Essendon continues to duck for cover

[lones37]

How does it suggest that?

Work out how much that would be per person.

Suggests to me they have gone far and wide, including China, to gather as much intel as they needed.

 

[Bunk Moreland]

Work out how much that would be per person.

Suggests to me they have gone far and wide, including China, to gather as much intel as they needed.

No they've downloaded it from a few computers and phones. But anyway.

How does it suggest any of it is evidence?

 

[lones37]

Don't worry Bunk, you guys will be out of your misery soon.

 

[Bunk Moreland]

Don't worry Bunk, you guys will be out of your misery soon.

I'm not worried nor in misery, and if I was I certainly wouldn't need comforting from you.

But thank for acknowledging the stupidity of your comment, anyway.

 

[The Scales]

The fact that ASADA collected 98,000 texts and 449 GB of emails suggests they have more than enough evidence. They are just tying up loose ends.

I'm sure amongst all that they have alot of evidence otherwise they would not be handing out SC notices. They got in a retired judge and have had the man who brought down Lance Armstrong, Richard Young, work through it so you can be sure that they are sure The odds of having something damning amongst that body of evidence would be huge. Think even you would know that deep down.

The personnel involved does not strengthen, nor weaken the evidence. Just because they have a lot of stuff, doesn't make any of it relevent. Granted, there may have been a nugget or two in them thar hills, but if I worked for ASADA, I would bolster my SC's with a smattering of this evidence - just to show that I was fair dinkum.

You say "I'm sure" yada yada, and I'm happy for you. When you state "so you can be sure", guess what? I ain't. Nothing like sure. I don't think ASADA, the judge, or the Armstrong slayer are in the least bit convinced they have sufficient evidence to progress beyond the SC stage.

Please don't confuse your thought process with mine. Deep down, I believe the "odds" of damning evidence are miniscule. If there was a smoking gun, this would have been resolved against the EFC playing group long, long ago. ASADA forgot their role, when they teamed up with the AFL, and got caught up in the hype of being in the headlines. They acted outside of their juristiction by providing an IR - geared to the AFL's "requested" grounds for sanctions. They forgot they are basically piss testers.

I think deep down, you probably know this too. Amirite?

 

[blackshadow]

The personnel involved does not strengthen, nor weaken the evidence. Just because they have a lot of stuff, doesn't make any of it relevent. Granted, there may have been a nugget or two in them thar hills, but if I worked for ASADA, I would bolster my SC's with a smattering of this evidence - just to show that I was fair dinkum.

You say "I'm sure" yada yada, and I'm happy for you. When you state "so you can be sure", guess what? I ain't. Nothing like sure. I don't think ASADA, the judge, or the Armstrong slayer are in the least bit convinced they have sufficient evidence to progress beyond the SC stage.

Please don't confuse your thought process with mine. Deep down, I believe the "odds" of damning evidence are miniscule. If there was a smoking gun, this would have been resolved against the EFC playing group long, long ago. ASADA forgot their role, when they teamed up with the AFL, and got caught up in the hype of being in the headlines. They acted outside of their juristiction by providing an IR - geared to the AFL's "requested" grounds for sanctions. They forgot they are basically piss testers.

I think deep down, you probably know this too. Amirite?

And some people believe in fairies at the bottom of the garden...

Sent from my Nexus 7 using Tapatalk

 

[nineteen eighty]

The personnel involved does not strengthen, nor weaken the evidence. Just because they have a lot of stuff, doesn't make any of it relevent. Granted, there may have been a nugget or two in them thar hills, but if I worked for ASADA, I would bolster my SC's with a smattering of this evidence - just to show that I was fair dinkum.

You say "I'm sure" yada yada, and I'm happy for you. When you state "so you can be sure", guess what? I ain't. Nothing like sure. I don't think ASADA, the judge, or the Armstrong slayer are in the least bit convinced they have sufficient evidence to progress beyond the SC stage.

Please don't confuse your thought process with mine. Deep down, I believe the "odds" of damning evidence are miniscule. If there was a smoking gun, this would have been resolved against the EFC playing group long, long ago. ASADA forgot their role, when they teamed up with the AFL, and got caught up in the hype of being in the headlines. They acted outside of their juristiction by providing an IR - geared to the AFL's "requested" grounds for sanctions. They forgot they are basically piss testers.

I think deep down, you probably know this too. Amirite?

And you're not concerned with the fact that over 90% of those issued with SC notices get hit with infractions?

I think there's a lot of false bravado on this board and that deep down many EFC supporters are shitting themselves. Not saying you are.

 

[kfc1]

Not at all surprising that no Essendon supporters have chosen to reply to this post......

Probably because it's the exact same quote rehashed for the 1,000th time.

 

[Jimthegreat]

The personnel involved does not strengthen, nor weaken the evidence. Just because they have a lot of stuff, doesn't make any of it relevent. Granted, there may have been a nugget or two in them thar hills, but if I worked for ASADA, I would bolster my SC's with a smattering of this evidence - just to show that I was fair dinkum.

