Party boys don’t fear the AFL’s illicit drugs policy, writes Jon Ralph

Ben Cousins was a severe ice addict but was able to stay off drugs for two seasons when his career depended on it because he knew the ramifications if he failed a test.

Ben Cousins is believed to have passed every drug test conducted by Richmond during his two seasons at the club.

The’s AFL’S worst known drug addict was able to stay off drugs for two seasons when his career depended upon it.

Ben Cousins was such a severe ice addict he took a lengthy toilet break during an initial interview with Richmond.

ROBBO: AFL’S SILENCE ON ROOEY DRUG CLAM DEAFENING

NICK RIEWOLDT: DRUG USE IN AFL ‘OUT OF CONTROL’

Former coach Terry Wallace suspected he was up to no good.

Yet the Tigers subjected him to drug tests three times a week — and a series of hair tests conducted by the AFL — and to the best of our knowledge every single result was negative.

There were hairy moments across his two seasons, including a bizarre medical visit after he allegedly mixed a sleeping tablet with wine, but he passed a subsequent drug test.

Drug testing every AFL player three times a week is overkill, no matter whether you believe drugs are “rife” or just a societal problem reflected in football.

But as St Kilda great Nick Riewoldt said this week, the only real disincentive for AFL party boys is for them to know they absolutely will get caught.

The AFL’s illicit drugs code needs some mechanism to deal with seriously mentally ill players who might also be battling with illicit drugs.

Ben Cousins was drug tested three times a week at Richmond.

Surely, though, that applies only to a handful of the AFL’s 800-plus players.

For the ratbags who have already returned one positive result, consider testing them monthly or fortnightly — and make them pay for it.

If you want to play AFL football, prove to us you are clean for at least the following season.

We are told players who test positive once to illicit drugs or record a positive hair test during the off-season are target-tested.

But the secrecy of the code means there is exactly zero detail on whether this actually happens.

Former player manager Ricky Nixon has battled his own addiction issues, but he was the man who got Cousins through the 2009 and 2010 seasons.

He does not believe in a one-strike policy but says Cousins knew the ramifications if he didn’t pass the tests for illicit drugs.

“There are situations in life where people are drug tested on parole and the minute their parole finishes they relapse,” Nixon said.

“So you can’t test someone for life, you need to be educated in that time and work out why you are using drugs.

Ricky Nixon is against a one-strike policy. Picture: Jerad Williams

“But my experience was that Ben got through that period well. He was being scrutinised and he knew his future was on the line.

“It’s why I am a big believer in a two-strike situation. If you test positive once you get a second chance.

“You can’t expect everyone to be angels. Sometimes I have had players go down the track of alcohol or drugs when they lose a parent, so it’s a bit tough of Nick to comment like he did (about a one-strike system).”

AFL doctor Peter Harcourt said in 2014 that 95 per cent of AFL players taking illicit drugs were ratbags.

So what are the AFL and AFL Players’ Association doing to ensure those ratbags are weeded out?

It is obvious that those players are trying to game the system by using the now-closed loophole over self-reporting.

And, allegedly, by using the crutch of mental health to avoid positive tests.

If the AFL is to review a policy that in 15 years has never had a player suspended for illicit drug use apart from Travis Tuck, why not put the onus on one-strike players to prove they are clean?