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

[good4footy]

In this case over 75% of the list stands accused and they were all subject to an ASADA testing program. We are not talking about individuals here.

In the Armstrong case, as I understand it, there were several witnesses and their testimony led somewhat to the eventual outcome. I haven't heard of similar here. There are so many players and others involved that I would have expected someone to 'cut a deal'.

So a bit different I would have thought.

Not sure what your point is.

You asked if they had taken samples for future analysis- I said yes

I then asked if your posts suggest you believe only positive test athletes should be banned. I used two cases linked to non positive test suspensions. Did not link to Essendon to anything.

I take it from the way you are posting that you don't believe that WADA should have appealed?

 

[Subprime]

There is no test, you would have to test every player on an intrusively regular basis for something like TB4 and even then you wouldn't be 100% guaranteed you'd be correct.

The simple fact is the AFL signed up to the WADA code, Essendon hired known dodgy as **** campaigners and let them inject 34 of their players. Made no effort to have proper oversight, kept no records, lied about it, held up investigation. First TB4 "wasn't banned" then "it wasn't even TB4, I never said TB4?!?", tried to scape goat "the weapon" but he calls himself "the weapon" so no one gives a shit about that idiot and on and on and on.

Personally I believe the players must be punished to force the AFL to adequately (life ban) punish all those involved with the regime, if the players aren't banned the AFL has no reason to pursue it. I think everyone is sick of the AFLs shit and definitely sick of Essendon's shit. None of the timeline or any other issues can be blamed on ASADA or WADA, they have been forced to work through and now around the AFL "system".

In the end it's about player safety, accountability within the business and the fairness of the competition.

Having said all that I mostly agree with this - http://monash.edu/news/show/doping-and-bad-arguments

I have always been of the opinion recovering is not cheating. Pain killers are.

Enjoyed the article, thanks for that, I'd agree with most of it.

Personally I think the Essendon saga could just as easily be put down to nincompoopery as much as anything else.

How this stuff drags on for years and costs so much is beyond me. Now WADA want to hold the CAS in Switzerland when they have previously appealed to the CAS in Sydney for Australian cases. Inexplicable.

 

[Subprime]

Not sure what your point is.

You asked if they had taken samples for future analysis- I said yes

I then asked if your posts suggest you believe only positive test athletes should be banned. I used two cases linked to non positive test suspensions. Did not link to Essendon to anything.

I take it from the way you are posting that you don't believe that WADA should have appealed?

My attitude would be if samples were taken for future analysis then let time be the judge, eventually a test will be developed and the truth will come out.

Another thing that makes me wonder is that, as I understand it, WADA has previously appealed to the CAS in Sydney and now it wants to appeal to the CAS in Lausanne, Switzerland, why?

Judges in Sydney have previously been ok presumably, almost everyone involved is Australian, why the disruption of a hearing on the other side of the world?

WADA has every right to appeal but in this case it seems to have chosen the most inconvenient way of doing so.

 

[good4footy]

My attitude would be if samples were taken for future analysis then let time be the judge, eventually a test will be developed and the truth will come out.

Another thing that makes me wonder is that, as I understand it, WADA has previously appealed to the CAS in Sydney and now it wants to appeal to the CAS in Lausanne, Switzerland, why?

Judges in Sydney have previously been ok presumably, almost everyone involved is Australian, why the disruption of a hearing on the other side of the world?

WADA has every right to appeal but in this case it seems to have chosen the most inconvenient way of doing so.

I disagree with your first point strongly- we need athletes to know they can be caught without a positive test.

As whether the hearing is inconvenient to us Australians, my attitude is so what? If this was the Chinese swimming team I'd want it as far away from China as possible. Why should his be any different?

 

[Subprime]

I disagree with your first point strongly- we need athletes to know they can be caught without a positive test.

As whether the hearing is inconvenient to us Australians, my attitude is so what? If this was the Chinese swimming team I'd want it as far away from China as possible. Why should his be any different?

