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

[BOMBERS 4 LIFE!!!!]

Does that mean that you disagree with the rest of that post?

Yes/no was just pointing out that Asada's anti doping rules weren't designed for team sports they were designed to catch athletes winning gold medals in the Olympics that's why imo the AFL need to cut ties with Asada and make their own anti-doping rules.

 

[simoro1]

I don't. At all.
A) it shouldn't be in this thread as it is EFC only
B) how hard are ASADA looking at the OTHER 17 clubs???? Of which we know a SIGNIFICANT number had equally contentious supplement programs.

It seems ASADA don't give a crap about 'clean sport'.. they are just looking for headlines. They haven't acted professionally in this matter at ANY time.. they are showing themselves to be a corrupt bunch of syds that can't organise a piss up in a brewery.

I have said for ages that the BIGGEST disappointment of this whole sorry mess is that ASADA will lose ALL credibility to keep sports clean in this country. I want clean sport and I want us to be able to participate on the world stage.. I'm not sure if we can achieve both these things if ASADA continue to act like syds and cowboys and go outside the stringent NAD Act.

If you really think potentially banning 34 players because they MAY have been duped into receiving, WITHOUT THEIR CONSENT OR KNOWLEDGE, 1 vial of an unknown substance three years ago that would have had ZERO effect on their performance is necessary for the 'sake of all world sport' then you are delusional. ASADA are not doing this to protect the integrity of sport.. they are doing it to justify their inflated budget, they are doing it to boost to WADA they can handle their shit.. they are doing it because it would be the single BIGGEST doping case this country has seen and it has resulted in ASADA going from a complete unknown to front page news for two year..

Dont' kid yourself that ASADA aren't eating this shit up.. a chance to bully their way into the AFL and NRL.. which they have wanted to do for YEARS but haven't been able to because of the lack of positive tests. This is ASADA's big moment to show the AFL/NRL who is boss.. nothing more and nothing less. Our players are just victims in their sick power games.

Maybe ASADA can go find another poor sod who drank the wrong energy drink and make sport safer for all of us. I know I certainly sleep easier knowing that doping cheat Saad isn't on the field..

This whole thing is a joke There should be a clear distinction between people who set out to cheat, and those who were duped into or inadvertently took a banned substance with little to no effect on their onfield performance.

I do think that strict liability is necessary, but like in the Saad case, our players are being treated like Lance armstrong in all this which is very unfair.

 

[Jam123]

What do the opposition fans think about Monfries, Crameri or Gumbleton? Should Monfries be among the 34 players and they win the premiership, would Port have an * next to their premiership? If Gumbleton plays in Fremantle's premiership, would they have an * next to their premiership? Are Port cheating by letting a player like Monfries play with this cloud hanging on top of his head? Did Fremantle and Western Bulldogs cheat by knowingly getting a questionable player to boost their chances of a premiership? Or is it innocent until proven guilty for these players?

Did Port step him down last year and do the 'honourable thing'? Were the finals compromised because he played? According to most, each player is responsible. If there were infractions heading their way, would their club's reputation be tarnished for drafting and playing such players? I mean they actively traded for players who were accused of doping and played them without serving their suspensions. Or is that the way of Australian Sport these days?

If Essendon have an * to them, then so do Port, Bulldogs and Fremantle to me. Not that I hate Port, Bulldogs or Fremantle. While everyone is tearing the players at Essendon apart, those other players are sitting quietly at their own respective clubs. In fact, Bulldogs, Port and Fremantle supporters are willing to see their own club play these questionable players and cheering them on, while the same supporters are having a go at our supporters for cheering the players and backing our boys. If they were true to their words, they would have pressured their respective clubs to stand those players down pending on further investigation. But because it affects their club, it is fine to turn a blind eye. Well because it affects our club, is it fine for us to turn a blind eye too? And they don't understand the mentality of a lot of Essendon supporters while they are unknowingly doing it too? Well here is a perspective of what it is like. The way Essendon supporters are now is an insight to how their respective supporter base would be should they be in Essendon's situation. Don't have to look far with the defensive mindset that Sydney supporters have over COLA.

