[Brian McIlmoyle]

As a field owner and game host I see it as my job to monitor and enforce on field behavior.

I don't condone the use of illegal drugs on the field and would not tolerate it during a game on my property.

It adds risks that I don't want to deal with , the least of which is stoned players.

The greater risk to me is to the other players who have an expectation of certain degrees of safety while playing, facing impaired players adds a level of risk that the other players did not sign up for. I as host could be liable for damages that impaired players cause because I did not take steps to mitigate this risk.

Ill tolerate a couple of beers post game, I don't mind even seeing a beer or two during breaks ( but my games don't have any breaks so I don't see this much) I have even run games where one of the objectives was a cooler full of beer.
But I won't tolerate "drinking" ( as in to acheive an intoxicated state) during games.


I personally typically carry a small flask of whiskey on the field..(this being a habit long established... I often never open it) that Ill enjoy at breaks or post game.. it's discrete and not enough to intoxicate me.. as it is often shared in sipps with other players ..

anyway that is my position..

on the issue of ASC's role in enforcement of on field behavior.. it has none, ASC is not responsible to enforce player behavior, it has not been empowered by concensus of its members to do so. It is not at risk of loss regarding the behavior of players and so it has no standing in enforcement.

Empowering a entitiy that is nothing more than an meeting and information sharing clearing house with such a mandate is bound to lead to abuses and will result in an overall loss of membership.

ASC has no place in this issue, it is a Host / field owner problem full stop.