THE testy relationship between the AFL and Ben Cousins shows no signs of abating. Cousins clearly will jump through hoops to regain some of his former football glory and the AFL has allowed him to try but there is no love lost between them.

The commission regards Cousins as something of a narcissist. It has let him get away with shaving his head and therefore physically unable to submit a worthy hair sample two weeks ago simply because it believed it had no choice given he had provided more than one clean urine sample during the same period.

But in the back of many commissioners' minds was the small seed of doubt as to why he shaved his head. Cousins, according to the league, was quite likely thumbing his nose at them. If he does so again, under his stringent playing guidelines, he will be suspended.

Or at least he should be. Retired North Melbourne footballer Nathan Thompson pleaded a medical appointment and avoided a drug test in September and got away with it. The AFL's procedures are not perfect but in Cousins' case one suspects they will be watertight.

The Brisbane Lions, becoming increasingly nervous about Cousins, have been subjected to more drug tests in the past fortnight or so than the club can remember. St Kilda, which has also been under some scrutiny, has been assured by the AFL that it does not harbour a drug problem — with no concerns attached to the Lions either — and remains in the running to draft the player.

Cousins learned last week that he would be forced to undergo rigorous drug testing if the AFL ended his suspension, as it did, on Tuesday. He was sent a lengthy explanation from the league's appointed medical experts as to why he required special treatment. He feels he has been unfairly singled out but he cannot be surprised. And given all he has been through, how hard can a urine sample or three be?

Brendon Gale's AFL Players' Association was not consulted and appears snubbed and overlooked. The commission claims it attempted to get in touch with the AFLPA in the minutes that preceded the Cousins announcement but that was token at best. The AFL claims it has not tampered with the drug code — pointing to Cousins' long-term addiction — but it has.

And it should have. Cousins is not the only player being protected here. The teenagers he could be playing with — or their parents — will feel reassured and so too should the Saints if they take him. In one sense the AFL has taken the problem out of their hands.

And it has protected itself beautifully. It will hate the headlines that accompany Cousins — it is not particularly keen on Cousins — but should he succeed then it has been vindicated, just as it will be should he fail.

The AFL might have upset the AFLPA but it will back down. It has upset Cousins and his champion Ricky Nixon. But in the court of public opinion it has emerged victorious. It will be happy with that.