to deliver a more transparent illicit drugs policy and name players who fail multiple tests. The AFL remains locked in discussions with the AFL Players' Association over an updated policy with tensions between the two parties still simmering. FOX FOOTY, available on Kayo Sports, is the only place to watch every match of every round in the 2025 Toyota AFL Premiership Season LIVE in 4K, with no ad-breaks during play. New to Kayo? Get your first month for just $1. Limited-time offer. At the core of the dispute remains the list of 51 players' names that were handed over to Sport Integrity Australia investigators in March for targeted drug testing. The move reportedly blindsided AFLPA CEO Paul Marsh and has left the union at odds with the league over the confidentiality behind positive results. The AFL was determined to introduce strict measures within the illicit drugs policy with a $5000 fine for a first strike while a second strike would see the player named publicly. But the AFLPA has pushed back in a move that Riewoldt says is nothing more than a horrible look for the current players. 'It is a shocking look for the players. This reeks right now,' Riewoldt said on Channel 7's The Agenda Setters. 'If the players are pushing back against a tougher drug code, this code is so old, society has moved so fast since this code was introduced. 'It is such a bad look for the players because it reeks of, 'Leave us alone, we want to take drugs'. That is what it looks like.' While some players are reportedly on board with a tougher stance, the majority are said to be digging in their heels on the changes. Riewoldt said the AFLPA had to be stronger and get on board with the harsher measures to stop players from exploiting current loopholes within the existing policy. 'It is time for a refresh, but the players are pushing back. Or at least the majority of players - it's being reported - are pushing back on a tighter code,' Riewoldt said on Triple M's Mick in the Morning. 'The AFL leaked the target testing names to the drug-testing authorities – of players. So, the AFLPA and the players are pushing back on the AFL, saying, 'We don't want a tighter code because we don't trust you.' 'I think this is where the AFLPA need to be stronger; a stricter, tighter drug code for the players has to be a good thing, doesn't it?' Co-host Titus O'Reilly asked: 'What do you mean by stricter?' Riewoldt responded: 'Fines for testing positive, naming of players (testing positive) … just greater ramifications around a positive test. The removal of the loopholes that have allowed players to self-report and essentially get a 'get out of jail free' card anytime they take drugs. 'The other thing that's pretty sketchy is the landscape of taking drugs. We're not just talking about illegal behaviour; we're talking about dangerous behaviour. You read all the time about these fentanyl issues, and you think you're taking one thing, but you're taking another. 'A stricter drug code could only be a good thing for the players and the players' health and long-term prospects from a health and wellbeing point of view.' Mick Molloy then questioned on what basis would an AFL player become targeted for more testing and also stated that naming players is a strong stance to take. Riewoldt however said doing so would keep players and teams honest and that only after two strikes would they be outed. 'If a player tests positive to an out-of-season test or a hair test, they go into the targeted testing capsule, and then they're just subject to more tests. There's accountability and an educational set-up that occurs as well. The code as it stands is outdated,' he said. 'Not (naming) on the first go. The trouble now is that you read 'ankle injury' or 'finger injury' (on the injury list), and there's every chance that's not the case. Now, everyone is tarred with the same brush, and we've all heard the rumours. In this situation, only those who have tested positive will be named for that.' The AFL and AFLPA continue to remain at loggerheads over an updated illicit drugs policy with talks between the two parties dragging on. 'It is extraordinary we're still talking about this. Six weeks ago I said the AFL and the players were close to a deal,' Caroline Wilson said on Channel 7's The Agenda Setters. '14 to 15 months after it was put back on the agenda, still no deal. 'The commission are getting impatient because Paul Marsh leaves the players association in the coming weeks and they want a dealt before he is gone. 'I think the deal will be done, but I think they will want it done with this current administration and frankly it is a bit of a mess.'
