• Please read this post on the rules on BigFooty regarding posting copyright material, including fair dealing rules. Repeat infringements could see your account limited or closed.

afl asks players to stop calling essendon players drug cheats

Remove this Banner Ad

Crankyhawk said:
It has now got beyond a point where anyone gives two shits what the AFL commission want.

Screw their attempts to control the narrative.

Screw their attempts at thought control.
Click to expand...
LOL the tribunal says 23 injections maximum per player across the whole playing group. What was all that shit the AFL fed you about 1000s of injection. What was that about? I bet you swallowed it up back then.

Various people at EFC said it was nonsense but I bet no one in here listened.
 
Are fellow Essendon players allowed to sledge their own for not double checking what they were receiving? Can I sledge the bloke next to me at Gustaves who is blowing cigarette smoke in my direction?
 
Heres Waite said:
Safe working environment hey??

"In particular the rapid diversification into exotic supplements, sharp increase in frequency of injections, the shift to treatment offsite in alternative medicine clinics, emergence of unfamiliar suppliers, marginalisation of traditional medical staff etc combine to create a disturbing picture of a pharmacologically experimental environment never adequately controlled or challenged or documented within the Club in the period under review." The Switkowski report

"We now know that a lot happened at this club in 2012 that just should not have happened. We let down our players and their families; how seriously we let them down is still a matter of investigation … There is no excuse in not knowing." Ian Robson

"There are things that you hear in this interview that you know nothing about and you've never heard before and they are quite alarming … You think about your family, you think about your health and it's quite serious … I'm talking about if you had given blood where that was going and if you were given a substance and it's not checked off properly." Mark McVeigh

"My child ... for him to be used and to be injected with substances that may not be illegal but could be banned, with substances that are labelled not for human consumption and not for human use, and for the club to completely disregard those warnings and to inject my son I find appalling." A woman identifying as the mother of an Essendon player on Melbourne radio
Click to expand...

To re inforce this was the reality.
 

Log in to remove this ad.

tesla1962 said:
LOL the tribunal says 23 injections maximum per player across the whole playing group. What was all that shit the AFL fed you about 1000s of injection. What was that about? I bet you swallowed it up back then.

Various people at EFC said it was nonsense but I bet no one in here listened.
Click to expand...

What does this have to do with what I said?

And go back through my posts, I've been pretty consistent on players getting off, massive Essendon fine. Oh and bankruptcy and torture for dank.
 
clivenator26 said:
Next will be no silly antics on the mark when an opponent is lining up for goal. Strictly hands up and you can jump up but only 3 times.

Disgraceful to think that Dustin Martin wasn't suspended for his water squirt on Spurr.
Click to expand...
Spurr was mighty lucky the liquid squirt didn't come from elsewhere.
 
tesla1962 said:
LOL the tribunal says 23 injections maximum per player across the whole playing group. What was all that shit the AFL fed you about 1000s of injection. What was that about? I bet you swallowed it up back then.

Various people at EFC said it was nonsense but I bet no one in here listened.
Click to expand...
You must have misread it, that was per day;)
 
carloss said:
I miss the old AFL :cry:
Click to expand...

Remember what it was like before the AFL decided it was every Australians moral compass and tried to brainwash the fans with the latest left wing fad every time they sat down to watch a game?

I watched about 60 games of NHL hockey last season. I didn't see any of that. They talked a bit about what was going on in hockey, what player needed to lift or whatever, then the game came on and they just commentated on it.

Gee willockers it was refreshing. I could sit down and watch a game and not have to worry about anything else for a couple of hours. Imagine that!
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

tesla1962 said:
LOL the tribunal says 23 injections maximum per player across the whole playing group. What was all that shit the AFL fed you about 1000s of injection. What was that about? I bet you swallowed it up back then.

Various people at EFC said it was nonsense but I bet no one in here listened.
Click to expand...

The tribunal said that did they. Is that what you think happened

NLM admits to having about 10 across just 2 days

''They were more in the back because I had a lot of back tightness, [which] caused problems in the hamstring and calves. I would have them in the back and that area,'' Lovett-Murray said on Monday. ''It was probably about 10 over a couple of days. At the time, I felt like it helped. But Doc Reid didn't agree. He reckons there was no medical explanation for it. He didn't agree with it. But body-wise, I did.''

Read more: http://www.theage.com.au/afl/afl-news/i-put-my-trust-in-stephen-dank-retired-bomber-nathan-lovettmurray-says-20140210-32d0o.html#ixzz3igtB7FBr
Follow us: @theage on Twitter | theageAustralia on Facebook
 
Lavender Bushranger said:
How old?

Cause this is all Demetriou's legacy. Him and Anderson's game was to deny everything and sweep everything under the rug.

And that's the precise reason this saga happened in the first place.
Click to expand...

Mainly the 90s.

These days it feels like the AFL administration is bigger than the game. Can't think of another sport where the adminstration is as high profile and dominant.
 
To be honest, I think this partly stems from the actions (or inaction) of the club. For the last three years, they've exploited public sympathy for the players as a means of avoiding responsibility for anything that occurred on their premises, or even to avoid any troubling questions on the subject. Apparently we should be angry at ASADA, WADA, the media, the AFL and so on for all the undue stress they've put on the players every time they've commented on the issue. Any reporting of the facts in the case is condemned as a violation of the players' privacy. ASADA and WADA, by merely performing the function they were set up to perform over appropriate time frames, are blasted by the club and its sympathisers for putting the players through hell. Any media commentator who even hints at the potential guilt of the parties concerned is accused of unfairly targeting the players, of leading a witch hunt. This has been the strategy of the club since day one: use the public sympathy that exists around the players to shut down any potentially difficult debate or inquiry.

