Mega Thread All AOD-9604 Discussion - Still Illegal but ASADA will not press charges on AOD9604 - McDevitt

[Armchair Critic]

If they had of told Essendon it was prohibited, we would know about it and Essendon wouldn't have used it.

Seriously dude, it's not hard.

The investigation has lasted how long again

 

[larson]

Now it's maybe.I thought it was Clearly

oh we've got a slow one here

 

[Duckworth]

So you're saying this man had access to a supplement "budget" with no simple security procedures like ONLY X amount of money can be used? or no signing off on orders by a higher power of the club?

DO you still be believe in santa?

Your smug ignorance aside. I believe that was to do with the poor governance - where such orders were not monitored as closely as they should have been.

 

[Ironmonger]

May I ask where you get the info for how ASADA interpreted what you claim above.

From nowhere at all. I'm just trying to interpret Whateley's reasoning.

I haven't decided yet whether I fully agree with it. It paints ASADA in a very, very negative light. But I've been following Whateley for years and I've learnt to trust his views.

good post.

one issue though is that Dank knew that AOD might fall under S.0

did he ask ASADA to clarify that? or if they replied to his email wiht something along of the lines of "AOD is not on the prohibited list S.2" did he just accept that and move on. if he did accept that and move on then EFC are culpable. if he replies back to them and says "is it prohibited under S.0 or any other section?" and receive a response; "no it's not prohibuted under any other section" then they are clear.

Dank knew about S.0 he cannot claim ignorance of it EVEN if ASADA didn't volunteer that information. also EFC cannot lay the blame on Dank solely as they have to have checks in place to ensure against this. it's not like it was a one off thing either so it was a big deal involving lots of money, time and injections.

Good point. From the correspondence we've seen it appears Dank knew full well what WADA's interpretation was.

But I'd suggest that imposes a liability on the club, but not on the players. The players aren't expected to seek advice from WADA. Dank (and therefore the club) only had that advice because he hadn't exactly followed the right processes, as I understand them.

 

[larson]

The investigation has lasted how long again

Exactly, Essendon have admitted using it, yet their players are still playing, put the pieces of the puzzle together, I know you don't want to but it's time.

 

[Duckworth]

give me a break. its the same code WADA and ASADA. Dank knew it wasn't under s.2 thats why he was told by WADA to check ASADA about s.0

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2013-05-03/new-evidence-contradicts-danks-claims-of-wada-approval/4667294

Depending on where the two were mutually exclusive or not. GW was suggesting such an interpretation by ASADA.

 

[larson]

Geez some of you Essendon boofhead supporters make me laugh. You are all getting excited about some so called evidence which is nothing more then hear say, in fact all you have to defend yourself is hear say evidence.

Lets wait and see what the authorities have to say first before your wet dreams become more frequent and your travel arrangements and holidays in September are paid for.

The irony here is the best.

Essendon have copped it from everywhere and everyone for 6 months without one word from the authorties.

 

[Armchair Critic]

Exactly, Essendon have admitted using it, yet their players are still playing, put the pieces of the puzzle together, I know you don't want to but it's time.

Sanctions don't get issued till the investigation is over. I am sure you would know that though with you being so smart and all

 

[Art Corvelay]

it does actually, because they didn't take a banned drug, they took one that they were told was not banned. WADA "clarified" it later, and as I said ad nauseum, that was the only answer they could give to the enquiry. The officiating body said it wasn't a banned drug. If it's been retrospectively banned, that's a different issue

It's not a banned drug as in its not specifically named under S2 of the WADA code. That's why the catch all of S0 exists.

I wonder if Essendon/Dank are seriously trying to use the S2 angle (as in, they specifically asked about S2) and will pretend they weren't informed about S0, when that's not what they were asking about. The Dank emails certainly seem to indicate that's what he was trying to do. Surely that WADA emails saying it was banned under S0 means they can't pretend they didn't know it existed when contacting ASADA?

This seriously stinks. The fact it was announced the same day as Vlad was on the show makes it even fishier. I'm not buying it.

 

[mehow2g]

Your smug ignorance aside. I believe that was to do with the poor governance - where such orders were not monitored as closely as they should have been.

My smug ignorance?

Listen to the story you told everyone on this thread it does not make any sense that a sports scientist has unlimited access to funds without question.

This is not some average organisation this is a professional multi million dollar brand, you do not simply give the keys to someone who is the bottom of the food chain at your business and say "go for your life just dont go too much over" without any sign offs etc.

 

[erbenz]

On the surface, this is looking more positive for Essendon. The win-win out of the situation interpreted by Whateley is that the haters get to be right, the bombers fans get to be right, and everyone gets to hate on ASADA's incompetence.

However, the S2/S0 categorisation becomes crucial in regards to Essendon's line of questioning. Essendon's line of questioning will determine whether they did due diligence to ensure their pharmaceuticals were correct or not. If they asked only about it's status under S2, and not under S0, then they will be in trouble. If they asked generally about its status, then fault lies with ASADA for not providing full clarification.

 

[Football Pope]

If you can't go to the governing body and get the correct information what lengths do we expect athletes to go? What does it say about ASADA and WADA that they can't even keep track of what is banned and what isn't banned.

Where is the corruption accusation coming from? Just because you jumped the gun without all of the facts, against the advice of people like myself and now the bubble you have been living in has been burst.

I've said it many times, this issue is not black and white. There is a reason why so many other sports have nothing to do with WADA...they are incompetent.

