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

[Nuggs Bunny]

Are we arguing about whether this is morally right or whether this is legally sound? Because I hate to disappoint, but what's transpired is 100% legally sound.

 

[BOMBERS 4 LIFE!!!!]

Wouldn't it be better just have Asada? there is no need for us to sign up to Wada when the sport is only played in Australia.

 

[efcboy]

Actually including the state government it was $7.8M.

If you think that's "only", then stop being so naive. To suggest an AFL club is big enough to just drop another ~$8M for the sake of it is just so ridiculously small minded. Don't even try and compare us to the NFL. That's a ridiculous comparison.

There's no salary cap on facilities - EFC has many coteries who could provide funding if required. Paul Little is a billionaire for starters who can and is providing interest free loans for certain things relating to the club.

It's not ridiculous to compare to NFL. AFL is Australia's number one sport and has billion dollar TV/media right deals. It's one of the biggest industries in Australia given the amount of money involved. NFL is by and large an American sport much like AFL is an Australian sport. We will never see either sport feature on the world scale (eg Olympics) as neither are an international sport.

 

[efcboy]

Are we arguing about whether this is morally right or whether this is legally sound? Because I hate to disappoint, but what's transpired is 100% legally sound.

An appeal is currently underway to determine that.

 

[ManWithNoName]

There's no salary cap on facilities - EFC has many coteries who could provide funding if required. Paul Little is a billionaire for starters who can and is providing interest free loans for certain things relating to the club.

It's not ridiculous to compare to NFL. AFL is Australia's number one sport and has billion dollar TV/media right deals. It's one of the biggest industries in Australia given the amount of money involved. NFL is by and large an American sport much like AFL is an Australian sport. We will never see either sport feature on the world scale (eg Olympics) as neither are an international sport.

Compare the turnover of the NFL to the turnover of the AFL, and the turnover of your average NFL club to the turnover of your average AFL club and come back to me.

And LOL at the idea we can just hit up $8M at will from the coteries. Good grief.

 

[Nuggs Bunny]

There's no salary cap on facilities - EFC has many coteries who could provide funding if required. Paul Little is a billionaire for starters who can and is providing interest free loans for certain things relating to the club.

It's not ridiculous to compare to NFL. AFL is Australia's number one sport and has billion dollar TV/media right deals. It's one of the biggest industries in Australia given the amount of money involved. NFL is by and large an American sport much like AFL is an Australian sport. We will never see either sport feature on the world scale (eg Olympics) as neither are an international sport.

The Dallas Cowboys alone are worth more than the entire AFL. The smallest NFL team is worth 1.5 billion dollars. The scale difference between the AFL and NFL is absolutely enormous.

 

[Nuggs Bunny]

An appeal is currently underway to determine that.

No, the appeal is underway to determine if the CAS was right or wrong, not whether ASADA had the power to take the case to the CAS.

 

[efcboy]

No he wasn't told that. Because none of that is fact. It's opinion and prejudiced thoughts. Nothing more.

You're right though. They have no alternative as an AFL player. Like I can't choose if I want to sign up to the rules of the road when I drive. I can either agree to it, or I can not drive. That's life.

Facts are they lowered the burden of proof likening a case to strands in a cable thus allowing guesses and assumptions to rule their verdict.

The AFL tribunal verdict had more logic - the substance in question was TB4. For doping to have occurred TB4 has to be in the syringe. To be in the syringe TB4 had to be at the club. If you cannot prove the club ever accepted or took possession of TB4 how could a doping violation have occurred.

However the players could only appeal on an error of law. So they could not re-argue this point so the only option is to appeal on error of law. Interesting the error of law relating to players appeal is WADA appealing based on anything other than an error of law. WADA changed their rules mid case to allow themselves to appeal without reason and do it de novo. If WADA could only appeal on an error of law then most likely there would not have been an appeal and the players would still be not guilty.

 

[efcboy]

No, the appeal is underway to determine if the CAS was right or wrong, not whether ASADA had the power to take the case to the CAS.

That is completely wrong. The appeal is to determine whether WADA had a right to appeal de novo without providing a reason on an error of law. The appeal by law has nothing to do with the decision (it actually cannot given the rules). If the appeal is successful the original AFL Tribunal decision will stand and then WADA would have to find an error of law in that ruling if they wanted to appeal again.