If everyone else were to be in agreement that the players were responsible and shouldn't be playing now, then it doen't matter what colour jumper they are wearing. There is no ifs or buts about that. Don't see anyone nullifying any of Crameri's goals because he is a 'drug cheat', certainly not Bulldogs supporters. Nor do I see the media jumping on those players like they jump on ours.

 

[rines]

What do the opposition fans think about Monfries, Crameri or Gumbleton? Should Monfries be among the 34 players and they win the premiership, would Port have an * next to their premiership? If Gumbleton plays in Fremantle's premiership, would they have an * next to their premiership? Are Port cheating by letting a player like Monfries play with this cloud hanging on top of his head? Did Fremantle and Western Bulldogs cheat by knowingly getting a questionable player to boost their chances of a premiership? Or is it innocent until proven guilty for these players?

Did Port step him down last year and do the 'honourable thing'? Were the finals compromised because he played? According to most, each player is responsible. If there were infractions heading their way, would their club's reputation be tarnished for drafting and playing such players? I mean they actively traded for players who were accused of doping and played them without serving their suspensions. Or is that the way of Australian Sport these days?

If Essendon have an * to them, then so do Port, Bulldogs and Fremantle to me. Not that I hate Port, Bulldogs or Fremantle. While everyone is tearing the players at Essendon apart, those other players are sitting quietly at their own respective clubs. In fact, Bulldogs, Port and Fremantle supporters are willing to see their own club play these questionable players and cheering them on, while the same supporters are having a go at our supporters for cheering the players and backing our boys. If they were true to their words, they would have pressured their respective clubs to stand those players down pending on further investigation. But because it affects their club, it is fine to turn a blind eye. Well because it affects our club, is it fine for us to turn a blind eye too? And they don't understand the mentality of a lot of Essendon supporters while they are unknowingly doing it too? Well here is a perspective of what it is like. The way Essendon supporters are now is an insight to how their respective supporter base would be should they be in Essendon's situation. Don't have to look far with the defensive mindset that Sydney supporters have over COLA.

If everyone else were to be in agreement that the players were responsible and shouldn't be playing now, then it doen't matter what colour jumper they are wearing. There is no ifs or buts about that. Don't see anyone nullifying any of Crameri's goals because he is a 'drug cheat', certainly not Bulldogs supporters. Nor do I see the media jumping on those players like they jump on ours.

The 'forgotten' men aren't they. My biggest fear is that more players will leave to escape the scrutiny after seeing that once you leave EFC.. no one gives a toss that you may have taken a banned substance also...

Not a single mention in the Collingwood/Bulldogs game about how Crameri is dealing with the stress of a show cause letter.. not one. fascinating.

Did Crameri miss that shot at goal because of a show cause letter? Would people even think of that as an excuse? Not sure.

Funny thing.

 

[Jam123]

The 'forgotten' men aren't they. My biggest fear is that more players will leave to escape the scrutiny after seeing that once you leave EFC.. no one gives a toss that you may have taken a banned substance also...

Not a single mention in the Collingwood/Bulldogs game about how Crameri is dealing with the stress of a show cause letter.. not one. fascinating.

Did Crameri miss that shot at goal because of a show cause letter? Would people even think of that as an excuse? Not sure.

Funny thing.

It's not only that they are the forgotten men. Port, Bulldogs and Fremantle are the forgotten clubs. They actively drafted/played players that have been accused of doping without serving the suspension. They didn't step down any of the players. Yet the general public perceives the competition as compromised because these players are playing while the forgotten men get no mention. Do Port, Bulldogs and Fremantle supporters perceive their respective clubs as cheats? Or are they willing to turn a blind eye?

 

[yodellinhank]

Melbourne is the forgotten club.

 

[yaco55]

Surely you can't complain about the timing of the SC notices - everyone has been crying out for this process to get moving, and now because it was done on a Thursday, they should have considered that a game was coming up in a couple of days? And seriously, we agreed to the joint investigation, but because it didn't go our way, we're going to drag it through the courts, wasting another 6 - 24 months? Because of that, the reduction of penalties - as much as 75%, is gone. As a club, and a supporter base, we really need a reality check.

