drugged up athletes denying the undeniable

While I was reading a recent article about celebrity (or socialite to be exact) Totti Goldsmith getting busted for allegedly being in possession of cocaine at a rock music festival, her denials of the allegations got me thinking of all those god awful athletes (especially cyclists and track and field competitors) who when caught, immediately switch to plausible deniability mode, and plead that there's been some kind of terrible mistake and that they're innocent of the allegations. Well there's been a mistake alright, they didn't use enough masking agent and got caught! While making no aspersions on dear old Totti, this appalling mindset that exists in professional sport that we just deny everything really has got to change. And perhaps it might if we had journalists who actually took these athletes to task for their crimes, instead we usually see an instinctive maternal response where the media laps up their denials while continuing to portray them in the best possible light.
And if the media are not bad enough, when these allegations finally go before the relevant authorities, (as an example I'll use cyclist Nathan O'Neill) they're found guilty of a violation, yet the Arbitrator slaps them on the wrist with a "no significant fault or negligence" finding! I mean no wonder these guys can just keep blatantly taking drugs, because they know that even if they get caught with something in their system, they can usually come up with a plausible denial that we'll gladly swallow. The media won't vilify them too much, they'll keep their sponsors, and at worst they'll have a short ban for an "unintended" violation. That's how these things seem to work I'm afraid.
And btw, does anybody still remember that Shane Warne is a convicted drug cheat?

Kennett responsible for increased drug use?

I was passing the time on youtube recently, and came across the Victorian State Coalition's election campaign advert for the 1996 election see it here , and noticed that they promised "alcohol free" discos. I assume this (absurd) idea was a pathetic attempt to be seen to be doing SOMETHING about the King St nightclub precinct violence that was spiralling out of control at the time?
But this got me to thinking, did this idea of "alcohol free" discos morph into the giant rave party scene which took off in the 90s, which were alcohol free, but contained about 95% drug use of patrons?
How ironic would that be, if by trying to lower nightclub violence, you've helped create a flourishing pill popping drug scene?.....which shows no signs of abating!