The trouble this policy is that it therefore leaves the players as the only possible target of quite justified opprobrium. No-one else at the club - or even the club itself - has accepted even the slightest bit of responsibility for what took place, meaning there are no other targets available. The club gave Robinson a six (or was it seven?) figure sum of money to depart the arena in silence. Dank has not been taken to court - or even publicly reproached - by the club for his role in the saga. The doctor who should have been overseeing the program still has a job, and has for some reason been lionised for his work with the club. The head coach... well, we all know what's happened there. The chairman of the club fell on his sword, admittedly, but has been hammered by the club's fan-base ever since. Absolutely no-one at the club has shown the slightest bit of interest in asking the question: "why are the players currently in this situation?" Or: "what should we have done differently?" Or: "whose responsibility is it, given (as we have apparently established) the players are completely blameless?" If the club had been more forthcoming - or at least appeared more interested in pursuing these questions honestly, rather than stonewalling and finding any available path to avoid responsibility - there would be no reason to target the players because the culpability would have been shown to lie elsewhere. As it stands, you can't cower behind the players and then complain when it is they - rather than the more senior members of the club - who cop the flak. If people at the club genuinely believe that the players are blameless and should be treated as such, why the complete lack of interest in identifying where the true blame lies?

As for this issue of taunting players more generally, I'm not going to bother addressing what "rights" members of the crowd have to shout certain epithets over the fence because I don't think it's relevant. Does one have the "right" to call a player a drug cheat, an aboriginal player an ape, or the umpire a white maggot? Probably. But that doesn't make it right to do it. It's tactless, cheap and unnecessary. If anyone here feels that their self-determination is being compromised because they are being asked not to shout insults at young men paid to chase a ball around all afternoon, then I think you probably need to rethink your priorities in life. If this is a matter of overwhelming importance to you, and the prospect of being polite strikes you with such dread, then you frankly have bigger problems you need to come to terms with than the directives of AFL press releases.
 
JP2 said:
To be honest, I think this partly stems from the actions (or inaction) of the club. For the last three years, they've exploited public sympathy for the players as a means of avoiding responsibility for anything that occurred on their premises, or even to avoid any troubling questions on the subject. Apparently we should be angry at ASADA, WADA, the media, the AFL and so on for all the undue stress they've put on the players every time they've commented on the issue. Any reporting of the facts in the case is condemned as a violation of the players' privacy. ASADA and WADA, by merely performing the function they were set up to perform over appropriate time frames, are blasted by the club and its sympathisers for putting the players through hell. Any media commentator who even hints at the potential guilt of the parties concerned is accused of unfairly targeting the players, of leading a witch hunt. This has been the strategy of the club since day one: use the public sympathy that exists around the players to shut down any potentially difficult debate or inquiry.

The trouble this policy is that it therefore leaves the players as the only possible target of quite justified opprobrium. No-one else at the club - or even the club itself - has accepted even the slightest bit of responsibility for what took place, meaning there are no other targets available. The club gave Robinson a six (or was it seven?) figure sum of money to depart the arena in silence. Dank has not been taken to court - or even publicly reproached - by the club for his role in the saga. The doctor who should have been overseeing the program still has a job, and has for some reason been lionised for his work with the club. The head coach... well, we all know what's happened there. The chairman of the club fell on his sword, admittedly, but has been hammered by the club's fan-base ever since. Absolutely no-one at the club has shown the slightest bit of interest in asking the question: "why are the players currently in this situation?" Or: "what should we have done differently?" Or: "whose responsibility is it, given (as we have apparently established) the players are completely blameless?" If the club had been more forthcoming - or at least appeared more interested in pursuing these questions honestly, rather than stonewalling and finding any available path to avoid responsibility - there would be no reason to target the players because the culpability would have been shown to lie elsewhere. As it stands, you can't cower behind the players and then complain when it is they - rather than the more senior members of the club - who cop the flak. If people at the club genuinely believe that the players are blameless and should be treated as such, why the complete lack of interest in identifying where the true blame lies?

As for this issue of taunting players more generally, I'm not going to bother addressing what "rights" members of the crowd have to shout certain epithets over the fence because I don't think it's relevant. Does one have the "right" to call a player a drug cheat, an aboriginal player an ape, or the umpire a white maggot? Probably. But that doesn't make it right to do it. It's tactless, cheap and unnecessary. If anyone here feels that their self-determination is being compromised because they are being asked not to shout insults at young men paid to chase a ball around all afternoon, then I think you probably need to rethink your priorities in life. If this is a matter of overwhelming importance to you, and the prospect of being polite strikes you with such dread, then you frankly have bigger problems you need to come to terms with than the directives of AFL press releases.
Click to expand...

Very good point
 

Remove this Banner Ad

afl asks players to stop calling essendon players drug cheats

Similar threads

A
This is the way to treat drug cheats
2
Replies
25
Views
2K
PoppedCorn
PoppedCorn
Satan
Pharmacist involved in essendon saga sadly found dead
Replies
3
Views
881
Satan
Satan
The_Wookie
Play Nice Happy 10th Anniversary (of the Essendon/ASADA Saga)
2
Replies
30
Views
3K
blackcat
blackcat

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top