Don't ever believe that Essendon willingly self reported or agreed to a Joint Investigation. Once we self reported we were unable to defend ourselves publically because we were under investigation.

 

[yaco55]

Dank's case won't get through ADRVP (in relation to the EFC stuff.. not sure about Cronulla).. hence why ASADA won't send it to the Panel...

They just went fishing with Dank.. hoped he would provide the missing pieces..

Oh and notice that even with their new shiny 'powers'.. he still hasn't answered a SINGLE question under oath?!! FFS 16 months and you still haven't interviewed the KEY player in the entire ******* saga?!!!

I'm so friggen mad right now.. how can ANYONE take this shit seriously when the ONLY person responsible for this mess hasn't even been formally interviewed???

Show Cause letters SHOULD NOT have been issued under Dank had gone through the process and they knew the whole facts.

Question2

A player or two ( could be retired/different club ) decided to accept's ASADA's six month suspension, later in the year Essendon wins the Federal Court case against the Joint Investigation - Where does this leave any player who accepts ASADA's deal ?

 

[Ninja dog]

Anybody know the answers to these 3 questions -

1. Did Doc Reid sign off the player consent forms? Chip seems to suggest not but I thought Jobe in 'the interview' said Reid had signed off.

2. After the consent forms were drawn up (& before) Dank must have ordered more thymosin alpha/thymomodulin. Do we have any records of Dank buying any thymomodulin at all? If so, are ASADA suggesting we used both? Surely Dank can tell us who his supplier is?

3. Does anyone know what happened to the poor Zombie who got locked in Sam Lane's bedroom for 1 week?

 

[Dan Cooper]

At some point Dank will need to give evidence.

Which do you believe is more likely:
A) Dank says "I injected athletes with a banned substance TB4"
B) Dank says "I did not inject athletes with a banned substance"

I'm just saying..

Hope it's that simple.

Increasingly I'm feeling ASADA are the ones bluffing. Haven't got enough proof of wrong doing to actually nail us with. But in a move as much as to save face as anything else, are prepared to settle for a minimum penalty.

To hell with that, and to hell with them!

As Little said yesterday: "Essendon hadn't signed up to the joint investigation believing it would take 16 months, leak constantly and give no feedback as to its progress."

Justice delayed is justice denied, and enough is enough. See you in court ASADA.

 

[rines]

Question2

A player or two ( could be retired/different club ) decided to accept's ASADA's six month suspension, later in the year Essendon wins the Federal Court case against the Joint Investigation - Where does this leave any player who accepts ASADA's deal ?

If they accept penalties then that can not be reversed. So if they 'blink' then they would have no right of reply.

I would also remind everyone that EVEN IF we 'lose' this court action, the players still have a very very very strong defence against these so called 'doping potential violations'...

Personally I can't see any player willingly acknowledging they doped.. especially as their lawyers would be telling them they have a very good chance at a defence.

 

[Lord Nicholson]

Melbourne is the forgotten club.

Since they've become McClub Mk III, certainly.

 

[Dave]

Something else that raised my eyebrows from yesterday's interview with McDevitt was when Gerard Whateley said



How the heck can either of those responses be marked as "yes"?

Very good question, one that wasn't answered in the interview.

 

[Dave]

I want to know how the **** Gerard Whately has copies of confidential interviews!

The interim report?

 

[Lance Uppercut]

Excellent article in Fairfax this morning

In August 2013, Australian javelin thrower Jarrod Bannister received a 20-month ban for failing to attend an out-of-competition test. The only problem was this – Bannister was asleep in the hotel where he told the authorities he would be. He paid the price for being forced to share a twin room to save Athletics Australia money and the hotel being unable to simultaneously record the names of two room guests on its computer system.

Back in 2007 Socceroo Stan Lazaridis tested positive to finasteride, a drug he used with medical clearance for therapeutic reasons. It was banned as a masking agent for anabolic steroids. ASADA, Australia’s anti-doping authority, even acknowledged that Lazaridis was not a cheat and agreed to the minimum mandatory ban (a career-ending one-year suspension).

