Aflpa

[Sanecow]

"We represent the collective interests of players and but I think when you take into account the overall circumstances, it's not a great picture," he said.

"But as I said we're still getting a handle on the nature of these charges and whether they're going to be sustained."

Source

I would think that the organisation responsible for covering up illicit drug use (three strikes / medical records in the gutter scandal) owes their members more than just to ditch them when they do get into trouble. At the very least it shows that their current approach is not working.

[reigning premier]

"We represent the collective interests of players and but I think when you take into account the overall circumstances, it's not a great picture," he said.

"But as I said we're still getting a handle on the nature of these charges and whether they're going to be sustained."

Exactly. The represent the collective. And whilst they may WANT to support all members in a time of need, you have to accept, that will not always be possible.

In any association or union, the needs of the majority will always outweight the wishes of the few.

I think you'll recall the AFLPA was on front foot protecting Cousins in the first instance and ensuring he was treated fairly. However, he is now potentially damaging the collective by his own individual actions. Though I note by the comments above, they are in fact maintaining an "innocent until proven guilty" stance.