Because there are 34 players involved and therefore a cost factor in moving the whole thing to Switzerland.

As I said earlier, my understanding is that WADA has previously used the CAS in Sydney, why the change?

Why would 3 judges in Sydney be any different to 3 judges in Switzerland?

It is an unnecessary complication.

And we are not talking about a national team here so the comparison with the Chinese swim team is a little far-fetched.

BTW If samples were taken then athletes do know they will be caught once a test is developed.

 

[Baltimore Jack]

Because there are 34 players involved and therefore a cost factor in moving the whole thing to Switzerland.

As I said earlier, my understanding is that WADA has previously used the CAS in Sydney, why the change?

Why would 3 judges in Sydney be any different to 3 judges in Switzerland?

It is an unnecessary complication.

And we are not talking about a national team here so the comparison with the Chinese swim team is a little far-fetched.

The 34 players didn't attend the hearings when they were held in Melbourne

That's why they have Lawyers

We have Video links now

 

[Subprime]

The 34 players didn't attend the hearings when they were held in Melbourne

That's why they have Lawyers

We have Video links now

We also have a CAS in Sydney which WADA has been happy to appeal to in the past.

 

[Bloben]

We also have a CAS in Sydney which WADA has been happy to appeal to in the past.

Yes it is odd that they want to hear the appeal away from Sydney when it is more convenient and has been used in the past. It is not the most logical place to hold the appeal so we can only assume that WADA believes there is some reason that they should not hold the appeal in Sydney for their case.

 

[good4footy]

Because there are 34 players involved and therefore a cost factor in moving the whole thing to Switzerland.

As I said earlier, my understanding is that WADA has previously used the CAS in Sydney, why the change?

Why would 3 judges in Sydney be any different to 3 judges in Switzerland?

It is an unnecessary complication.

And we are not talking about a national team here so the comparison with the Chinese swim team is a little far-fetched.

BTW If samples were taken then athletes do know they will be caught once a test is developed.

Baltimore Jack answered the way I would have regards complication of the hearing overseas.

As to whether it is a national team, an individual or a team is irrelevant. It is about the truth and the best process that allows people to get to it. I personally have no problem with the hearing being overseas if in fact that is where it is held for reasons already expressed.

As for the bolded bit I think you are just being argumentative. Are you seriously suggesting we let athletes compete knowing they won't get caught whilst doing so unless they test positive. It is not only unfair to those that they are competing against but also a sigh we are giving up on keeping sport clean.
We will never agree that only those athletes that test positive should be held to account.

 

[Subprime]

Baltimore Jack answered the way I would have regards complication of the hearing overseas.

As to whether it is a national team, an individual or a team is irrelevant. It is about the truth and the best process that allows people to get to it. I personally have no problem with the hearing being overseas if in fact that is where it is held for reasons already expressed.

As for the bolded bit I think you are just being argumentative. Are you seriously suggesting we let athletes compete knowing they won't get caught whilst doing so unless they test positive. It is not only unfair to those that they are competing against but also a sigh we are giving up on keeping sport clean.
We will never agree that only those athletes that test positive should be held to account.

If you know your reputation will be ruined then by a future positive drug test then that's as great a disincentive as there can be.

Happy to agree to disagree with you and Baltimore Jack at this point.

 

[good4footy]

If you know your reputation will be ruined then by a future positive drug test then that's as great a disincentive as there can be.

Happy to agree to disagree with you and Baltimore Jack at this point.

They already know that and it isn't.

I am as interested in the athletes that don't cheat not being affected negatively in the here and now by losing to the cheats, as well as catching the cheats.

 

[Subprime]

They already know that and it isn't.

I am as interested in the athletes that don't cheat not being affected negatively in the here and now by losing to the cheats, as well as catching the cheats.

There will always be some who take the chance and your hope that they will be caught in the 'here and now' will not be satisfied unless testing regimes move forward dramatically.