 

[Nuggs Bunny]

What if by small chance that CAS got it wrong?

Hence the appeal.

 

[Nuggs Bunny]

That is completely wrong. The appeal is to determine whether WADA had a right to appeal de novo without providing a reason on an error of law. The appeal by law has nothing to do with the decision (it actually cannot given the rules). If the appeal is successful the original AFL Tribunal decision will stand and then WADA would have to find an error of law in that ruling if they wanted to appeal again.

What's your source? Everything I have read on the matter suggests the players feel the CAS did not adequately consider the evidence. Most notably, player testimonials.

 

[efcboy]

Compare the turnover of the NFL to the turnover of the AFL, and the turnover of your average NFL club to the turnover of your average AFL club and come back to me.

And LOL at the idea we can just hit up $8M at will from the coteries. Good grief.

Need to factor in the population size as well. Per capita the AFL is a beast.

We can and have hit up $8M from coteries in recent years.

 

[ManWithNoName]

Need to factor in the population size as well. Per capita the AFL is a beast.

We can and have hit up $8M from coteries in recent years.

The Dallas Cowboys are worth $4B. Stop trying to compare them. It's ridiculous.

 

[DonsRule]

What's your source? Everything I have read on the matter suggests the players feel the CAS did not adequately consider the evidence. Most notably, player testimonials.

Thats not part of what you can appeal.




You can only appeal CAS in errors in law. Not the evidence. You can't question if they set the bar too low etc .

 

[efcboy]

What's your source? Everything I have read on the matter suggests the players feel the CAS did not adequately consider the evidence. Most notably, player testimonials.

My source? Well this is well publicised and my mate works for the legal company representing the players! Gordon and others involved have spoken publicly about it.

The only avenue to appeal for the players was an error of law. Yeah sure the players and lawyers felt CAS did a poor job at considering the evidence but this was no legal basis for an appeal. Under WADA/CAS rules the only avenue for appeal for players is an error of law. If they can successfully argue that the anti-doping code prior to 2015 (when rules changed) didn't allow WADA to appeal tribunal decisions for any reason other than an error of law then WADA's appeal will be deemed unlawful and the entire judgement thrown out. WADA's appeal was not based on error of law. WADA appealed the AFL tribunal decision de novo. This is explicitly listed as an option for WADA in the 2015 version of the code. However as this case commenced prior to this change the argument is that the preceding code rules should apply where de novo appeals were not explicitly listed.

It remains to be seen if the Swiss courts will rule that the preceding code did not allow de novo hearings and an appeal not based on an error of law. If the Swiss court rules in the players favour it still may not be over. WADA would then analyse the AFL tribunal verdict attempting to find an error of law to appeal again.

 

[yaco55]

Without the Government funding signing on to the WADA code provides, the TVSC doesn't exist.

So why should any Government funding be tied to whether you are part of the WADA Code - This was never an issue before the WADA code - And it's poor form when Howman of WADA publically states 'that if codes won't to break away from WADA then the Government should stop funding' - Somehow Howson thinks he is the elected leader of every Government in the world - And American professional sports still receive Government funding for stadium developments and the like.

 

[yaco55]

Paul Little says otherwise. The government only chipped in 6 million.

The AFL is a billion dollar industry in Australia now - I see no reason why they couldn't survive or flourish without signing onto the WADA code if it meant losing government funding. The NFL does quite well without WADA so given AFL is Australia's number one sport I see no difference.

Myth - American professional sports receive funding from Governments - This is a myth created by the WADA cabal.

 

[tesla1962]

We signed off on it. If they disagree, too late now. It's done. They knew all this as soon as they became AFL players. They knew all this as soon as the saga started. They've known all this all along. If they didn't like it, it's too late to complain about it now.

The game itself is irrelevant. Why does the court need to know about AFL? How much should they know? It's a case of athletes using illegal drugs. That's it. Why is a knowledge of AFL necessary? It's not in the slightest.

We all know that the afl signed up to the WADA code and that the club and the players have to abide by it. How many times are you going to tell us what we know. A lot of the debate on here is about whether the WADA code is fair and whether it's appropriate for the AFL. It's actually never too late to have that sort of debate. In other areas of life we have these sorts of debates all the time. None of us individually signed up to the WADA code and now that it is under the microscope there are some questions being asked by us punters. There is nothing unreasonable or 'too late' about any of this. Please stop telling us all how to suck eggs, it's tiresome.