Still isn't black & White nothing really changes, as per Gerards 360 take. ASADA still has to present its findings and its recommendations and where this lies with the AFL. Anti-Doping code..Regardless of the S status... The AFL under it's objectives has a responsibility to encourage and promote competition free from Prohibited Substances and Methods and to prevent doping practices in sport..By their own admission Essendon have used an on the edge scientific sports program that administered pharmacological substances rather than allowing relying on the athletes natural levels..goes against the AFL's anti-doping objectives

1. OBJECTIVES
The AFL subscribes to a philosophy and adopts a stance that:
(a) ensures that the AFL Competition is conducted upon the basis of athletic
prowess and natural levels of fitness and development and not on any
pharmacologically enhanced performance;
(b) protects Players from using substances which may cause acute or long term
harm to their bodies;
(c) educates the Players to understand the dangers and consequences of the use
of performance enhancing substances; and
(d) sets an example for all participants in the sport of Australian Football by
condemning the use of performance enhancing substances.

 

[Espe]

Geez some of you Essendon boofhead supporters make me laugh. You are all getting excited about some so called evidence which is nothing more then hear say, in fact all you have to defend yourself is hear say evidence.

Lets wait and see what the authorities have to say first before your wet dreams become more frequent and your travel arrangements and holidays in September are paid for.

Just because your brain is incompetent to understand the facts and rules (which some were brought to light tonight of 360) doesn't mean you have a little hissy fit because the desired outcome you so desperately want probably won't happen. And because you can't be bothered to read about the issue to actually form a valid opinion, you're only option is to attack others. Well done.

 

[cheppe89]

The irony here is the best.

Essendon have copped it from everywhere and everyone for 6 months without one word from the authorties.

Haha spot on!!

 

[Hollow Knight]

Ings is tweeting about the latest "revelations" at the moment.

https://mobile.twitter.com/ringsau

Will leave it to others to disect.

 

[RussellEbertHandball]

I said at the time that this was the worst article I'd seen for the Bombers..

http://www.theage.com.au/afl/afl-news/drug-suspicions-over-essendon-grow-20130704-2pfa5.html

It came out immediately after Evans released that video talking about AOD. It's a leak off! I should have put that in the timeline.

There's separate thread for Thymosin Beta 4 by the way.

yeah I've read that article, just didn't understand the way you phrased it. have read that other thread.

 

[Armchair Critic]

Just because your brain is incompetent to understand the facts and rules (which some were brought to light tonight of 360) doesn't mean you have a little hissy fit because the desired outcome you so desperately want probably won't happen. And because you can't be bothered to read about the issue to actually form a value opinion, you're only option is to attack others. Well done.

There were no facts presented tonight , except for the statements issued by the ACC and ASADA , Gerards comments were an opinion on his interpretation of the facts presented

 

[Jade]

What happened?

Everyone seems to upset.......

 

[Duckworth]

Geez some of you Essendon boofhead supporters make me laugh. You are all getting excited about some so called evidence which is nothing more then hear say, in fact all you have to defend yourself is hear say evidence.

Lets wait and see what the authorities have to say first before your wet dreams become more frequent and your travel arrangements and holidays in September are paid for.

On the contrary, we have always been saying that we need to wait for the investigations to conclude. After refuting all of the negative press we have received this year, we shouldn't take the small amount of positive press as gospel either.

 

[Tiger08]

If Essendon was a stock I'd be selling them first thing tomorrow.

Bombers fans should remember two things:

1 - AOD was a banned substance. They just got the wrong advice.

2 - You're about to learn a whole lot more about Thymosin Beta 4.

 

[Espe]

There were no facts presented tonight , except for the statements issued by the ACC and ASADA , Gerards comments were an opinion on his interpretation of the facts presented

You just said there weren't any facts, then said it's his interpretation is based on the facts presented. Okay....

There were facts. Facts such as ASADA classified AOD under s2 is huge. Additionally, the ACC clarified their position as well.

 

[Big Fozza]

From nowhere at all. I'm just trying to interpret Whateley's reasoning.

I haven't decided yet whether I fully agree with it. It paints ASADA in a very, very negative light. But I've been following Whateley for years and I've learnt to trust his views.



Good point. From the correspondence we've seen it appears Dank knew full well what WADA's interpretation was.

But I'd suggest that imposes a liability on the club, but not on the players. The players aren't expected to seek advice from WADA. Dank (and therefore the club) only had that advice because he hadn't exactly followed the right processes, as I understand them.

yeah i rate GW highly so it was interesting to hear him make sweeping statements when the facts he presented don't line up for me.

 

[Espe]

If Essendon was a stock I'd be selling them first thing tomorrow.

Bombers fans should remember two things:

1 - AOD was a banned substance. They just got the wrong advice.

2 - You're about to learn a whole lot more about Thymosin Beta 4.

Under WADA rules, yes.
Under the enforces of the rules in Australia, no.

 

[Armchair Critic]

You just said there weren't any facts, then said it's his interpretation is based on the facts presented. Okay....

There were facts. Facts such as ASADA classified AOD under s2 is huge. Additionally, the ACC clarified their position as well.

That was not a fact , Gerard stated it was to his knowledge.

The ACC clarified ASADA gave correct information to them from the start of the investigation.

 

[hoianbulldog]

I don't think this is something WADA can walk away from easily. By doing so it would effectively open the door for corrupt govts, through their local doping agency to provide erroneous advice to athletes knowing that the athlete will be fine if anyone picks them up. Really messy for wada.