You say "I'm sure" yada yada, and I'm happy for you. When you state "so you can be sure", guess what? I ain't. Nothing like sure. I don't think ASADA, the judge, or the Armstrong slayer are in the least bit convinced they have sufficient evidence to progress beyond the SC stage.

Please don't confuse your thought process with mine. Deep down, I believe the "odds" of damning evidence are miniscule. If there was a smoking gun, this would have been resolved against the EFC playing group long, long ago. ASADA forgot their role, when they teamed up with the AFL, and got caught up in the hype of being in the headlines. They acted outside of their juristiction by providing an IR - geared to the AFL's "requested" grounds for sanctions. They forgot they are basically piss testers.

I think deep down, you probably know this too. Amirite?

Yes, it does, when to get the best to get the best, or in this case, the most watertight result. Using your theory if personnel doesn't doesn't strengthen or weaken thing why have lawyers. Not hard for the simplest to understand. Obviously if you ever have to go to court, which I sincerely hope you don't, you obviously won't get a lawyer because it won't change the evidence hence won't change the result.

There is noting in the ASADA Act that prevents joint investigation and the AFL rules clear that all are forced to answer every question under the terms of their contract. You have nothing. Then the court can't suppress AFL evidence, given the case is against ASADA's procedures not the AFL's so in the unlikely event that you win ASADA will send disclosure notices to the AFL, re-gather the evidence and re-issue SC notices.

You have no clue what ASADA have to believe their evidence is miniscule. You can only say that out of hope and delusion. Other than that, nothing! Seeing though you have inside ASADA information on their evidence please share it.

The fact is there is 34 SC notices with obviously enough evidence to proceed. It would not happen otherwise. Would be stupid to do so. And they have the right people to make sure their evidence is very strong. Danks admission in the Age helps too. You know what happens when a cop reads you your rights "everything you say or do will be used against you in a court of law". Sure that's the same here.

By the way, in case you didn't know, SC notices are the first step by law to allow the player to answer the "charge" before it proceeds to the ADVRP for consideration to be registered in the "register of findings" leading to probable infractions. It's not about not having enough evidence to go past the show cause stage, it's only the first step in the infraction process.

My suggestion, if you're going to post at least have a clue what you are talking about. You know deep down you're in trouble, you can't be that stupid. No mount of delusion, spin and hope will change that.

 

[Argy]

Yes, it does, when to get the best to get the best, or in this case, the most watertight result. Using your theory if personnel doesn't doesn't strengthen or weaken thing why have lawyers. Not hard for the simplest to understand. Obviously if you ever have to go to court, which I sincerely hope you don't, you obviously won't get a lawyer because it won't change the evidence hence won't change the result.

There is noting in the ASADA Act that prevents joint investigation and the AFL rules clear that all are forced to answer every question under the terms of their contract. You have nothing. Then the court can't suppress AFL evidence, given the case is against ASADA's procedures not the AFL's so in the unlikely event that you win ASADA will send disclosure notices to the AFL, re-gather the evidence and re-issue SC notices.

You have no clue what ASADA have to believe their evidence is miniscule. You can only say that out of hope and delusion. Other than that, nothing! Seeing though you have inside ASADA information on their evidence please share it.

The fact is there is 34 SC notices with obviously enough evidence to proceed. It would not happen otherwise. Would be stupid to do so. And they have the right people to make sure their evidence is very strong. Danks admission in the Age helps too. You know what happens when a cop reads you your rights "everything you say or do will be used against you in a court of law". Sure that's the same here.

By the way, in case you didn't know, SC notices are the first step by law to allow the player to answer the "charge" before it proceeds to the ADVRP for consideration to be registered in the "register of findings" leading to probable infractions. It's not about not having enough evidence to go past the show cause stage, it's only the first step in the infraction process.

My suggestion, if you're going to post at least have a clue what you are talking about. You know deep down you're in trouble, you can't be that stupid. No mount of delusion, spin and hope will change that.

The way I understand it ASADA have to be reasonably convinced that their case will stand up in the Court of Arbitration for Sport before they will proceed. In other words, they would not issue SC's unless they were damn sure they were going to stick.

 

[Satan]

And some people believe in fairies at the bottom of the garden...

Sent from my Nexus 7 using Tapatalk

 

[Better Loosen Up]

Probably because it's the exact same quote rehashed for the 1,000th time.

Ahh... that's the reason

 

[topdon]

And you're not concerned with the fact that over 90% of those issued with SC notices get hit with infractions?

All on the back of a positive doping result. What is their record without a said positive result, let alone 30+?

 

[The Scales]

My suggestion, if you're going to post at least have a clue what you are talking about. You know deep down you're in trouble, you can't be that stupid. No mount of delusion, spin and hope will change that.

You may wish to follow your own advice re: posting. Yours is bordering on the most inane I have read ITT. I'm not in trouble, deep down, nor superficially.

 

[nineteen eighty]

All on the back of a positive doping result. What is their record without a said positive result, let alone 30+?

