Heppell on 360

[Big Sim is Back]

Well no, I've maintained the players have a right to feel that way about the club for a long time. No penny dropping here.

Not you Doss, Dyson.

 

[Big Sim is Back]

But he said the club did nothing wrong. Why would he be angry at them? They are just as innocent.

This is the problem with the players. What they say defies logic.

Yeah its wierd. I don't know what I took but I know what I didn't take. That sort of logic could make Mr Spock's head explode.

Robbo says that ASADA told the boys that they would be right...when did that happen?

 

[Muggs]

Yeah its wierd. I don't know what I took but I know what I didn't take. That sort of logic could make Mr Spock's head explode.

Robbo says that ASADA told the boys that they would be right...when did that happen?

Few times you could argue this, supposedly investigators early on,
Oct 2015 just before the AFL sent out infraction notices ASADA sent a letter to the AFL and indicated a 50% reduction for no signicant fault be ok. If you than add backdating basically meant no further penalty.

WADA than come along and disagreed...

 

[Big Sim is Back]

like many in this thread, you've ignored what Heppell said

Heppell said he had no problem with the legal process & he never said he didn't take banned substances & shouldn't have been suspended.

His issue is with the club's organization of the supplements plan, which both worksafe & the AFL tribunal penalized essendon for. 4 corners went into last night.

fact is, no one has been able to give a "yes" or "no" to whether players took banned substances, hence the legal battles over the last few years.

CAS was comfortably satisfied they did, but that's different to saying they definitely did. Heppell clearly stated he ain't questioning this.

Not much difference besides semantics. They were comfortably satisfied that they definitely did, hence the verdict.

 

[Doss]

Yeah its wierd. I don't know what I took but I know what I didn't take. That sort of logic could make Mr Spock's head explode.

Robbo says that ASADA told the boys that they would be right...when did that happen?

For what it's worth, I was told by one of the current 12 in January 2014 that they'd been told by 'ASADA investigators' that "they were safe".

Obviously goalposts changed at some point.

 

[Big Sim is Back]

Few times you could argue this, supposedly investigators early on,
Oct 2015 just before the AFL sent out infraction notices ASADA sent a letter to the AFL and indicated a 50% reduction for no signicant fault be ok. If you than add backdating basically meant no further penalty.

WADA than come along and disagreed...

I heard McD talking about that. It seemed to me the "deal" everyone spoke of and still speaks of as offered involved the players coming clean and helping the investigation: "thyomsin sounds familiar but I can not be sure" not counting as helpful. So it was not a blanket sign here and it will all end type of thing.

 

[HairyO]

Yeah its wierd. I don't know what I took but I know what I didn't take. That sort of logic could make Mr Spock's head explode.

Robbo says that ASADA told the boys that they would be right...when did that happen?

Early on ASADA said it based on the original Essendon self report - which totally glossed over what was really going on.

Once ASADA saw the level of doping they quickly changed their mind. Though all along they were happy to offer a minor punishment to the players for their liability while acknowledging the club truly screwed up.

Its a shame Robbo didnt ask Heppell to release his ASADA statement for his drug test so he could show that he was honest with them.

Ben McD said only one player listed one substance out of all their forms - Panadol.

The others never listed a thing.

No conspiracy here of course.

No wonder Heppell was so relaxed. He knew it would be a softball interview. Will any talk to Caro or Patrick Smith?

 

[Big Sim is Back]

For what it's worth, I was told by one of the current 12 in January 2014 that they'd been told by 'ASADA investigators' that "they were safe".

Obviously goalposts changed at some point.

OK, interesting. I guess the public discrediting and constant sniping at all things ASADA would not have helped.

 

[Muggs]

I heard McD talking about that. It seemed to me the "deal" everyone spoke of and still speaks of as offered involved the players coming clean and helping the investigation: "thyomsin sounds familiar but I can not be sure" not counting as helpful. So it was not a blanket sign here and it will all end type of thing.

Actually quoted in the CAS documents - para 156



No linking to a deal, was linked to actually issuing the infraction notice.

 

[stewie dew]

is that saying ASADA told the players they would be okay?

 

[Demonic Ascent]

Says they never concealed anything, but fails to mention all the times they did fail to declare as required to.

