Riewoldt urges AFL to update 'outdated' illicit drugs policy as McGuire warns of looming crisis if they don't

St Kilda legend Nick Riewoldt has called on the AFL to overhaul its illicit drug policy so that it may better protect players.

Earlier this year, the AFL proposed a stricter three-strikes code in response to criticism around players abusing the current procedures.

Riewoldt, who has been an outspoken critic of the league's protocols around drug issues, has again demanded a tougher, more transparent code.

READ MORE: Two riders dead after 'catastrophic' Superbikes crash

READ MORE: Why Aussie pro wrestling star 'broke down in tears' in Las Vegas

READ MORE: Mam 'temptation' put to the test after 'very lucky' suspension

Speaking on Triple M's Mick in the Morning, Riewoldt declared that the current policy, which has been in place since 2005, is in desperate need of an update.

"Drug-related societal issues have moved so far since that code was introduced," he said.

"The code as it stands is outdated.

"It is time for a new one, it is time for a refresh, but the players are pushing back, or at least the majority of players — it's being reported — are pushing back on a tighter code."

It has been reported that the AFL leaked targeted test lists with 51 players' names to drug-testing authorities, namely Sport Integrity Australia (SIA). The AFL's reason for specifically targeting players for performance-enhancing drugs is not known, but the body has promised it will not happen again.

In response, the AFL Players' Association (AFLPA) has expressed concern and suspicion around the AFL providing lists to SIA, with increased risks of player anonymity being exposed.

The AFLPA's resistance stems from the AFL potentially using information from its confidential illicit drugs policy, such as positive hair test results, to create the target list for performance-enhancing drug testing under the anti-doping code.

This was challenged by Riewoldt, who believes the AFLPA should be showing more leadership on the issue.

"The AFLPA and the players are pushing back on the AFL and a tighter code, saying, 'We don't want a tighter code because we don't trust you'," he said.

"I think this is where the AFLPA need to be stronger; a stricter, tighter drug code for the players has to be a good thing, doesn't it?"

Riewoldt's co-host Titus O'Reily questioned what the five-time All-Australian meant by "stricter".

Riewoldt said: "Fines for testing positive, naming of players [who test positive]. Just greater ramifications around a positive test".

Former Collingwood president Eddie McGuire is equally frustrated with the resistance to strengthening the rules, saying the goal should be to save players from a life of drugs before they become addicted, rather than simply hiding it.

"Call me old-fashioned, but [players need] an early intervention. Because we want knuckleheads playing football," McGuire told Nine's Eddie and Jimmy podcast.

"We want people from all parts of life. We don't just want to make it a private school game.

"But you've got to be able to look after people when they come in. You've got to be able to adjudicate, and the biggest scourge in our society - I know that nine per cent of people pulled up on the roads get done for drugs - and they don't even test for cocaine.

"I'm not a religious crusader, I just see people's lives getting blown up. I just think we've got young dummies finding bad friends and getting themselves into big trouble, and it's not being talked about. Everyone is hedging their bets on it.

"It's a very simple solution. Test our players properly in season and the idea is to not let them get into drugs, not become open season for nefarious activities and look after people.

"And if you don't want to do that and you want to be the cocaine sniffing champion of Victoria, knock yourself out, but you can't play footy.

"I don't know what the argument is. I don't know why you die in a ditch for people about to blow your competition up.

"I'm giving you the tip: the number of players who will come back to the AFL in a few years and say 'your drug rules taught me how to get around [tests]'.

"Every week, there's another situation that raises eyebrows."

Riewoldt agrees that loopholes are allowing players to feel total contempt for the policy.

The previously proposed changes from the AFL would see players fined $5000 for a first offence before being named publicly and whacked with a suspension for a second offence.

The changes will also include the removal of the self-reporting flaw, which has previously allowed players to avoid a second offence strike if they are to make their drug use known.

"The removal of the loopholes that have allowed players to self-report and essentially get a 'get out of jail free' card anytime they take drugs," Riewoldt said.

Riewoldt argued that the current policy lacks accountability and that naming players after their first strike could improve transparency and promote open communication.

"If a player tests positive to an out-of-season test or a hair test, they go into the targeted testing capsule, and then they're just subject to more tests. There's accountability and an educational doctor-patient set-up that occurs as well," he said.

"The trouble now is that you read 'ankle injury' or 'finger injury' [on a club's injury list], and there's every chance that's not the case. Same with 'personal reasons'.

"Now, everyone is tarred with the same brush, and we've all heard the rumours: 'Oh, he's not playing because he's actually tested positive [to illicit drugs].

"But in this situation, only those who have tested positive will be named for that. No guessing or letting the rumour mill go into overdrive.

"We're not just talking about illegal behaviour; we're talking about dangerous behaviour.

"A stricter drug code could only be a good thing for the players and the players' health and long-term prospects from a health and wellbeing point of view."