Essendon's Final Hopes

[bomberjez]

You don't know that. You have no idea what was said in those interviews, you don't even know if there are players who admit to taking it on their SC responses.

Actually there's been a few articles about what we said in those interviews.

What I can guarantee you and I'll hand you my severed left leg if I'm wrong is that there is no 100% player x took substance x at this date/time for Thymosin beta 4.

That's what fish was referring to.

 

[Argy]

ASADA are duty bound to issue SCN's if they believe an ADRV may have occurred.

Think about the level of public pressure, media grandstanding and political investment in this (blackest day, Gillard's office etc) and it's not hard to believe they had to issue something, irrespective of the level of likelihood a) that an ADRV had occurred and b) it could be successfully prosecuted.

McDevitt said that was the case (ie that they had enough evidence to believe that multiple ADRVs have been committed) . He went further by saying that they considered the issue of burden of proof right up to CAS. In other words, they have not issued these SCNs lightly.

 

[carnthedons]

McDevitt said that was the case (ie that they had enough evidence to believe that multiple ADRVs have been committed) . He went further by saying that they considered the issue of burden of proof right up to CAS. In other words, they have not issued these SCNs lightly.

The CEO of ASADA, who went on a media roadshow crowing about the SCN's not 24 hours after sending them, then admitted he didn't know the burdens of proof required at ADRVP stage and now is silent. That guy?

 

[Argy]

The CEO of ASADA, who went on a media roadshow crowing about the SCN's not 24 hours after sending them, then admitted he didn't know the burdens of proof required at ADRVP stage and now is silent. That guy?

Yes, that guy. The one who issued 34 SCNs and said he did so after considering the likelyhood of success right up to the CAS.

 

[Laphroaig]

The CEO of ASADA, who went on a media roadshow crowing about the SCN's not 24 hours after sending them, then admitted he didn't know the burdens of proof required at ADRVP stage and now is silent. That guy?

Yep. The guy who acted on the advice of a Federal Court Judge (wotacoincidence the very Court that Essendon is now rolling the dice in) AND the advice of the guy who nailed Lance Armstrong.

Hey, but what would they know.

 

[carnthedons]

Yep. The guy who acted on the advice of a Federal Court Judge (wotacoincidence the very Court that Essendon is now rolling the dice in) AND the advice of the guy who nailed Lance Armstrong.

Hey, but what would they know.

Equally valid points. At the end of the day we're just pissing in the wind now, none of us know anything for sure and through the wonders of confirmation bias we're led to interpret facts based on our preconceived ideas.

 

[Baltimore Jack]

Equally valid points. At the end of the day we're just pissing in the wind now, none of us know anything for sure and through the wonders of confirmation bias we're led to interpret facts based on our preconceived ideas.

See, you still don't get it

We actually know quite a lot, even if we just use these two facts:
* The Essendon internal report
* ASADA issuing SC Letters which in effect says "We believe we enough evidence that places you in breach"

The only people "pissing in the wind" are those that think there is some bias in the known facts when there isn't.

 

[hoianbulldog]

There are those who have been involved in the investigation and are pretty confident that ASADA are kicking tires

You'd think that if someone was involved in the investigation they'd be more than "pretty confident" that asada are kicking tyres. You'd think they'd know pretty definitively one way or the other. Or is this just speculation?

 

[carnthedons]

See, you still don't get it

We actually know quite a lot, even if we just use these two facts:
* The Essendon internal report
* ASADA issuing SC Letters which in effect says "We believe we enough evidence that places you in breach"

The only people "pissing in the wind" are those that think there is some bias in the known facts when there isn't.

On the internal report and the oft-quoted "pharmacologically experimental environment", this report was written by someone who in the same report goes on to state he knows nothing about PEDs and sports administration. It was also done at the behest of the AFL and without interviewing a number of key personnel. The worst the report implies is that it is an environment where lines could've been crossed, it doesn't say "they done injected the banned drugzzz!!!"

On the second point, as previously mentioned, all ASADA need to send an SCN is the possibility of an ADRV.

 

[kfc1]

McDevitt said that was the case (ie that they had enough evidence to believe that multiple ADRVs have been committed) . He went further by saying that they considered the issue of burden of proof right up to CAS. In other words, they have not issued these SCNs lightly.

He didn't say that he has enough evidence to believe that 34 ADRVs have been committed. And therein lies the problem for SALADA, how to get from 34 players to at least 1.

 

[kfc1]

See, you still don't get it

We actually know quite a lot, even if we just use these two facts:
* The Essendon internal report

Would that be the Essendon internal report which does not state anywhere that we took any prohibited substances?

