News Geelong's position in Essendon investigation and ACC report

[AM]

Yep exactly- and really we just want to get back to footy-Bombers just need to cop their right whack and let us concentrate on great finals series coming up.

Be nice to have it done and dusted. However I can't see that happening until the final ASADA report hits the deck. ASADA now has much wider investigative powers which include getting witnesses to attend hearings and provide other specified information. There are significant civil penalties for those who don't comply. Dank, and a few other people material to the matter, can no longer easily walk away from subjecting themselves to scrutiny.

 

[geelong_boy]

Geelong are fine in this. Relax.

Of course that's what we all want romeoh. However the comment by Bomber does leave one feeling a little uneasy.

 

[kriso182]

Reckon when David Evans was the Prez the club was in mediation mode. Since Little took over they've become more combative. They now appear on a war footing.

There is to be a meeting convened by the AFL of all the clubs tomorrow on this matter. Will be intriguing to hear what comes of that.

AFL is trying to stop this from going through the courts. It was mentioned on the radio the AFL will try and get support from all other 17 clubs so Essendon has no choice but to accept sanctions. They (the AFL) believe if they can get support from all the clubs Essendon will be less likely to take legal action against them. Apparently will cost the AFL 60k a day if it goes to court.

 

[AM]

How can you ever possibly know if you have 'all the evidence'? If that was a reasonable assumption no crime would ever be prosecuted because another witness could come forward or another piece of physical evidence could be found. What matters is whether or not the AFL - because this is not ASADA's case - is satisfied that an offense has taken place and that a sufficient level of evidence exists to prove it. Dank's evidence is totally irrelevant if it's not used against Hird, which it won't be given when the hearing is scheduled for.

Hird's argument about 'trial by media' is totally disingenuous. He's spent six months complaining that the AFL is running a conspiracy against him through certain journalists and that he'll be vindicated when it all comes out. Finally the AFL makes its case very clearly to the public and he complains that this somehow handicaps him! It's rubbish. The AFL should be commended for their transparency in finally giving the public a look.


My comment was obviously tongue in cheek, but 34 pages of dot points isn't very much to read. Particularly when the majority of the document is in a narrative format that slowly builds the case rather than leveling specific accusations.

What we do know is that all the evidence is not in yet because the ASADA report is interim.

As I've said often here ASADA acquired far greater investigative powers as from August 1. There final report will more related to the actual doping issues and will include evidence from many people material to the case who have hitherto not been prepared to come forward.

Hird certainly has a case to answer and I don't think he has been well advised from the get-go. However procedural fairness is not limited to what transpired today in my view.

Apologies if I took your comment the wrong way.

 

[AM]

AFL is trying to stop this from going through the courts. It was mentioned on the radio the AFL will try and get support from all other 17 clubs so Essendon has no choice but to accept sanctions. They (the AFL) believe if they can get support from all the clubs Essendon will be less likely to take legal action against them. Apparently will cost the AFL 60k a day if it goes to court.

Doubt either of the two parties most affected have a desire to see the matter end up in court. Not only because of the dollars but the damage to the AFL brand and the Essendon brand. As I said earlier I think under Evans the two combatants were working toward a compromise. Enter Little and all bets appear to be off.

 

[Jimmy Yamazaki]

Of course that's what we all want romeoh. However the comment by Bomber does leave one feeling a little uneasy.

Robinson has stated before that Hird was the culprit in this. If he wanted to, he could have implicated that Cats and made this story even bigger and probably got even more $$$ for his story. (Dropping a bombshell when he was on tv= huge ratings and extra $$$) Considering he is unemployed at the time iirc.

Also he wouldn't have said he regretted leaving Geelong if he had done wrong here in the past and wouldn't be welcome back at the club if he did. (hopefully leaving the door ajar that he will get hired by Cats again)

I'm confident we have nothing in this, otherwise explain our 2011 flag and our second spot on the ladder this year considering that Dean left in 2010 and that apparently ASDA come to Geelong in 2007 after our quick rise that season.

 

[thejester]

What we do know is that all the evidence is not in yet because the ASADA report is interim.

As I've said often here ASADA acquired far greater investigative powers as from August 1. There final report will more related to the actual doping issues and will include evidence from many people material to the case who have hitherto not been prepared to come forward.

Hird certainly has a case to answer and I don't think he has been well advised from the get-go. However procedural fairness is not limited to what transpired today in my view.

I understand that ASADA has gained greater powers and that's so that the testimony Dank was forced to give to the ACC can be gained and used by ASADA. I just don't think it's relevant because the current charge will be heard with the current evidence.

Apologies if I took your comment the wrong way.

No, stupid of me to phrase it like that - would obviously have come off as me having a go at you, which it wasn't meant to be.

