The AFL’s new illicit drugs policy will see tougher penalties for offenders, with players now to be named after their second strike.

A first-time offender will receive a suspended fine and the chance to modify their behaviour through sessions with a counsellor, but a second strike will result in a four-week ban and a $5000 fine.

A third offence will draw a 12-week ban and $10,000 fine.

• WADA claims ‘new proof’ in Essendon saga
• New Saint Jake Carlisle apologises for ‘mistake’
• Gold Coast’s Harley Bennell cops suspended ban, fine

Under the AFL’s previous three-strike policy, only club doctors were informed after first and second positive tests.

Players were named publicly and suspended for up to 18 games if they recorded three failed tests in a four-year cycle.

The changes will come into effect immediately, however players who had two strikes under the previous regime will not be made public unless they test positive again.

AFL football operations manager Mark Evans said the league had toughened up the rules after wide consultation and with the support of the players.

“The policy was introduced in 2005, and it’s evolved quite a bit over that time, but earlier this year we committed with the players’ association to review the policy and its operation,” he said.

“Along the way [we] involved clubs, players, AFL doctors and others – as you can expect there’s a wide range of views on what we should or shouldn’t do with the policy.”

The illicit drugs code is separate to the standard WADA performance-enhancing-drugs policy and is a voluntary agreement between the AFL and the players.

Illicit drugs an issue for greater society

Mr Evans said illicit drugs were an issue for the whole of society, and there was no silver bullet.

“If you think this is an AFL alone issue, you’re wrong,” he said.

“This is an issue that every parent of teenagers and university age children would have to deal with, and what we’ve tried to do is almost act like a parent here.

“If you had a child who needed some medical assistance you would want to provide that, if you had a child who made a poor decision you would want to give them the tools to avoid that decision.

“If you had a child that continued to make poor decisions you would expect bigger consequences for that and that’s what this policy tries to do.”

The AFL Players Association Paul Marsh were generally “brilliant role models” and not taking illicit drugs.

“As much as we talk about how big an issue illicit drugs is, we’re talking about a very, very small number of players who have transgressed in this space,” he said.

“The amount of great work that they do, not only playing the game but in the community often gets overlooked, so I would say that the vast majority of players are fantastic role models.”