 

[Jimthegreat]

He didn't say that he has enough evidence to believe that 34 ADRVs have been committed. And therein lies the problem for SALADA, how to get from 34 players to at least 1.

Of course he hasn't said it but he's certain he has obviously got it to issue SC notices. That he has said. ASADA aren't going to issue them only to embarrass themselves. They can't commit, by law,to anything else until the players have had a chance to respond to the SC notices. Everyone knows that simple fact outside of Essendon supporters.

 

[kfc1]

Of course he hasn't said it but he's certain he has obviously got it to issue SC notices. That he has said. ASADA aren't going to issue them only to embarrass themselves. They can't commit, by law,to anything else until the players have had a chance to respond to the SC notices. Everyone knows that simple fact outside of Essendon supporters.

ASADA have issued SC notices in a last ditch hope to get enough information to tie TB4 to at least one player. Fishing expedition, kicking tyres, whatever you want to call it.

 

[Jimthegreat]

Sorry mate but that aint true. We'll wait till we hear their evidence. There are those who have been involved in the investigation and are pretty confident that ASADA are kicking tires after a long investigation which in their eyes still hasn't exhonerated Essendon and this is the only chance of advancing the investigation. If nothing comes of it nothing every would have.

Much like Essendon's court proceedings are a free hit, this is a free hit for ASADA.

You're showing how little you know and to put it frankly you'd have no clue as to why they wee issued, just like the rest of us.

That fact is ASADA have issued 34 SC notices and are very highly unlikely to issue them just to embarrass themselves. While NONE what ASASA has of us know you can be assured they'd be confident of getting an infraction by dishing them out.

Any speculating what ASADA's reason are are purely out of hope and nothing more, unless, of course you're an ASADA employee. So right now we can only take it of face value.

 

[andrewb]

That fact is ASADA have issued 34 SC notices and are very highly to issue them just to embarrass themselves.

Ex - ****ing - actly.

 

[Jimthegreat]

ASADA have issued SC notices in a last ditch hope to get enough information to tie TB4 to at least one player. Fishing expedition, kicking tyres, whatever you want to call it.

How would you know that? You wouldn't. You're only hoping that because you follow Essendon hence biasing your speculation with hope. Unless, of course, you're an ASADA employee.

 

[Jimthegreat]

Ex - ******* - actly.

Hahahaha! Oops.

Best I edit.

 

[kfc1]

How would you know that? You wouldn't. You're only hoping that because you follow Essendon hence biasing your speculation with hope. Unless, of course, you're an ASADA employee.

It's an informed opinion of which I am very confident.

 

[Baldur]

It's an informed opinion of which I am very confident.

And there are people whose "informed" opinion of which they are "very confident" is that the US Government is in contact with little grey aliens who fly around in flying saucers. I have seen more 'evidence' for their opinion than yours.

 

[I Rock]

ASADA have issued SC notices in a last ditch hope to get enough information to tie TB4 to at least one player. Fishing expedition, kicking tyres, whatever you want to call it.

So by your reasoning ASADA have issued 34 SC notices to get enough information to issue 1 SC notice?

 

[kfc1]

So by your reasoning ASADA have issued 34 SC notices to get enough information to issue 1 ADRV?

Correct

Of course they are hoping for more

 

[I Rock]

Correct

Of course they are hoping for more

So just to clarify, your stance is. ASADA issued 34 SC notices in the hope of being able to issue 1 SC notice? Seeing as though ASADA don't issue the ADRV.

 

[kfc1]

And there are people whose "informed" opinion of which they are "very confident" is that the US Government is in contact with little grey aliens who fly around in flying saucers. I have seen more 'evidence' for their opinion than yours.

Thanks?

 

[andrewb]

So by your reasoning ASADA have issued 34 SC notices to get enough information to issue 1 SC notice?

Mate you know as well as I do that ASADA have been leaking like a sieve throughout this. Rebecca Wilson knows enough to tell us what colour Hirdy's shit was in mid-2013. If they had anything new and substantial it'd be ALLLLLL over the place.

 

[Jimthegreat]

It's an informed opinion of which I am very confident.

How can it possibly be an informed opinion unless you're privvy to the information. You'd have no clue like the rest of us.

The only thing we know is 34 SC notices were handed out and they surely don't go out unless they feel they are tight with their evidence. They've had a retired judge and Armstrong slayer lawyer Richard Young check that over so they'd be confident. So while nothing is ever 100%, hence speculation unless you're privvy to information, the obvious thought is that they were handed out as they feel their evidence is very strong.

You're opinion is not even close to informed. None of us could have a 100% informed opinion so we work on the most obvious premise as to why SC notices were issued as it stands. Hoping will change nothing.

Those with informed opinions are feeling confident though.