AFLPA, AFL close to agreement on new illciit drugs policy

The AFL and AFLPA are close to an agreement on changes to the league’s illicit drugs policy, with players “gaming the system” set to face greater scrutiny.

The AFL and player union are edging closer to a new illicit drugs deal with clearer guidelines about players with continued poor behaviour receiving drug strikes that will fall short of Eddie McGuire’s ‘scorched earth’ approach.

The AFLPA released its Insights and Impact Report on Thursday which showed record engagement with mental health experts and improved workplace culture for its players assessed in club-by-club surveys.

But the under-reporting of concussions continues to be a concern, with 17 of the 105 AFLW players who experienced a concussion in 2024 not reporting symptoms.

In all 20 of the 142 men who suffered a concussion did not report symptoms — one in seven — although that number decreased from the one in five who did not report symptoms in the previous year.

The insights survey stated the most common reason for under-reporting by AFLW players was the “fear of missing games due to the short season”.

The coming season will be played with 12 games in 12 weeks, but last year’s condensed season with multiple games in some weeks meant reporting a concussion might have seen players miss three games.

AFLPA boss Paul Marsh will depart on Friday with interim boss Ben Smith to take charge.

Much of the heavy lifting has been done on the details of a new policy, but it will not be the heavily punitive approach ex-Pies president McGuire has demanded.

AFL boss Andrew Dillon.

There have been at least 20,000 illicit drug tests since the policy went behind closed doors with no public reporting of positives, with not one second strike in the past decade.

Current negotiations are detailing the ways in which the policy can still protect the players who take drugs to mask serious mental health or trauma issues but also crack down on the very few troublemakers gaming the system.

Many of the latter category are not handed second strikes as they state mental health reasons.

But under a new policy there could be a more definitive framework for those players to be handed strikes if they refuse to work within the parameters of the IDP.

That could include if they refuse treatment or do not attend medical sessions, which has been a frustration of the AFL for some players this year.

The AFL and player union believe the current model saves lives and allows many players to rehabilitate themselves without the adverse consequences of being named and shamed.

But whether the policy penalises those who do not have trauma or mental health-based issues yet are in effect shielded by its confidentiality provisions is an open question.

Originally published as AFLPA, AFL close to agreement on new illciit drugs policy