 

[catempire]

Hird is directing his comments at the totality of the process to date not merely today's proceedings.

It's reasonable for Hird to claim that all the accusations leveled at him and the club should be on the table thereby permitting his and the clubs legal advisers to have all evidence before them. That can't happen until the final ASADA findings are known. That won't occur until ASADA has completed it's ongoing investigations using their greatly enhanced investigative powers. Powers that took effect from August one this year.

I don't agree AM. The AFL's rules are a completely different matter to the ASADA ones. While the same conduct may have breached both, the AFL is entirely within its rights to bring charges against Essendon without the ASADA investigation having concluded. None of the charges brought by the AFL are reliant on the ASADA case(s) being made out.

 

[FredLeDeux]

I don't agree AM. The AFL's rules are a completely different matter to the ASADA ones. While the same conduct may have breached both, the AFL is entirely within its rights to bring charges against Essendon without the ASADA investigation having concluded. None of the charges brought by the AFL are reliant on the ASADA case(s) being made out.

If you mean by the ASADA case(s) the cases against individual players, that may be correct.
But as I understand it, the current charges are based on the evidence in the interim ASADA report in relation to the defendants, which may or may not be complete in relation to those charges.
Be that as it may, it is apparent after reading and skimming the charge sheet that:
1 The charges cover a very wide range of alleged misconduct, involving a great deal of factual material, imputations and legal questions, and there was never any realistic chance that the defendants could reasonably be expected to be ready by next Monday.
2 It is no wonder the AFL tried to negotiate settlements on some of the issues, because if they are all in dispute then, with at least 6 defence barristers involved, the hearing is going to extend over several very long meetings; and a fair consideration of the decision and penalties is going to require detailed legal assistance to the Commissioners on each and every charge and will involve further delay.
This first stage will be going on well into the finals period, and very possibly beyond.
And subsequent legal proceedings may well continue for months.

 

[Duskfire]

I am no legal genius, but this all seems bad. Is it as bad as the media and other people on here are claiming? Are Essendon that screwed?

 

[steady2]

I have heard that Doc Reid is an honourable man by people who know him, and that letter is damning of what has happened since. Given the concerns expressed earlier by the club Doctor how Essendon have fallen ever deeper into the murky mud.

I fully expect Hird’s coaching career to come to an abrupt and permanent end very soon. He was a very good player.

 

[vealesy]

Put it this way.

I think Hird is going to plead insanity.

 

[Duskfire]

The way Bomber was against the entire thing as well according to the report seems to completely rule out any sort of that bullshit happening at the Cats.

 

[FredLeDeux]

The way Bomber was against the entire thing as well according to the report seems to completely rule out any sort of that bullshit happening at the Cats.

Not correct.

25. Thompson pushed very strongly for the appointment of Robinson, notwithstanding the
fact that Thompson knew or believed that there were significant concerns about the
manner in which Robinson had conducted himself.

35. Thompson supported the appointment of Dank and failed to raise concerns regarding
Dank notwithstanding the fact that Thompson knew or believed that there were
significant concerns in relation to the appropriateness of Dank for the position of Sports
Scientist at the Club.

 

[manboob]

Doubt either of the two parties most affected have a desire to see the matter end up in court. Not only because of the dollars but the damage to the AFL brand and the Essendon brand. As I said earlier I think under Evans the two combatants were working toward a compromise. Enter Little and all bets appear to be off.

That is the only desire Essendon have. They've be gunning for a Supreme Court showdown for the last three months.

 

[catempire]

If you mean by the ASADA case(s) the cases against individual players, that may be correct.
But as I understand it, the current charges are based on the evidence in the interim ASADA report in relation to the defendants, which may or may not be complete in relation to those charges.

Yes, the AFL's charges are, at least in part, based on the ASADA interim report and, as I understand it, partly on the Switkowski report. Those reports both present a litany of established facts. In the case of the ASADA report, it is interim in that it does not purport to be a complete assembly of the facts nor does it make conclusions or findings. However the facts that it has established may stand on their own and, if so, the AFL is within its rights to rely on them.

The ongoing ASADA investigations may uncover further facts and is sure to make conclusions at some point. When that happens, the AFL may well make further charges against Essendon and individuals.

Be that as it may, it is apparent after reading and skimming the charge sheet that:
1 The charges cover a very wide range of alleged misconduct, involving a great deal of factual material, imputations and legal questions, and there was never any realistic chance that the defendants could reasonably be expected to be ready by next Monday.
2 It is no wonder the AFL tried to negotiate settlements on some of the issues, because if they are all in dispute then, with at least 6 defence barristers involved, the hearing is going to extend over several very long meetings; and a fair consideration of the decision and penalties is going to require detailed legal assistance to the Commissioners on each and every charge and will involve further delay.
This first stage will be going on well into the finals period, and very possibly beyond.
And subsequent legal proceedings may well continue for months.