Finasteride was removed from the prohibited substance list a matter of weeks after the expiry of Lazaridis’ suspension when it was realised that the science behind its prohibition was flawed. The long-awaited review of the WADA code in 2013 once again lazily played the deterrence card, and rewarded WADA for its ineffectiveness. Mandatory penalties increased from two to four years, highlighting the dominance of the Olympic movement and the irrelevance of the WADA code to professional team sports.

WADA’s hand-picked athletes’ representatives undemocratically said this reflected the views of the athletes.

The fans and athletes of Australian sport are entitled to ask why such a flawed global system should be imposed on our sports given the ability of our sports administrators to develop tailor-made and athlete-driven anti-doping policies that will actually work.

If any penalties are to be imposed on players because of the ASADA investigations at Essendon and Cronulla, it will only be because of the rigidity of the WADA code. It is known that if any ADRVs occurred, they did so at the behest of the employing clubs which, in so doing, threatened the health, safety and legal rights of the players. The employer is the party that should be sanctioned, and this is the approach rightly taken to date by both the AFL and NRL commissions.

It would now be wrong for ASADA to impose the mandatory, inflexible, ineffective, unjust and expensive WADA system on the AFL and the NRL. This will only render untold damage to both sports and their players, and do absolutely nothing to enhance the effectiveness of the anti-doping regime.

Hopefully, common sense will soon prevail, and each major professional sport in Australia will follow their US colleagues in staying away from the WADA code, and developing in partnership with its players a tailor-made anti-doping code that will have the trust and confidence of the administrators, players and fans of each sport. And even more hopefully, the Australian government will have the courage and common sense to allow them to do so.

Lawyer Brendan Schwab is general secretary of the Australian Athletes’ Alliance, peak body for eight major players’ associations representing 3500 elite athletes. He is also a vice-president of FIFPro, the world footballers’ association, and vice-chair of UNI Sport Pro.


Read more: http://www.smh.com.au/sport/why-aus...s-with-wada-20140615-zs8k1.html#ixzz34kttvKKi

 

[Wattos Waste]

Worst case scenario. Hird does not coach and Bomber does not want to continue coaching in 2015.

Who do you think would be best placed to take over? Goodwin? Or someone new to the club? What other options are out there?

 

[Ben the Gooner]

Off the top of my head, Choco would be an ideal candidate.

 

[Wattos Waste]

Off the top of my head, Choco would be an ideal candidate.

I just want someone with a bit of campaigner in them!

 

[rines]

Strict liability is necessary otherwise every positive test would be met with "I didn't know etc etc"

HOWEVER surely there must be two steps introduced and that is:
1) was there doping
2) did that doping result in improved performance/advantage

At the moment there is no consideration of part 2 in any doping decisions.. so a guy drinking a single energy drink gets the same punishment as a guy injecting anabolic steriods for three months... to me that doesn't make sense.

Nor does it make sense that the penalty for a VFL footballer drinking a minute amount of banned substance in an energy drink is the same as for an international cyclist who admits to using EPO..

One has 0% chance of assisting a) the player, b) his team to win that game c) his team to win that season.. the other has a direct influence on the cyclists ability to directly win that event.

I just don't see how it can be the same penalty.

 

[rines]

Excellent article in Fairfax this morning

In August 2013, Australian javelin thrower Jarrod Bannister received a 20-month ban for failing to attend an out-of-competition test. The only problem was this – Bannister was asleep in the hotel where he told the authorities he would be. He paid the price for being forced to share a twin room to save Athletics Australia money and the hotel being unable to simultaneously record the names of two room guests on its computer system.

Back in 2007 Socceroo Stan Lazaridis tested positive to finasteride, a drug he used with medical clearance for therapeutic reasons. It was banned as a masking agent for anabolic steroids. ASADA, Australia’s anti-doping authority, even acknowledged that Lazaridis was not a cheat and agreed to the minimum mandatory ban (a career-ending one-year suspension).

