Graeme Allan's poorly judged advice to a distressed young Lachie Whitfield to spend three nights at the home of Craig Lambert back in 2015 has surely been trumped by the version of events all three men have offered in the face of serious anti-doping charges.
It was one thing to panic on Whitfield's behalf — as Allan and Lambert allegedly did — and share his fear that a drug test might unearth something more career-threatening than an illegal party drug. You could even excuse their failure to understand the serious rules they were allegedly breaching despite the years of experience held by the two officials.
But it was quite another to cling to their claim that the entire affair — as laid out by blatant text messages between Whitfield and his former partner — was concocted by the young GWS player because he was attempting to deal with a girlfriend problem.
It is difficult to imagine why a footballer attempting to handle or finish a turbulent relationship with a so-called unpredictable and erratic partner would tell her that he feared he could test positive to performance-enhancing drugs after taking illicit substances. Further, that even though she was overseas at the time, he would make up the fact via text message that he was moving into Lambert's home to avoid a potential drug test - when instead he had a migraine.
Even allowing for the fact that Whitfield's ex-girlfriend supplied the text message evidence that looks certain to harm the careers of all three men, there is no doubt her initial position was one of concern for her partner's welfare. And it is so disappointing that the entire unfortunate affair has been laid at her feet as the key element of the trio's defence.
Fairfax Media's Michael Gleeson, who broke this story after the AFL and the Giants had kept it under wraps for more than a year, wrote in August that it remains a typical response in football to blame a woman. Certainly Tania Hird and her role in the Essendon scandal comes to mind.
But so does the other Hird, the coach who was in large part to blame for allowing the drug program. Like Whitfield, Hird showed a lack of judgment and received appalling and ultimately career-threatening advice. Like Allan and Lambert, Hird failed to put his hand up early on and therefore mitigate the damage.
Even after the pair had escaped serious sanction following an internal club investigation, the two seasoned officials had the opportunity to admit their error. Whitfield would have been well advised to do the same. Even after ASADA and the AFL became involved and investigators had electronic devices, all three stuck to their official view that the incident was pure subterfuge – a blind performed in response to a problematic woman.
They still would have faced penalties but the damage to the reputations of all – particularly Allan and Lambert who remain the object of some derision now – would have been less significant. What could have been explained as an ill-advised but well-intentioned manoeuvre in the best interests of the player now smacks of cover-up, deceit and bungling.
And any chance of a negotiated outcome overseen by the AFL Commission now looks impossible as the competition and the national anti-doping authority are working together with separate sets of legal advice, both of which look ominous.
The facts of the case are now well known. There was no drug test, nor even the threat of one at the time of Whitfield's fears. The questions too continue to linger. They include just why the officials escaped serious penalties following the club's internal investigation and how CEO Dave Matthews and his board missed them given subsequent allegations that emails and text messages were deleted and former girlfriend Nowland was so concerned about Whitfield and initially shushed.
Again we ask why the AFL, which has previously damned the slow-moving ASADA, has procrastinated over the situation and allowed the officials to move into key welfare and football roles at other clubs without alerting those clubs to the allegations against them? How on earth has this investigation taken almost 16 months?
Certainly Collingwood have been severely embarrassed by the Allan situation. The cracks have been emerging at the Magpies from the board level down and both Eddie McGuire and Gary Pert impacted by the decision to appoint him over Neil Balme. Not only was Nathan Buckley not a part of the decision but other staff were deceived. Now Balme has gone and Allan faces a lengthy suspension and the club has a favourite son in the final year of his coaching contract looking at the prospect of his fifth football boss in just over three years.
Lambert, despite two years remaining on his deal at Brisbane, cannot be confident of surviving. And worst of all, a 22-year-old star footballer who possibly faced a positive illicit drug strike, now could miss at least the 2017 season.
