No Oppo Supporters CAS hands down guilty verdict - Players appealing - Dank shot - no opposition - (cont in pt.2)

Remove this Banner Ad

Status
Not open for further replies.
Doss said:
No opposition posters.

However, the links that might be pertinent for people to peruse and draw their own conclusions from:

https://wada-main-prod.s3.amazonaws.com/resources/files/wada_doping_control_form_v7.pdf - 2015 form
https://wada-main-prod.s3.amazonaws.com/wada_doping_control_form_v6.pdf - 2014 form
https://wada-main-prod.s3.amazonaws.com/resources/files/wada_dco_toolkit_v3_full_en.pdf
https://www.wada-ama.org/en/resources/world-anti-doping-program/doping-control-form
Click to expand...

This is interesting, I think from the third link:
The DCO shall complete the Declaration of Medication Use and Blood Transfusions section of the form. If there is not enough space in this section, continue on a Supplementary Report Form and record the number of the Supplementary Form. The DCO must ensure that NO Athlete information is contained on this Supplementary Report Form
Click to expand...

So its not a matter of the athletes filling it in themselves. The DCO would've asked them the question and written down whatever was relevant. Although I noticed the form itself doesn't say anything about including only things that may cause elevated readings (perhaps a different version from what they used in 2012?).
If McVeigh told the Doping Control Officer he was given 'Melatonan' (for insomnia), and the DCO wrote 'Melatonin' (for tanning), that lends weight to the argument that his tanning effect or 'vehement denial' thereof is irrelevant.
 

Log in to remove this ad.

Also various paragraphs from the CAS judgement relevant to a bunch of arguments I've heard recently:

Why the applicable procedural law is Swiss, not Australian:
Applicable law.png

"It is each athlete's personal duty to ensure that no prohibited substance enters his or her body":
It is each Athlete's personal duty....png

Why WADA does not need concrete evidence:
establishing use of prohibited substance.png

Defining "comfortable satisfaction" and whether WADA must '"eliminate all possibilities" which could point to a player's innocence':
Burden of proof.png

Why the CAS Panel can rehear all the evidence 'just coz' (de novo):
De novo?.png

Each players' case should be considered independently but with prejudice from the other players' cases:
I think this last one is probably the most poignant, because they've essentially given themselves free run to apply one piece of evidence (such as McVeigh's 'vehement denial' of a tanning effect) to every player in the case, without any references or reasoning for why that would be an appropriate way to consider the evidence before them.
Ind vs. Team.png

Source: http://www.tas-cas.org/fileadmin/user_upload/Arbitral_Award_WADA_ESSENDON.pdf
 
ManWithNoName said:
Did the players not agree they all wanted to be treated together?
Click to expand...
CAS Panel themselves acknowledged that each player was entitled to individual consideration, someone quoted the excerpt below
 
efcboy said:
Yes - only 21 players were tested out of the 34. Out of that 21 remaining more than half were tested before the thymosin program commenced so they couldn't possibly list something they hadn't received. Of the remaining 5 or 6 that were tested after receiving thymosin they should have listed it.

However my understanding is players believed ASADA would receive the club documented supplements listed and they had to inform them of anything they had taken outside this.

It's a pretty silly system if ASADA expect athletes to remember off the top of their head (coming off the training track) everything they took over a period of time.
Click to expand...

It was a rubbish decision by CAS - What did the players hide ? For heavens sake the players handed in the consent forms which is what eventually hung them.
 
Can anybody explain how clubs get away with self reporting on cocaine usage (one club alone had 8 players) and why this is not investigated for usage of a banned substance?

WADA Code - S6. Stimulants
If a Substance or Method is not defined in this list, please verify with your Anti-Doping Organization.
All stimulants, including all optical isomers e.g. d- and l- where relevant, are prohibited.
Stimulants include:
  • adrafinil
  • amfepramone
  • amfetamine
  • amfetaminil
  • amiphenazole
  • benfluorex
  • benzylpiperazine
  • bromantan
  • clobenzorex
  • cocaine
  • cropropamide
  • crotetamide
 
MarkG said:
Can anybody explain how clubs get away with self reporting on cocaine usage (one club alone had 8 players) and why this is not investigated for usage of a banned substance?

WADA Code - S6. Stimulants
If a Substance or Method is not defined in this list, please verify with your Anti-Doping Organization.
All stimulants, including all optical isomers e.g. d- and l- where relevant, are prohibited.
Stimulants include:
  • adrafinil
  • amfepramone
  • amfetamine
  • amfetaminil
  • amiphenazole
  • benfluorex
  • benzylpiperazine
  • bromantan
  • clobenzorex
  • cocaine
  • cropropamide
  • crotetamide
Click to expand...

Most stimulants are only prohibited substances (from a WADA perspective) on match day. If they are taken outside of competition then it's not a WADA issue.

For example the substance Saad had he tested positive on match day. So he was banned. If he'd taken outside of competition then he wouldn't have been banned by ASADA.
 
efcboy said:
Most stimulants are only prohibited substances (from a WADA perspective) on match day. If they are taken outside of competition then it's not a WADA issue.

For example the substance Saad had he tested positive on match day. So he was banned. If he'd taken outside of competition then he wouldn't have been banned by ASADA.
Click to expand...
It doesn't say that anywhere in the WADA code. The info that I pasted in is verbatim.

