So we find out today that Andrew Johns was not only a recreational drug user for a decade, but the members of his team also knew.
For probably 10 years on and off I have taken it. It was usually during the off season but there were times during the season I have played Russian roulette with the drugs testers,” said Johns, who admitted some officials and players at the Newcastle Knights knew of his drug taking.. “I was about 19, 20, 21 when I first started taking it, and to be honest I sort of used it to escape all the pressure.
Somehow though I don’t think you can call it Russian Roulette when you’ve only been tested 17 times in a decade. Interesting too is this piece by Jacquelin Magnay that reveals Joey had a pretty good understanding of the testing protocols and clearance times of the drugs he was taking.
Johns said he would take drugs in the off-season, when there was no testing, or play “Russian roulette” on occasions during the season.
“If you play a Friday night, you don’t train on a Saturday, Sunday and generally it’s out by Monday,” Johns said of the drugs clearing his system and therefore not being detectable.
Which of course leaves one big question needing to be asked in a list of many, what other kinds of drugs have you taken Joey?
10 responses so far ↓
Shaun // Aug 31, 2007 at 9:36 am
I hate how clubs elite athletes are protected from their vices. Ffs can’t someone say “no, you are being a dickhead and stop it”?
Both the NRL and AFL need to adopt a stance that no matter how great a player is, they they have to bear the full responsibility of their actions. Not have it covered up or handled with kid gloves.
Mungo Amanda // Aug 31, 2007 at 10:16 am
I don’t know Phil, what else did he take?
Having ecstacy a few times a year doesn’t put you in the dickhead shock outrage string em up and never let them near kiddies category in my book. Ho hum. I don’t see how he has been protected anymore than any other human being is by their mates and colleagues. People don’t often dob in friends and family members for having a toke.
In fact if he was not an elite athlete his misdemeanour in London would not have made the front pages a world away. You and I are protected from consequences for our actions by anonymity. Far more protected than any elite athlete.
Phil // Aug 31, 2007 at 10:42 am
It signifies deeper doping issues, seen it all before, same arguments, same rationalisations, not our sport, not our hero, not our team, no coverups, he did it on his own….
We know nothing, see nothing, hear nothing. Society as a whole…
Pffftt!
Yada, yada, yada ad infinitum.
Then there are the due process arguments in the face of what turns out to be criminal conspiracy.
Doping and recreational drug (and gambling) use allows criminal elements into sport in a way that has not existed before and ultimately the athletes are involved in this. Trafficking, dealing etc…
But then again what do I know? I’m just a mushroom.
Ho hum indeed.
Mungo Amanda // Aug 31, 2007 at 10:44 am
We can wink wink nudge nudge implying inside knowledge all day but .. . in this case? Evidence?
Mungo Amanda // Aug 31, 2007 at 11:13 am
I know what you are talking about re: cycling. But I just don’t immediately see how you can lift circumstances which are different in almost every category from one context, plop them down in another and proclaim it meaningful.
Phil // Aug 31, 2007 at 11:18 am
Amanda, I have no direct evidence in this particular case, just the heavy weight of history and experience on these issues.
Actually Amanda I can because it’s a template. Anyone who plays sport seriously knows how it’s done.
Come with me to your local bodybuilding gym hangout, it’s where we’ll meet the local eccy and roids supplier……the same one that hangs out at the local nightclubs.
Gotta get your gear from somewhere. And if that doesn’t work, the strength coach at the club might know a few guys you can talk to.
Mungo Amanda // Aug 31, 2007 at 11:26 am
We shall see. You may be vindicated soon. Now the journos are all coming out saying they knew all about Joey’s eccy dabblings so will now presumably feel free to explore at length. And that serious journalism on the topic you’re hankerin’ for might get done.
I’m still not bringing out the black cap yet.
Shaun // Aug 31, 2007 at 2:34 pm
Roy Masters makes the point that while he knew of Johns’ drug taking, defamation laws made it impossible for him to go public.
David Jackmanson // Aug 31, 2007 at 2:58 pm
Trackback
staronline8 // Apr 11, 2008 at 3:49 pm
I’m supporting this idea all the way! I can not imagine who would disagree with it. On the whole – make posts like this more often.