He seemed amazed that CAS found that none of the Essendon players tested in 2012 revealed any of the injections on the forms they had to lodge. Does he think they just purely made this up? Does he think the public are really that gullible? He said he was one of the players tested and definitely reported what he had been given on the forms. I find this extremely hard to believe in light of the CAS findings.

Robbo of course was on the "the public would think differently if only they knew what we knew" train and Whately is back to refusing to really challenge the AFL/EFC spin. Robbo/Heppell claimed the players had been told for 3 years that they had nothing to worry about, intimating ASADA told them there would be no suspensions. Does anyone really think this is what was said to them by the national anti-doping agency? Maybe if they tried to settle this way back when and took a limited suspension like the Cronulla players did it would have been swept under the carpet but once they decided to push their luck and challenge this and it ended up with WADA involved there was no chance in hell they would get off. The worst thing that happened to them was the AFL Tribunal finding them not guilty - a guilty verdict with a limited suspension would have been the best outcome they could hope for.

 

[Demonic Ascent]

Heppell knows what he was given and is comfortable? Hunter doesn't? Big difference in salary talking here. Something is not right and these players are not as innocent as i first thought or they are delusional? This isn't over by a long way, i still believe many of these suspended players will not be at Essendon in 2017.

Comfortable he was not given any banned substances. The club can't say what he was given.

Did nothing wrong, amazed to be found guilty. Feels let down by the club and key individuals within.

Does anyone else see the contradictions in these statements?

 

[stewie dew]

even watching the four corners report last night, you have to say EFC have done a fantastic job of keeping everything quiet, Hal Hunter was very careful on answering questions, nothing new in the show, no surprises from Heppel on AFL360

hard to understand it all, no wonder the saga continues

 

[Andrew Mc]

even watching the four corners report last night, you have to say EFC have done a fantastic job of keeping everything quiet, Hal Hunter was very careful on answering questions, nothing new in the show, no surprises from Heppel on AFL360

hard to understand it all, no wonder the saga continues

Suspect there are a few things Hal can't/won't talk about due to the impending court case.

 

[Demonic Ascent]

Should be even angrier with himself for being totally complicit with the actions of the club. When you don't ask any questions, when you deliberately hide your actions from the club doctor, when you hide what you're taking from ASADA, and yet still continue to allow yourself to be used as a human pincushion, you loose every right to be angry with those that you are complicit with. Of course, you can be delusional about all this, and pretend you've never been told you're completely and utterly responsible for anything that goes into your body, but you'll just come out looking like either an idiot, or a cheat.

I agree with this to an extent - as a player in 2012 you would assume having asked the question of the club that would be enough. Not sure whether Doc Reid was included in that consultation process but the club giving the OK would have been enough for most players at the time. Whether that is in the code or not, whether that is what they'd been told about strict liability etc - as a player in a club environment you would feel getting ticked off by the club would be sufficient to allay any fears that what was going on was OK. The club is a professional organisation, they should know what's going on right?

Subsequently it has come to light that what they did crossed the line - the players can't absolve themselves of responsibility because the club told them it was OK - at the end of the day they are the athletes and they are the ones who were injected with banned substances. If Heppell came out and said we trusted the club but we found out later that what we did/what happened under the clubs program was wrong, under the code we are complicit and accept our full punishment and responsibility I think the public would have a sympathetic ear. Continuing to shift the blame onto others and deny responsibility has been the key motif throughout this whole ordeal from ALL the people involved and its still going on.

 

[kaiserchief13]

Comfortable he was not given any banned substances. The club can't say what he was given.

Did nothing wrong, amazed to be found guilty. Feels let down by the club and key individuals within.

Does anyone else see the contradictions in these statements?

The bolded part is what everyone has said throughout this saga. Are they that stupid that they believe that is a valid response?

 

[Demonic Ascent]

I think the 12 players are gone. I would simply ask what was I given (we all know Essendon can't answer that) and then leave. No way they should be forced to stay with a club that did that to them.

It raises another interesting question I've been thinking about the Essendon list - apparently the 12 suspended players will have the right to act as Delisted Free Agents (DFA) at the end of the year if they so choose even if they are still under contract (I believe that's the case but someone may want to correct me).

They currently have top-up players replacing those guys on 1-year contracts - what rights do they have to the top-up players at the end of the year? If Stokes, Kelly and Crowley have good years and other clubs come sniffing will they be treated as contracted EFC players and have to be traded? Or will they go into the Pre-Season Draft?