Are hormones OK to take off season?
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

I want to send an email of support to individual players.
Does anyone know the appropriate email address?
I assume if I send to the club, with a request to forward it to a player, they would receive it.
Any thoughts?
 
MarkG said:
It doesn't say that anywhere in the WADA code. The info that I pasted in is verbatim.
Click to expand...

WADA is too cute by half - Substances should be banned 365 days a year - As an example - Do you think Crowley took his baaned substance on match day ? Apparently he took 3 days before the game but it was still in his system - Better to ban substances 365 days so that athletes don't role the dice.
 
MarkG said:
It doesn't say that anywhere in the WADA code. The info that I pasted in is verbatim.

Are hormones OK to take off season?
Click to expand...

It's classified as S6 - I believe S6 refers to substances banned on match day.

S2 is another category banned 365 days (eg TB4)

S0 is a fluffy category that WADA can use to their discretion.
 
BOMBERS 4 LIFE!!!! said:
Essendon 34: Banned Bombers' Swiss appeal may taint AFL season

"The full hearing, if papers are lodged, could be two or three years away. It's not a bad idea, especially for the older blokes who may only have a couple of years left and could return to their clubs soon."

Read more: http://www.theage.com.au/afl/afl-ne...afl-season-20160126-gme99r.html#ixzz3yKsqD3QU
Follow us: @theage on Twitter | theageAustralia on Facebook


Hmm interesting.
Click to expand...

I wonder how many ****s the affected lads give if they "taint" a season for the AFL which has done everything in its power to taint their individual reputations over the past 3 years?

I say taint away, chaps. Send Gilligan and his merry band of lapdogs a long, drawn out, messy but ultimately clear message that we'd like him to personally smoke our ***** and his comp to burn.
 
IggypopsTshirt said:
I wonder how many ****s the affected lads give if they "taint" a season for the AFL which has done everything in its power to taint their individual reputations over the past 3 years?

I say taint away, chaps. Send Gilligan and his merry band of lapdogs a long, drawn out, messy but ultimately clear message that we'd like him to personally smoke our ***** and his comp to burn.
Click to expand...

The comps been tainted for a long time anyway with campaigners like gill and vlad running the show
 
efcboy said:
Most stimulants are only prohibited substances (from a WADA perspective) on match day. If they are taken outside of competition then it's not a WADA issue.

For example the substance Saad had he tested positive on match day. So he was banned. If he'd taken outside of competition then he wouldn't have been banned by ASADA.
Click to expand...

Drug dealers or “distributors” usually cut a batch of cocaine with other additives. This helps to thin out the batch, which means a dealer has more of the drug to sell. Depending on the type of additive used, the final product can appear off-white or pinkish. The texture of the drug also changes depending on the type of additive used.
I assume all the usual checks were done by ASADA to make sure the dealer was compliant with his additives
 
MarkG said:
Can anybody explain how clubs get away with self reporting on cocaine usage (one club alone had 8 players) and why this is not investigated for usage of a banned substance?

WADA Code - S6. Stimulants
If a Substance or Method is not defined in this list, please verify with your Anti-Doping Organization.
All stimulants, including all optical isomers e.g. d- and l- where relevant, are prohibited.
Stimulants include:
  • adrafinil
  • amfepramone
  • amfetamine
  • amfetaminil
  • amiphenazole
  • benfluorex
  • benzylpiperazine
  • bromantan
  • clobenzorex
  • cocaine
  • cropropamide
  • crotetamide
Click to expand...
because S6 substances are only banned on matchday... if they self-reported for use on match day you can rest assured they'd get 4 years off
 
But what of the unknown substances and additives contained in the illicit drugs players are using?Doesn't Caro weep for the unborn children of these fine young men who may or may not be being unwittingly fed dangerous cutting agents by unscrupulous coke dealers? Don't the players themselves hold grave fears for their long term health due to ingestion of unknown substances that have been compounded in what one could term a "pharmacologically experimental environment"?
 
IggypopsTshirt said:
But what of the unknown substances and additives contained in the illicit drugs players are using?Doesn't Caro weep for the unborn children of these fine young men who may or may not be being unwittingly fed dangerous cutting agents by unscrupulous coke dealers? Don't the players themselves hold grave fears for their long term health due to ingestion of unknown substances that have been compounded in what one could term a "pharmacologically experimental environment"?
Click to expand...
you mean like the Collingwood players?
 
yaco55 said:
WADA is too cute by half - Substances should be banned 365 days a year - As an example - Do you think Crowley took his baaned substance on match day ? Apparently he took 3 days before the game but it was still in his system - Better to ban substances 365 days so that athletes don't role the dice.
Click to expand...
really? So you just think if an athlete gets the flu in between meets or games then **** 'em, no chance to take any decent cold and flu tabs just because if they happened to take them matchday they get a slight advantage?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Remove this Banner Ad

Similar threads

Duckworth
Delisted #38: Rhett Montgomerie - Not offered a contract for 2024 - 28/8
4 5 6 7 8
Replies
196
Views
20K
Zach Package
Zach Package
RedmanWasHere
Delisted #36: Jayden Davey - Delisted - 23/10
7 8 9 10 11
Replies
253
Views
19K
boncer34
boncer34

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top