This article is a 3rd of a series, see related articles below for more

While every effort should be made to help drug addicts overcome their dependence, no matter what the drug, no effort should be spared in weeding out the drug cheats. The problem these days, though, is that the boundary between drug addict and drug cheat has become very blurred.

Steroid abuse is addictive and enhances performance. Recreational or illicit drugs like cocaine (and ice etc) are addictive and can also enhance performance. Why, then, are they treated differently by the WADA who, on the one hand, ban steroids in and out of competition while cocaine is only banned in competition?

In the Australian Football League (AFL) and National Rugby League (NFL) however, drugs like cocaine and cannabis are subject to in-house testing ‘out-of-competition’ and not subject to sanctioning unless players have three strikes against them. (ASADA do in-competition testing where sanctions apply on the first strike). So have the AFL and NRL administrators taken their eye off the ball? All the talk is about the addiction of illicit drugs and how players should be helped rather than punished for their addiction. What’s been lost in the debate though is the potential for illicit drugs like cocaine to be performance enhancing.

And what exactly does ‘out-of-competition’ mean. Is it pre-season, is it during training or is after a game? It could be argued that testing positive for recreational drugs out of competition, as defined above, is not cheating. But it is, because if you are taking these drugs while training you may be performing harder than you normally would. Come game day though, because you may not be juiced for fear of testing positive in competition, you may not play as hard as you train deflating the expectations of team mates and coaches.

Most cheats taking ‘traditional’ sports drugs like steroids do so while training and ‘taper off'’ in the days leading up to competition with probably little affect on the performance benefits already obtained from ‘drug therapy’ while training. If you are ‘high’ on recreational drugs during training but ‘normal’ at game time you may not necessarily be cheating against the other team but you are cheating yourself, your coach, your team, your club, your sport and the public. There is little doubt though that when used on game day, recreational drugs can enhance performance and then you would be cheating against the opposition, the sport and the public.

In the current saga that has embroiled the AFL’s West Coast Eagles, their CEO, Trevor Nisbett, took the view that it was all to do with addictive behaviour. At last count there were eight players suspected, or known to be, partaking in drugs at his club and the focus has been on star play-maker Ben Cousins.

Nisbett said: "We failed in our attempt to assist Ben because we are not counsellors; we are not equipped to spot people. The first sign you notice is when a guy doesn't turn up for training or he is late for training and there is no reason given, or his behaviour changes from what it was. At the end of it, we feel a little bit useless."

Nisbett says clubs must be told at an earlier stage when their players test positive to drugs such as cocaine, ecstasy and ice, and that they must have authority to target - test players with the consent of the players and the AFL Players' Association - when anecdotal or circumstantial evidence of drug use arises. There is no mention that players could be cheating though. Under the current drug testing policies those caught out of competition are labelled addicts but those caught on game day would be labelled as cheats.

Perhaps there should be zero tolerance for recreational drugs and that they should be banned during out-of-competition periods also, because like steroids, whether they are used out of competition or on game day it is still cheating. By all means, if recreational drug addicts/cheats need help they should still receive it whether exposed by official in or out of competition testing.

In-house and out-of-competition testing tends to hide the recreational drug problem, not address it. The West Coast Eagles case is exposing the flaws in the AFL’s current policy. Only 500 tests per year among 600 or so players means that a player is tested at best once per year. On that basis it would take three years to incur three strikes and then only if each test was positive. It is a long time to for an addict to hide unless the testing is targeted.

Any way you look at it though there is no easy answer and as a result the AFL’s drug testing credibility is teetering on the brink. The NRL should be keeping a close eye on developments or they may be heading down the same path as well.

  • Robin Parisotto is author of Blood Sports – the inside dope on drugs in sport.
Drug cheat or addict? What's the answer to the problem? Let us have your view at Sportingo.