 

[good4footy]

There will always be some who take the chance and your hope that they will be caught in the 'here and now' will not be satisfied unless testing regimes move forward dramatically.

I am happy with trying to catch everyone and catching some. I don't subscribe to catching them in the future only. We can do both.

 

[Subprime]

I am happy with trying to catch everyone and catching some. I don't subscribe to catching them in the future only. We can do both.

We are doing both now. How much do you want to spend?

 

[MarkT2]

There's potentially different burden of proof for starters.

That's not what Richard Ings said.

 

[good4footy]

We are doing both now. How much do you want to spend?

What we are doing now. You seemed to argue for less hence my responses.

 

[Subprime]

What we are doing now. You seemed to argue for less hence my responses.

I'm not arguing for less I'm just ambivalent about catching people straight away. To me an athletes achievements are worth nothing if a test later proves they were cheating. Its unfortunate that their competitors didn't get to stand on the podium or receive the cup at the time but so be it.

When we know that medical science is advancing all the time and that tests conducted now can be analysed conclusively at a later date why not wait.

Anyway like I said earlier we'll have to agree to disagree I think.

 

[Helfarch]

I'm not arguing for less I'm just ambivalent about catching people straight away. To me an athletes achievements are worth nothing if a test later proves they were cheating. Its unfortunate that their competitors didn't get to stand on the podium or receive the cup at the time but so be it.

When we know that medical science is advancing all the time and that tests conducted now can be analysed conclusively at a later date why not wait.

Anyway like I said earlier we'll have to agree to disagree I think.

Problem is their performance isn't worth nothing, even the little old AFL is worth billions. Part of the hearing in Switzerland agenda I believe (if they do) is to get it as far away as possible from the various vested interests in industry and govt.

 

[Subprime]

Problem is their performance isn't worth nothing, even the little old AFL is worth billions. Part of the hearing in Switzerland agenda I believe (if they do) is to get it as far away as possible from the various vested interests in industry and govt.

Its worth nothing in terms of how posterity views their achievements, at least that's how I see it.

As for the Switzerland thing I just think its getting a bit silly if the location of an appeal to the CAS matters. Do it in the most convenient, closest and most cost effective location.

 

[MyManLynch]

We also have a CAS in Sydney which WADA has been happy to appeal to in the past.

I guess they just don't trust Australia enough to handle this case...too many opinions, too much media coverage?? They want to remove any prejudice in this particular high profile case?
Judge from an outside perspective?
It does seem strange, but I don't care where they hold...just do it, whatever it takes.

 

[DAWESOME!!]

If you know your reputation will be ruined then by a future positive drug test then that's as great a disincentive as there can be.

Happy to agree to disagree with you and Baltimore Jack at this point.

No, being thrown out of the sport in your prime and losing future earnings and the career of your choice AND your reputation is a greater disincentive.

 

[jmac70]

Its worth nothing in terms of how posterity views their achievements, at least that's how I see it.

As for the Switzerland thing I just think its getting a bit silly if the location of an appeal to the CAS matters. Do it in the most convenient, closest and most cost effective location.

It's purely a provocative gesture aimed at demonstrating how small Australia is in comparison to the world body.

 

[Hardas]

Naaaaaaaaaw...poor dears...
http://www.afl.com.au/news/2015-06-07/wada-cloud-hovering-over-bombers-again-hird

 

[TW Sherrin]

on radio hird blamed the wada appeal for their current performances.

the end is in sight bomber fans. he is doing a malthouse and we all know how that ends.

 

[Countrypie]

on radio hird blamed the wada appeal for their current performances.

the end is in sight bomber fans. he is doing a malthouse and we all know how that ends.

Yep - just spent a very enjoyable half hour reading through the Essendon board about their coach. I think the penny may be starting to drop (albeit in slow motion) There's quite a bit of anger and it's largely directed at one man.