I tend to agree with all of that. It was very ambitious by the AFL to hope to have this wrapped up in two weeks. I expect it to go well into 2014 and will be a very messy (and expensive) expedition. One of the things the other clubs meeting the AFL tomorrow are sure to be asking is how this is going to affect them, both financially and in terms of the integrity of the competition.

 

[Scottland2007]

Crystal ball time : only members can save Essendon now (overturn the board). They need a complete clean out of staff. I don't think it will happen, I think we will be a 17 team comp very soon. That may be permanent or just 2 years. The fixture will have a floating bye like when we had GC but no GWS. Hird is in big. I mean big. Over seeing a program where players were injected with drugs not fit for human use at there work. I think he will be lucky if he doesn't get jail time. Players association and worksafe will be out to crucify him. The loss of points this year is the least of there worries.

 

[catempire]

Not correct.

25. Thompson pushed very strongly for the appointment of Robinson, notwithstanding the
fact that Thompson knew or believed that there were significant concerns about the
manner in which Robinson had conducted himself.

35. Thompson supported the appointment of Dank and failed to raise concerns regarding
Dank notwithstanding the fact that Thompson knew or believed that there were
significant concerns in relation to the appropriateness of Dank for the position of Sports
Scientist at the Club.

It will be very interesting to eventually find out what those things mean.

It is obvious why Bomber supported the appointment of Robinson - he was very happy with the job Robinson did at Geelong. However it's not clear why he "knew or believed that there were significant concerns about the manner in which Robinson had conducted himself".

The only reason I can see Bomber supporting the appointment of Dank is because Dank came on Robinson's recommendation and Bomber trusted Robinson enough to go with that. Again, it's not entirely clear why Bomber "knew or believed that there were significant concerns in relation to the appropriateness of Dank for the position of Sports Scientist at the Club".

But the ASADA report must surely provide a basis for such claims.

 

[manboob]

I am no legal genius, but this all seems bad. Is it as bad as the media and other people on here are claiming? Are Essendon that screwed?

Personally I think they are done.

Firstly, the AFL have them by the balls on governance issues. It, insofar as I can tell, is no different from Carlton tanking or Ben Cousins being a drug addict. All clubs signed up to this it is and should be dealt with by the AFL. Under 1.6 bringing the game into disrepute.

The second matter which seems to get conflated with the first is the issue of performance enhancing drugs.

This has two parts to it. 1) Whether they took banned substances.

& 2) If Essendon had full knowledge and control of what was going into their players.

As far as I can tell they are both as serious as each other. Point 1 is strictly as ASADA/WADA matter. Point 2 is where is gets super serious legally speaking. Charges can be laid by the AFP, the ACC, TGA, and NHMRC (National Health and Medical Research Council) the last one is particularly worrying...

In a worst case scenario Essendon were testing drugs on players without their consent. This is probably one of the worst things an individual could be subjected too. I don't need to go further.

So we have 3 possible "grounds for attack". And it seems the least serious relates to taking performance enhancing drugs. This shit is serious. We could see jail time if the worst of it's true and going by what I've read today it is. I feel sick to the stomach typing this.

 

[Selective Retention]

I am no legal genius, but this all seems bad. Is it as bad as the media and other people on here are claiming? Are Essendon that screwed?

For their sake I hope they have some of that lube all plus stuff still lying around.

 

[Selective Retention]

This whole saga moves so quickly it is impossible to keep up.

 

[manboob]

For their sake I hope they have some of that lube all plus stuff still lying around.

The AFL are going in dry.

 

[manboob]

I can see now why all those guys left the club when this first came up. They knew what was written on the wall and got the **** out of Dodge.

 

[FredLeDeux]

Yes, the AFL's charges are, at least in part, based on the ASADA interim report and, as I understand it, partly on the Switkowski report. Those reports both present a litany of established facts. In the case of the ASADA report, it is interim in that it does not purport to be a complete assembly of the facts nor does it make conclusions or findings. However the facts that it has established may stand on their own and, if so, the AFL is within its rights to rely on them.

The ongoing ASADA investigations may uncover further facts and is sure to make conclusions at some point. When that happens, the AFL may well make further charges against Essendon and individuals.

We're on the same page with all that.
However, in relation to the bolded part, Essendon leaks have foreshadowed a legal challenge on the basis that all of the evidence in the Report is inadmissible because it was illegal under Federal Law for ASADA to give it to the AFL.

 

[BotsMaster]

I'm so glad we're not involved.