The Ball's In Cousins' Court

Sydney Morning Herald

Monday November 19, 2007

Richard Hinds

SINCE the AFL Commission summoned former West Coast midfielder Ben Cousins to determine if he had brought the game into disrepute, opinions about how the commission should deal with this troublesome and sensitive case have been sharply divided.

The hanging judges believe that, having been given every chance to change his ways - or at least take meaningful steps toward a fully funded rehabilitation - Cousins should be punished. That he not only deserves the sanction the AFL failed to apply before the season, despite a significant rap sheet, but that the league is duty bound to make an example of the troubled star.

The touchy-feelies' sentiment is that Cousins is the victim of a society-wide problem. That, having put its store in a rehabilitation-based anti-drugs policy, the AFL is obliged to stay the trip with Cousins. And that, most emotively, those who sit in judgement should stop and think how they would feel if he was their son or brother.

Usually, such disparate opinions would make for a painstaking judgement by the eight commissioners when they hear Cousins' case today - particularly given they will be tip-toeing through a legal minefield as they decide what constitutes evidence that Cousins has brought the game into disrepute and what is mere rumour and innuendo.

That task was made more difficult when the charges brought after his arrest in Perth last month - the incident that triggered Cousins' sacking by West Coast and the AFL summons, - were dropped. Not to mention the fact Cousins has never acknowledged his supposed addiction to methamphetamine.

However, unless Cousins' representatives insist on forcing the AFL to make a clear-cut decision on his guilt or innocence, the timing of today's hearing has ensured there is one sensible solution that should satisfy everyone - that Cousins stands out of football for the next 12 months and, hopefully, returns in 2009 healthy.

The timing is right because AFL clubs will finalise their lists at next Saturday's national draft and the pre-season draft in early December, meaning there is insufficient time for Cousins to satisfy the commission he would be fit to play next season - and no subsequent mechanism for him to take a place on an AFL list before the end of 2008.

Cousins' representatives, David Grace, QC, manager Ricky Nixon and father Bryan, might argue that his rehabilitation is further advanced than recent publicity has suggested, that the dropping of the most recent charges strengthen the claim he had not relapsed and that rumours of a five-day cocaine binge in Los Angeles this month were just that - rumours.

While that might help soften the AFL's stance, the commission is unlikely to allow him to resume training with a club immediately, even if one was willing to draft Cousins. (And, given the strings the AFL can pull, a team that did seize on any legal loopholes to snare Cousins would no doubt find itself playing a lot of "home" games in Alice Springs.) More difficult to determine is how the commission will couch its verdict. Will it bring down a ban and wash its hands of Cousins for 12 months until the time comes to decide if he is fit to be re-registered? Or will it again attempt to play a role in his recovery by casting the suspension as a one-year rehabilitation period under its supervision?

Cousins is not taking the hearing lightly. He was photographed shopping for a suit, meaning he will not turn up for "court" wearing a t-shirt and jeans - something that has given the impression he has not taken his dilemma seriously.

As the AFL commission judges a case that presents many legal and moral dilemmas and which has embarrassed the game once already, it will be as relieved as Cousins' advisers about that.

© 2007 Sydney Morning Herald

Back to News Index | Back to Home