Josh Addo-Carr is facing at least three months on the sidelines should any club throw him a lifeline following his recent roadside drug test failure.
Addo-Carr’s camp is still awaiting formal notification of his B-test sample after he tested positive for cocaine in September.
The NRL and the Eels will wait on that result before any sanction is handed down.
While Parramatta are yet to make a formal decision on Addo-Carr’s future, it is highly likely that the Eels will reluctantly sack the flying winger from his $400,000 contract if the second test result comes back positive.
The NRL are also set to put a 12-game ban on him should any club look to sign him meaning he will be sidelined for almost half of next season.
Even if he is retained by the Eels, they will be missing him for a large chunk of the season. The 12-game ban is in line with the NRL’s illicit drug testing policy, which deems players are automatically sidelined for that period after a second failed test.
The NRL website states: “Players who record a second contravention will serve a 12-match ban, the prospect of contract termination, a fine, and further treatment and monitoring.”
Two years ago, Addo-Carr was sacked by the Bulldogs after failing a roadside drug test
The NRL may not formally announce the sanction should the Eels rip up his contract given he will no longer be a registered player.
However this column has learnt that should a club want him and the NRL allow him back into the game then the 31-year-old will have a long stint on the sidelines.
The former NSW flyer has been in a rehabilitation facility since his positive test result.
Addo-Carr was driving in Sydney’s inner-west along Enmore Road in Newtown when he was stopped for a test just days after he played in Parramatta’s final game of the season.
This time last year, Addo-Carr had returned to the Kangaroos line-up and was part of Australia’s extended World Cup squad before the positive test.
He was sacked by Canterbury in 2024 after he again failed a roadside drug test.
Addo-Carr looked to have resurrected his career with the Eels with Parramatta officials talking glowingly of his impact at the club on and off the field since his arrival in 2025.
Replies
Stick by him. I hope he stays.
because of multiple reasons.
We got him on the cheap.
we can't seem to buy anyone recently.
without him, we need two wingers.
he's the speed we finally got on the wing. ( sick of slugs )
most importantly, he's started rehab. So he's doing the right thing and owning his mistake.
maybe too late! But still a good start.
If he is looking at 12 weeks then he needs to be sacked for pure business reasons alone. Cap space can be used elsewhere.
Im no expert on the cap but ive heard terms like front loading etc. E.g we might not be able to get a big name replacement for 2027 but front loading some winger who is not as good could help with space to land a big name like best in 2028.
At the end of the day Josh has let himself down, the team and fans.
I'd love to stick by players through hard times but we are here as fans wanting to win comps, right?
Front loading doesn't work anymore, their salaries are averaged out for the length of their contracts for salary cap calculations.
Well no point sacking him then. Unless I am missing something. Just keep him.
12 matches seems like an adequate punishment.
Stick by him the amount of charity work he did for the club was enormous. Definitely the rehab helps his cases, but if I was parra I'm not sacking him he needs help and time.
There's no point in a "sack him or not" conversation unless there's a superior replacement.
JAC is still a very, very good winger if he can get some good service. The Bulldogs sacked him because they were in a cap squeeze and it helped them out.
We aren't in a cap squeeze, we're in a talent drought. So unless there are names who are willing and able to sign with Parra who are a genuine upgrade or on par with JAC, we'd be crazy to sack him.
Sounds like what it's coming down to but we did the same just differently with Lomax and Brown circumstances wise.
I don't know if we have the capacity to replace JAC with an adequate or equal replacement we clearly didn't do it with Lomax and Brown.
Rock meet hard place.
I think the Brown and Lomax situations are great examples of what happens when players leave without a backup plan and JAC would be the same. We will go tangibly backwards as a team, at a time when the coach needs to be showing improvement so we can start to build on something.
Ideally JAC doesn't make the dumb decision and catches an Uber, but here we are. We knew who we were signing when we got JAC after he was fired from the Bulldogs...an extremely talented player with rep experience who also has shown an ability to make very poor life decisions. Gotta take the good with the bad.
Disagree Captain; sack him and look for someone else. There would be some kid playing junior reps who would kill for a crack....no pun intended. These players have more wellbeing / support / hangerson than many and JAC has played under Bellamy FFS. No way - you cut him loose; JAC had a duty of care to his employers and before anyone says it - players are not role models. They're sportsman who are good at what they do.
If the Eels have grounds to terminate the foxes contract therefore not having his contract amount on there salary cap, sacking him is definitely the best option. You don't need to be Einstein to work out that paying someone ( on good money ) who can't play for close to half a season is simply stupid. We know that the Eels are in the market for 1 or more quality outside backs and the fox's money would be better spent in this area.
-
2
-
3
-
4
-
5
-
6
of 6 Next