Fair point and I don't have the answer to that. However, to quote another poster:

...
I'm sure amongst all that they have alot of evidence otherwise they would not be handing out SC notices. They got in a retired judge and have had the man who brought down Lance Armstrong, Richard Young, work through it so you can be sure that they are sure The odds of having something damning amongst that body of evidence would be huge. Think even you would know that deep down.
...

 

[Baldur]

All on the back of a positive doping result. What is their record without a said positive result, let alone 30+?

In cases I recall at present that involved ASADA, 100%. One VFL player banned for trying to import a banned substance, one NRL player banned for injecting drugs provided by Dank.

 

[Oneiros]

I'm not worried nor in misery, and if I was I certainly wouldn't need comforting from you.

But thank for acknowledging the stupidity of your comment, anyway.

Bunk, you've been stuck for months with a picture of Paul Little next to your name. Don't try to stiff upper lip it, you're plainly miserable.

 

[Jimthegreat]

You may wish to follow your own advice re: posting. Yours is bordering on the most inane I have read ITT. I'm not in trouble, deep down, nor superficially.

To think the argument is inane show how little you know. Something so simple is so hard for some but then again it's not my club in trouble so I don't have to spin BS. I unlike you know how the system works, and also don't need to spin, hope and dream a desired outcome in delusionary fashion. Years involved in sport at high level helps immensely and watching drug cheats try to worm their way of their predicament helps in the understanding. As I said I know this system better than you ever will.

34 SC notices tell you there's lot of evidence ready to go. Any idiot know that unless you're deluded. They used the right people to make sure they have the evidence tight. They certainly won't be issued unless they know they can win in the CAS. It's the first step towards infractions. Difficult to get your head around or do we have to dumb it down further for you?

I suggest you man up and accept the position you're in. It'll help when the walls inevitably come tumbling down on you. Spin and hope won't change that situation.

 

[evo]

Lyin', cheatin', hurtin, that's all you seem to do...

 

[The Scales]

To think the argument is inane show how little you know. Something so simple is so hard for some but then again it's not my club in trouble so I don't have to spin BS. I unlike you know how the system works, and also don't need to spin, hope and dream a desired outcome in delusionary fashion. Years involved in sport at high level helps immensely and watching drug cheats try to worm their way of their predicament helps in the understanding. As I said I know this system better than you ever will.

34 SC notices tell you there's lot of evidence ready to go. Any idiot know that unless you're deluded. They used the right people to make sure they have the evidence tight. They certainly won't be issued unless they know they can win in the CAS. It's the first step towards infractions. Difficult to get your head around or do we have to dumb it down further for you?

I suggest you man up and accept the position you're in. It'll help when the walls inevitably come tumbling down on you. Spin and hope won't change that situation.

Mo, I'm still not getting it. Could you please dumb it down some more? Thanks.

 

[Duckworth]

The personnel involved does not strengthen, nor weaken the evidence. Just because they have a lot of stuff, doesn't make any of it relevent. Granted, there may have been a nugget or two in them thar hills, but if I worked for ASADA, I would bolster my SC's with a smattering of this evidence - just to show that I was fair dinkum.

ASADA has the following:
1,512 emails on how to extend your penis
4,876 emails that has found some lost family inheritance from some guys in Nigeria
5 hours of recorded voice calls between Dank and Robinson saying 'no you hang up'
7,899 emails letting you know about '1 old special trick to reduce weight' it was AOD
4,553 emails about how to do surveys for money
1 email from Hird saying all supplements must be WADA compliant
1,676 emails in Spanish offering amazing credit card deals
and so on...

 

[I Rock]

ASADA has the following:
1,512 emails on how to extend your penis
4,876 emails that has found some lost family inheritance from some guys in Nigeria
5 hours of recorded voice calls between Dank and Robinson saying 'no you hang up'
7,899 emails letting you know about '1 old special trick to reduce weight' it was AOD
4,553 emails about how to do surveys for money
1 email from Hird saying all supplements must be WADA compliant
1,676 emails in Spanish offering amazing credit card deals
and so on...

And 34 past and present Essendon players have Show Cause notices.

 

[Duckworth]

And 34 past and present Essendon players have Show Cause notices.

Dank has one too.

 

[I Rock]

Dank has one too.

Does anyone care about Dank enough to be sad if he gets nailed to the wall?

Also I'm tipping the number is not going to stop at 35 before this is all said and done.

 

[chelseacarlton]

ASADA has the following:
1,512 emails on how to extend your penis
4,876 emails that has found some lost family inheritance from some guys in Nigeria
5 hours of recorded voice calls between Dank and Robinson saying 'no you hang up'
7,899 emails letting you know about '1 old special trick to reduce weight' it was AOD
4,553 emails about how to do surveys for money
1 email from Hird saying all supplements must be WADA compliant
1,676 emails in Spanish offering amazing credit card deals
and so on...

Do the penis ones work?,I'm enquiring for a mate of mine!.