I just read an article that made me choke on my late meal.
Some rugby league player was banned for two years in the UK after failing a drug test. He has lashed out at the league authorities stating that not enough was done to educate players about being drug free.
The article quotes a spokes person for the League saying that they felt they did enough and I quote:” the RFL says it does as much as it can to educate players about the perils of supplements and drug use.
“There has been an extensive information campaign for many seasons now and we have actually been praised by UK Sport for our anti-doping efforts,” an RFL spokesman told BBC Sport.
“We signed up to the 100% ME campaign and introduced a player education programme with posters in every dressing room, lectures, information booklets circulated around the clubs and a special section on our website.”
Oh, so that is enough!
Whose responsibility is Communication? The Sender or the Receiver? Let us go back to Comm 101. Communication is at best an imperfect science. Thus it is the responsibility of the sender.
It reminds me of the Peanut joke. I taught me dog to whistle. His friend replied, saying: I do not hear him whistle. To which Peanuts replied: “I said I taught him, I did not say he learnt how”.
Did the banned player pass an exam? Without checking for understanding and ensuring that the message got through, the League me thinks have a problem.
Read the full article at: