News Dons ASADA scandal (Latest: Pg 101 - CAS verdict. Guilty, 12 months.)

Remove this Banner Ad

I don't consider facts to be spin

The only thing the AFL has/had control over is Footy Department TPP as Essendon are Hird's employer.
They can pay him what ever they like (within the TPP), the AFL has no say in it. The AFL cannot prevent him from being paid and it is the reason AD quickly back tracked after he got briefed.

Surely they could remove or suspend a coaches credentials?
 

Log in to remove this ad.

The players signed a piece of paper that exonerated EFC from the actions they were about to take.
For this action alone the players are guilty of stepping outside the laws of the AFL and the various drug prevention agencies of the world.
They should recieve the maximum penalty as it can be proved that they had been educated that any such actions should have been reported to the relevant drug prevention agency. No athlete in the world can plead ignorance.
Once the players are penalised they should then sue their employer for loss of earnings and damages.
With the players rightfully sanctioned and the club rightfully sued, the AFL would have the right to ban Mr Hird from all positions of authority for life.
This is what should happen. But the AFL doesn't want the headlines.
Just like they don't want the headlines about Joe.
 
That was nothing more than an "arse covering" exercise by Reid
He did nothing after that letter and was even present when some kids were injected

I believe Reid is a hero worshipper. He may have had misgivings but he just couldn't bare the thought of not attending Essendon training and donning the tracksuit. Walking the boundary with his hero James and chewing the fat with footy stars.
Why didn't he follow up the letter? Why was that his only action? Why didn't he resign in protest at what he believed was happening to young men under his care?
Because he would've had to hang up the tracksuit and that would have meant severing ties with his heroes.
As club doctor he should have walked day 1.
 
Sure can, but Hird is still getting paid

Come on Baltimore the AFL suspended him without pay and Essendon thumbed their collective noses at the AFL, aas they've done throughout this whole saga, and went ahead and paid him anyway. The AFL's response to this was to verbally bend over for Essendon, as they've done for the bulk of this saga, instead of further penalizing them for their actions. Removal of free agency privileges, loss of draft picks, a reduction in their percentage of the AFL financial pie, banning Hird for another year with a clear indication to Essendon if they went ahead and paid him again a further years suspension would occur until the unpaid year was served, ect, ect, ect.

The AFL had options but chose to be weak.

On the players the moment Essendon wanted them to sign those waivers the alarm bells should have rung pretty bloody loud, the fact they either didn't because no one had the intelligence to recognize the implications or the fact they did and no one wanted to acknowledge the clear implications doesn't give me pause to feel much, if any, sympathy for the players. The receive a lot of education about their responsibilities regarding what goes into their bodies and no one batted an eye lid when a player was suspended for a silly mistake he admitted to so to sympathise with Essendon players who signed a waivers, went off site to receive multiple injection, and have either thumbed their noses at the consequences or hidden behind Essendon's long skirt and made no attempt to accept any responsibility for their part in this mess would be somewhat hypocritical.

Personally I hope when this is all said and done the players involved receive the maximum penalty available with no back dating and Essendon, both the club and the personal involved, receive an even greater penalty for not only intentionally breaching the rules governing this game but sport in general and for their actions thereafter but also, and for my mind more concerningly, having little to no regard for their players welfare before, during and after the decision was made to cheat.
 
He was suspended there was no mention of pay

Yes there was. The AFL and Essendon verbally agreed that Hird wouldn't be paid during the 12 month suspension, unfortunately the AFL in all it's splendor and glory didn't put this in writing which meant it became an "I said - he said" argument and wasn't legally binding. End result is Hird got paid and the AFL were made to look like the incompetent fools they were.
 
I do feel a little sorry for the players. However, signing waivers for these injections should have been a massive red flag.

That said, ban their arses for 2 years. They can then sue Essendon for loss of wages. Happy days.
 
I do feel a little sorry for the players. However, signing waivers for these injections should have been a massive red flag.

That said, ban their arses for 2 years. They can then sue Essendon for loss of wages. Happy days.
I don't feel sorry for them at all, because the senior players on the list who would have been to a dozen lectures on drugs and what to do ignored it trying to get an advantage for a premiership.
 
I do feel a little sorry for the players. However, signing waivers for these injections should have been a massive red flag.

That said, ban their arses for 2 years. They can then sue Essendon for loss of wages. Happy days.
The signing of waivers is normal practice. I'm sure every player from every club signs a waiver re supplements programs. Probably also for general training, diet & travel. A legal requirement to protect the club from any unforeseen events & potential legal claims from players.
So I doubt it would be a red flag.
The thing that bugs me with this...why did Essendon self report, if they did nothing wrong?
They lost their President, Football manager, plus others...huge fine, coaches suspended or fined.
Yet Hird still maintains, they did nothing wrong.
It's a conspiracy, the world v Hird.
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

The signing of waivers is normal practice. I'm sure every player from every club signs a waiver re supplements programs. Probably also for general training, diet & travel. A legal requirement to protect the club from any unforeseen events & potential legal claims from players.
So I doubt it would be a red flag.
The thing that bugs me with this...why did Essendon self report, if they did nothing wrong?

IIRC
re the signing of the waivers, this is a highly unusually practice. The only official club document that the player should sign is their contract, the issues of diet, training and supplement programs would all be covered in this. So being asked to sign anything else that is not a football or jumper should raise the red flag.
The only reason Essendon self reported is that they found out that they where already under the investigation of the ACC (Australian Crime Commission), it was a face saving move.
 
I do feel a little sorry for the players. However, signing waivers for these injections should have been a massive red flag.

That said, ban their arses for 2 years. They can then sue Essendon for loss of wages. Happy days.

Agree - When they where asked to Signed Waivers for Injections.

Sure sounded Fishy and they should of asked there Managers to what was happening
 
IIRC
re the signing of the waivers, this is a highly unusually practice. The only official club document that the player should sign is their contract, the issues of diet, training and supplement programs would all be covered in this. So being asked to sign anything else that is not a football or jumper should raise the red flag.
The only reason Essendon self reported is that they found out that they where already under the investigation of the ACC (Australian Crime Commission), it was a face saving move.
100% correct Essendon only self reported after being told they were under investigation and long after any illegal substances had left their players bodies this is why none of their players failed any drugs test.

they were very careful about their self reporting and I think if they had not been "tipped off" they would most assuredly not have self reported this has been shown by their reactions since the event.

I do not think they are entitled to any credit whatsoever for self reporting so long after the event,throw them out of the comp and have done with it it is no less than they deserved.
 
100% correct Essendon only self reported after being told they were under investigation and long after any illegal substances had left their players bodies this is why none of their players failed any drugs test.

they were very careful about their self reporting and I think if they had not been "tipped off" they would most assuredly not have self reported this has been shown by their reactions since the event.

I do not think they are entitled to any credit whatsoever for self reporting so long after the event,throw them out of the comp and have done with it it is no less than they deserved.

Andy D probably gave them the Heads Up
 
PC6gkxD.png
Nice one Pinokio
upload_2015-3-9_21-58-2.png
 
arseh*le or arseh*le - Who Cares, Means same thing

No Formerly Known you couldn't be more wrong. There is a difference and people care enough to write a book about it see The No arseh*le Rule by Stanford professor Robert Sutton. Careful reading and studying will edify you on the correct usage and prevent you from further faux pas.
 
Meanwhile, back on topic...

The Age is suggesting that a verdict from the tribunal is taking longer than expected:

There have been recent suggestions it could be weeks into the new season before a call is made, considering there is a 360-page report from the Australian Sports Anti-Doping Tribunal, about 60 pages from lawyers representing the players and 20 pages from the AFL to analyse.

There is also a hearing, which was split over two months, oral submissions, hours of interview transcripts and the need for 34 players to be considered separately with a written response on each.

It has also been pointed out that it took about three weeks for Jones to deliver his verdict on the Ahmed Saad case in 2013. Saad had only challenged the severity of the sentence. The Essendon case has involved challenges on jurisdiction and fact, there have been multiple witnesses and it has been contested every step of the way.

http://www.theage.com.au/afl/afl-ne...ake-longer-than-expected-20150309-13z8j4.html

We might get the top-ups on ANZAC Day. :eek::drunk:
 

Remove this Banner Ad

News Dons ASADA scandal (Latest: Pg 101 - CAS verdict. Guilty, 12 months.)

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top