Adrian Anderson has leapt to the defence of the AFL's illicit drugs policy, claiming Travis Tuck's clinical depression would have gone undiagnosed had it not been for his first two strikes.
Tuck was on Tuesday night suspended for 12 weeks after receiving a third strike following his drug overdose in his car last Friday night, with the 23-year-old informing his club of the incident some 24 hours later.
Having only been told of the latest incident on Saturday night, the Hawks were dismayed to be informed on Sunday evening that Tuck had in fact already received two strikes and would therefore face penalties that included up to 18 matches on the sidelines as a result.
Hawthorn chief executive Stuart Fox reacted angrily after the hearing, slamming the league's policy because the Hawks doctor Peter Baquie was the only person at the club aware that Tuck had failed two tests.
But Anderson defended the policy on Wednesday morning, suggesting that there would not be a policy in the first place if the league was required to inform clubs of first or even second positive tests.
"The players have told us in no uncertain terms in the past that 'we believe it's up to us as a player to decide who we wish to tell'," Anderson said.
"Yes the club doctor finds out, in this case the club doctor's been fantastic in the support he's provided (to Tuck)."
"But the players have said beyond that it's up to the player to choose who he wishes to tell."
According to Anderson, Tuck's problems would have been a lot worse were it not for the treatment he has been receiving since his first and subsequent second failed tests.
"If we had said to the players that the only way we're going to have this policy is if we tell the presidents and the coaches and the CEOs, there would be no policy and there would be no detection and the depression wouldn't have got diagnosed and he would've been demonstrably worse off," he added.
"I would make the point that if a club was required to know under the policy this would never have been detected."
"The treatment that Travis Tuck has been receiving over the last year has been fundamental to him being in the position that he's in today."
"It could easily have been very much worse."
Anderson also dismissed suggestions that Tuck could have been better off had club officials and his team-mates been informed because they could have helped him deal with his personal issues.
"It's up to the player who he wishes to inform," Anderson said.
"He's been responding extremely well to the treatment he's received."
"We've spoken to the doctor treating him ... he doesn't believe there's much else that could've been done."
"But at the end of the day it's an academic point because the only reason we have the policy and the only reason this got detected and treated was because the policy exists."
"And the policy would not exist if we told players we're going to tell people at your club automatically every time."