• Please read this post on the rules on BigFooty regarding posting copyright material, including fair dealing rules. Repeat infringements could see your account limited or closed.

Hird Hits Back

Remove this Banner Ad

Hird has no idea that all he is doing is putting himself first, I suppose you would if you thought you were the club and were bigger than anything else.

He's about to get one of life's tough lessons in a very big way on a very big scale.

I wonder what supporters will think of Hird next year when all the penalties get applied through the 2014 season. Will they still blame the AFL for allowing Essendon to inject it's players with syringes filled with whatever?
 
Sanders said:
Anyway, where is the legal basis for what Team Tirdy are demanding?

The report is not invalid without a point of law that it breaches, not because he disputes content
Click to expand...

Pretty much it in a nutshell. Vlads public comments may mean he has to remove himself from the process, but a independent three man panel should just be a matter of right for something this serious and given the particular context of this situation. Hird's camp shouldn't have to threaten to run to court over it. He has made public comment about the issue at hand. Irregardless of the content of his comments, he made a comment so shouldn't sit in judgment. I would assume the AFL wouldnt stick pigheadedly to this as that would surely let Hird get it thrown out eventually IMO. All that rubbish about just both being and seeming to be done. I wouldn't be shocks though if it was 2 independents and a commissioner like Fitzpatrick.

Hird's attempt to get him thrown out on a conflict on the basis they intend to call him as a witness just appears to be some farcical attempt to tie a phone call on 4 Feb 13 to the events of 11-12 Supplements program. The phone call would seem to be materially irrelevant to any of the issues at hand, therefore the need to be called as a witness wouldn't really be great enough to compel Vlad to be a witness which would then create the conflict. Essentially they are wanting to call him as a witness only to create the conflict of interest, because none of what he could say would be relevant to the issues at hand. I don't think a court would appreciate such an argument, and I would be shocked (and staggered) if Vlad gave any evidence at the hearing on 26/8. This is irrelevant though as Vlad should recuse himself for the first reason.
 

Log in to remove this ad.

  • Thread starter
  • Moderator
  • #81
Battleship said:
Good on Hird, The Nerve that the AFL can lay charges on evidence that currently does not exist just for the witchhunt effect.
Click to expand...

Haven't caught up on charge 1 from tonight yet?
 
1970crow said:
yep, the very people who laid the charges sit in judgement on them. conflict? no way. pretty sure our judicial system just has the coppers who arrest us decide if we're guilty.
Click to expand...

Maybe Ziggy can head a panel of experts that can decide their fate?

Experts like Spike, Darcy, Dank, Charters, Evans and Dean Wallis
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

Sanders, that's quite enough of the Bay 13 style names in here, please.

That goes for everyone too, regardless of team or individual involved.
 
dalethomas13 said:
lol and what would Demetriou standing aside from the Commission prove or achieve?

Do they just think the AFL commission will not have James Hird's "vendetta" against Demetriou in the back of their minds when handing down a verdict?

Do they honestly believe that AFL House aka City Hall will just stand by and do nothing while their supreme leader is under siege?

Team Hird is fighting a battle it cannot control unfortunately. Blood is looming and looks like it will be spilt.
Click to expand...

nice own goal dude.
 
*PAF said:
And would have been back in time for next year.
Click to expand...
Probably thought Essendon's strong start to the season was building to something big and didn't want to give that up. He should have known it would peter out by August and they'd bow out week one in the finals.
 
The last thing the AFL want is a situation where they feel compelled to charge a club for such a serious offense, so rest assured this is not a decision that they are doing lightly and would prefer the investigation turn up nothing. But the evidence to them must be clearly overwhelming.
 
Percel said:
Interesting that you think that. So you really think that a body as big as the AFL would put all on the line with no evidence? And it would be all on the line. They are going to spend hundreds of thousands of dollars on a witch hunt?

You cant be that silly bray/mate/champ/muscles/brother
Click to expand...

The process of charging head coaches, doctor's & player managers on the bases of an Interim Report is ridiculous.
When the full ASADA report is released and players & coaches and anyone else who is associated is found guilty, then I'm all for copping what they deserve.

Currently the full report & findings are not available, so the process of charging just bases on charging is not acceptable.
 

Remove this Banner Ad

Hird Hits Back

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top