Finasteride was removed from the prohibited substance list a matter of weeks after the expiry of Lazaridis’ suspension when it was realised that the science behind its prohibition was flawed. The long-awaited review of the WADA code in 2013 once again lazily played the deterrence card, and rewarded WADA for its ineffectiveness. Mandatory penalties increased from two to four years, highlighting the dominance of the Olympic movement and the irrelevance of the WADA code to professional team sports.

WADA’s hand-picked athletes’ representatives undemocratically said this reflected the views of the athletes.

The fans and athletes of Australian sport are entitled to ask why such a flawed global system should be imposed on our sports given the ability of our sports administrators to develop tailor-made and athlete-driven anti-doping policies that will actually work.

If any penalties are to be imposed on players because of the ASADA investigations at Essendon and Cronulla, it will only be because of the rigidity of the WADA code. It is known that if any ADRVs occurred, they did so at the behest of the employing clubs which, in so doing, threatened the health, safety and legal rights of the players. The employer is the party that should be sanctioned, and this is the approach rightly taken to date by both the AFL and NRL commissions.

It would now be wrong for ASADA to impose the mandatory, inflexible, ineffective, unjust and expensive WADA system on the AFL and the NRL. This will only render untold damage to both sports and their players, and do absolutely nothing to enhance the effectiveness of the anti-doping regime.

Hopefully, common sense will soon prevail, and each major professional sport in Australia will follow their US colleagues in staying away from the WADA code, and developing in partnership with its players a tailor-made anti-doping code that will have the trust and confidence of the administrators, players and fans of each sport. And even more hopefully, the Australian government will have the courage and common sense to allow them to do so.

Lawyer Brendan Schwab is general secretary of the Australian Athletes’ Alliance, peak body for eight major players’ associations representing 3500 elite athletes. He is also a vice-president of FIFPro, the world footballers’ association, and vice-chair of UNI Sport Pro.


Read more: http://www.smh.com.au/sport/why-aus...s-with-wada-20140615-zs8k1.html#ixzz34kttvKKi

Excellent article.. nice post!

The WADA code is widely condemned worldwide for being both ineffectual and stubbornly rigid. As the article points out.. and it is true world wide.. the amount of 'minor/mistakes/negligent' prosecutions made against athletes far outweighs genuine 'doping' in the true sense of the word convictions..

The quicker we exit stage left from WADA/ASADA and all the BS.. the better.

 

[Lance Uppercut]

Excellent article.. nice post!

The WADA code is widely condemned worldwide for being both ineffectual and stubbornly rigid. As the article points out.. and it is true world wide.. the amount of 'minor/mistakes/negligent' prosecutions made against athletes far outweighs genuine 'doping' in the true sense of the word convictions..

The quicker we exit stage left from WADA/ASADA and all the BS.. the better.

it is also geared toward the Olympics and invidual sports, and is manifestly unable to properly deal with team based sports.

 

[Ben the Gooner]

I just want someone with a bit of campaigner in them!

This bloke is a bit of a campaigner (and so is the coach he suggested, badoom tish)

Off the top of my head, Choco would be an ideal candidate.

 

[Pweter]

Excellent article.. nice post!

The WADA code is widely condemned worldwide for being both ineffectual and stubbornly rigid. As the article points out.. and it is true world wide.. the amount of 'minor/mistakes/negligent' prosecutions made against athletes far outweighs genuine 'doping' in the true sense of the word convictions..

The quicker we exit stage left from WADA/ASADA and all the BS.. the better.

Absolutely. For every Lance Armstrong, how many careers are been ended prematurely because of an organisation that answers to nobody but themselves, where mistakes are simply a "whoops", and the ability to reverse the damage of a "whoops" moment is not there

 

[cymarak]

it is also geared toward the Olympics and invidual sports, and is manifestly unable to properly deal with team based sports.

And yet the AFL signed up to the code, so it could get its hands on government $$$$$.

Get greedy in haste, repent at leisure.

 

[rines]

it is also geared toward the Olympics and invidual sports, and is manifestly unable to properly deal with team based sports.

Yes.. but I would argue it isn't really working for Olympics either... widely acknowledge that they miss more than they get.. and you are still more likely to be 'done' by some BS 'failed to notify location' than a positive test...