 

[efcboy]

The Dallas Cowboys are worth $4B. Stop trying to compare them. It's ridiculous.

Well they're actually worth $3.2 billion. Population of Texas is 27.5 million.

Population of Australia is 23 million.

So yeah one state Texas has a bigger population than the entire country of Australia.

Per capita AFL is on par or bigger than NFL. It has less competition than NFL given NBL, A-league, union and to a lesser extent league are not widely followed unlike afl whereas NBA, College football, college basketball, MLB, NHL etc are all huge in popularity.

 

[ManWithNoName]

So why should any Government funding be tied to whether you are part of the WADA Code - This was never an issue before the WADA code - And it's poor form when Howman of WADA publically states 'that if codes won't to break away from WADA then the Government should stop funding' - Somehow Howson thinks he is the elected leader of every Government in the world - And American professional sports still receive Government funding for stadium developments and the like.

Who cares. It could change but right now that's how it is. So we have to deal with it. If it changes, maybe the AFL will look at it. But there's no point discussing hypotheticals.

 

[ManWithNoName]

Well they're actually worth $3.2 billion. Population of Texas is 27.5 million.

Population of Australia is 23 million.

So yeah one state Texas has a bigger population than the entire country of Australia.

Per capita AFL is on par or bigger than NFL. It has less competition than NFL given NBL, A-league, union and to a lesser extent league are not widely followed unlike afl whereas NBA, College football, college basketball, MLB, NHL etc are all huge in popularity.

http://www.forbes.com/teams/dallas-cowboys/

I. Don't. Care. About. Per. Capita.

We cannot afford to go it alone like NFL clubs can. Cannot. The AFL cannot afford to go it alone. Will not be able to for the foreseeable future. They have so many competing sports over there but are STILL worth that much. AFL and its clubs have barely any major competitors but still can't compete. What does tht tell you?

 

[efcboy]

Myth - American professional sports receive funding from Governments - This is a myth created by the WADA cabal.

Yeah agreed. The AFL is too big an industry for the government to not support it with or without WADA.

 

[Nuggs Bunny]

Thats not part of what you can appeal.




You can only appeal CAS in errors in law. Not the evidence. You can't question if they set the bar too low etc .

You can absolutely appeal if you think the CAS has not honoured your right to a fair hearing. See: Guillermo Canas

 

[Nuggs Bunny]

My source? Well this is well publicised and my mate works for the legal company representing the players! Gordon and others involved have spoken publicly about it.

The only avenue to appeal for the players was an error of law. Yeah sure the players and lawyers felt CAS did a poor job at considering the evidence but this was no legal basis for an appeal. Under WADA/CAS rules the only avenue for appeal for players is an error of law. If they can successfully argue that the anti-doping code prior to 2015 (when rules changed) didn't allow WADA to appeal tribunal decisions for any reason other than an error of law then WADA's appeal will be deemed unlawful and the entire judgement thrown out. WADA's appeal was not based on error of law. WADA appealed the AFL tribunal decision de novo. This is explicitly listed as an option for WADA in the 2015 version of the code. However as this case commenced prior to this change the argument is that the preceding code rules should apply where de novo appeals were not explicitly listed.

It remains to be seen if the Swiss courts will rule that the preceding code did not allow de novo hearings and an appeal not based on an error of law. If the Swiss court rules in the players favour it still may not be over. WADA would then analyse the AFL tribunal verdict attempting to find an error of law to appeal again.

It is a basis for appeal. See guillermo canas

I'd also like something a little more concrete than "it's well publicized" because I've been scanning news articles for 20 minutes with no avail. And I don't know who your mate is or even if he exists, so excuse me for not taking you at your word there.

 

[efcboy]

http://www.forbes.com/teams/dallas-cowboys/

I. Don't. Care. About. Per. Capita.

We cannot afford to go it alone like NFL clubs can. Cannot. The AFL cannot afford to go it alone. Will not be able to for the foreseeable future. They have so many competing sports over there but are STILL worth that much. AFL and its clubs have barely any major competitors but still can't compete. What does tht tell you?

You may not care about per capita but it's a relevant point. You can't just dismiss something because you don't care. You're doing a Madigan?