If any of the 12 decide to leave will EFC be compensated with draft picks? As DFA's they would normally get no compo so will they have to use draft picks at the end of the draft once every other club has used all theirs? Will be interesting to see what happens if guys like Hurley, Hooker etc walk out, Watson, Stanton retire etc

 

[Demonic Ascent]

For what it's worth, I was told by one of the current 12 in January 2014 that they'd been told by 'ASADA investigators' that "they were safe".

Obviously goalposts changed at some point.

That may have been the players/clubs interpretation but I find it hard to believe ASADA would have made such a black & white statement.

 

[The 747]

Comfortable he was not given any banned substances. The club can't say what he was given.

Did nothing wrong, amazed to be found guilty. Feels let down by the club and key individuals within.

Does anyone else see the contradictions in these statements?

It's a carefully managed media strategy to keep things confused. They never go on any show where they get asked hard questions, and they just repeat the same Chewbacca defence. It doesn't make any sense of course but that's kinda the point so at some point the viewer/reader/listener gives up and thinks "well who knows".

The "we did nothing wrong" is a completely irrelevant statement but it's posturing for the AFL family.

 

[Andrew Mc]

I agree with this to an extent - as a player in 2012 you would assume having asked the question of the club that would be enough. Not sure whether Doc Reid was included in that consultation process but the club giving the OK would have been enough for most players at the time. Whether that is in the code or not, whether that is what they'd been told about strict liability etc - as a player in a club environment you would feel getting ticked off by the club would be sufficient to allay any fears that what was going on was OK. The club is a professional organisation, they should know what's going on right?

So, it didn't twig to any of the 34 when told to not involve Reid that they might be skirting the edges? I'll stick with complicit or idiots. Not forgetting that they are still saying they didn't take anything they shouldn't, yet also have no idea what they took. It really beggars belief.

 

[Baltimore Jack]

On AFL360 last night Heppell said (more than once) he firmly believes he "did nothing wrong"
He later then went on to say "I feel terribly let down by the Club"

I'm wondering why there was no follow up question by Robbo, such as:
"If you say you did nothing wrong, why do you say the Club let you down?"

 

[Pessimistic]

I still think essendon will like nothing better to get the remaining 12 off their books in as short a time as possible. It gives them a nice free agency fighting fund and their salary cap position is now very elastic thanks to the way its panned out.

Ill be boycotting their games as a matter of principle. they will be shit anyway

 

[sameolds33]

Just watching this interview now - these guys are on another planet. Still refusing responsibility, still claiming they've been hard done by, claiming that he's comfortable with what he was given but the club refuse to acknowledge what they were given, refusing to understand the strict liability concept for athletes and why it is important etc etc This is why the public sentiment is not with the players or the club. They just refuse to accept any responsibility and still don't get it.

Heppell thinks people who have called him a drug cheat don't know all the facts - maybe those specific ones don't but to think the public are just stupid and they are the innocent victims is wonderland tripe. They have been living in that bubble so long that it is their reality - in the real world people know what went on or have enough of a clue to fill in the gaps and that's why they think Heppell, his teammates and his club are drug cheats.

It's his truth and he's entitled to tell it, more entitled and relevant than the received wisdoms on the HTB, seeing as he was there. It's not his problem that his behaviour doesn't conform to your view of his responsibility for what happened at Essendon in 2012.

You've presumably heard of the Rashomon (great film!) effect. This from Wikipedia, "The Rashomon effect is contradictory interpretations of the same event by different people. The phrase derives from the film Rashomon, where the accounts of the witnesses, suspects, and victims of a rape and murder are all different."

Last night, we heard both Hal Hunter's and Dyson Heppell's accounts of the saga and how it has affected them. To me, their perceptions of the players' responsibility and their emotional responses to the consequences of the supplements program both seemed honest and plausible, if different (although both similarly trusted the program). Kind of selective of the HTB to believe one and not the other.

 

[SBYM]

Ben McD said only one player listed one substance out of all their forms - Panadol.

I just watched it and saw Doice label 'ridiculous' the accusation that none of them had filled out their forms correctly and in full.

Curiouser and curiouser...

 

[The 747]

I just watched it and saw Doice label 'ridiculous' the accusation that none of them had filled out their forms correctly and in full.

Curiouser and curiouser...

Easy, Doice should just produce the forms and that will settle that. He won't though, and you can guess why not......