Investigation into Essendon Fitness Program

Remove this Banner Ad

Status
Not open for further replies.
mxett said:
Wada directed Dank and his enquiries about aod9604 to ASADA.

ASADA helped the ACC with their report which said multiple times that AOD9604 wasnt banned by wada.

When asada were asked about their communications with Dank they said "no comment"?

The Age reported ASADA believe their case regarding the use of AOD9604 at Essendon is weak.

Hmmmmmmmm
Click to expand...
Never has been banned.............Ever. And I have never heard anyone say it is banned.............Doesn't mean it is allowed though.

When exactly did the age report that ASADA thinks their case is weak? I am curious about where it fits into the timeline.
 
linuscambridge said:
Newman has no idea and he actually did the exact opposite of what you just said. Newman stated many of the allegations as fact to try and prove his point. He went on to bag out an investigation that has barely even started, he believes we should take the word of the Essendon Football Club, even though they haven't actually said anything yet. It was one of his more bizarre rants and that's saying something.
Click to expand...

What we didn't employ Dank?

Oh my lord.
 

Log in to remove this ad.

pazza said:
That doesn't surprise me.

You along with others are quite happy to put the cart before the horse and pronounce Essendon gulity with no proof.

The problems lies at the end of that sentence. Where is the proof of guilt?

Therefore, what the media is doing and what so many on here are falling over themselves are doing, is actually not being at all prepared to countenance the principle of innocence.

Really is quite sad.
Click to expand...

Where was Robinson's presumption of innocence?
 
Jobecantkicklol said:
Ah your one of those kids with the ripped shirt and standing by himself envious of us private schoolboys ?
Click to expand...

I'm the guy that has your lunch money in my pocket.:thumbsu::thumbsu::thumbsu:
 
tassiedog said:
Never has been banned.............Ever. And I have never heard anyone say it is banned.............Doesn't mean it is allowed though.

When exactly did the age report that ASADA thinks their case is weak? I am curious about where it fits into the timeline.
Click to expand...
3 weeks ago, after Essendon officials and doctor were interviewed

In relation to the Bombers’ use of AOD, even ASADA’s internal advice suggests the doping case around the drug is weak.
Click to expand...

Read more: http://www.theage.com.au/sport/game-changer-20130412-2hr82.html#ixzz2S8UQO77p
 
pazza said:
He is still innocent...just stood down on full pay.

Though he is apparently launching his own legal action.

Another day another lawyer....
Click to expand...

It seems to be a contradiction when the man responsible for the football department is still working.
 
Kaiser Powser said:
He knows this will blow over, and was just informing the sponsors of this. If we were going to have points stripped for the next two years and all our players banned like you nitwits suggest would he really be calling our sponsors telling them to stay onboard?
Click to expand...
I would have thought so, yes. Your lads may need all the help they can get soon.
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

Kaiser Powser said:
He knows this will blow over, and was just informing the sponsors of this. If we were going to have points stripped for the next two years and all our players banned like you nitwits suggest would he really be calling our sponsors telling them to stay onboard?
Click to expand...

Armstrong's sponsors didn't leave him until after he was found guilty.
 
Gough said:
I would have thought so, yes. Your lads may need all the help they can get soon.
Click to expand...

I know you lot of hysterics will think so.

But it doesn't actually make sense. If we were truly up shit creek, Vlad would not be putting himself on the line calling sponsors telling them not to buy into the trial by media. Sponsors have every right to jump off. Vlad knows the media have gone overboard on this.
 
mxett said:
Wada directed Dank and his enquiries about aod9604 to ASADA.

ASADA helped the ACC with their report which said multiple times that AOD9604 wasnt banned by wada.

When asada were asked about their communications with Dank they said "no comment"?

The Age reported ASADA believe their case regarding the use of AOD9604 at Essendon is weak.

Hmmmmmmmm
Click to expand...
There's never been a mention of any letters or emails from ASADA, the one from WADA put your club into a deeper poo (if thats even possible)
Your club is about to be crushed and IF the players avoid suspensions it will be due to AFL's back room deals with ASADA and not because their case is weak.
 
PieBeast said:
There's never been a mention of any letters or emails from ASADA, the one from WADA put your club into a deeper poo (if thats even possible)
Your club is about to be crushed and IF the players avoid suspensions it will be due to AFL's back room deals with ASADA and not because their case is weak.
Click to expand...
Dank has said all along he liaised with WADA and ASADA. WADA directed Dank to ASADA.

Why would ASADA say no comment?
 
Kaiser Powser said:
If I had a dollar for every moron who compared Armstrong to Essendon.

Just highlighting your stupidity, the two cases could not be any more different.
Click to expand...

All us stupid folk would appreciate it if you could highlight the differences. Please...no big words though.
 
Kaiser Powser said:
I know you lot of hysterics will think so.

But it doesn't actually make sense. If we were truly up shit creek, Vlad would not be putting himself on the line calling sponsors telling them not to buy into the trial by media. Sponsors have every right to jump off. Vlad knows the media have gone overboard on this.
Click to expand...
Essendon are a traditional powerhouse of the AFL, if it goes **** up for them, as it may, the AFL will be trying to ensure that they aren't totally destroyed. I would have thought a reassuring phone call from the oberfurher to reassure sponsors that all is not lost would be in order.
 
mxett said:
Dank has said all along he liaised with WADA and ASADA. WADA directed Dank to ASADA.

Why would ASADA say no comment?
Click to expand...
Because they're busy testing all the substances that went into your players and leave WADA to do all the talking.

Dank never mentioned getting the go ahead from ASADA, only from WADA and we know how that turned out....
 
mxett said:
Wada directed Dank and his enquiries about aod9604 to ASADA.

ASADA helped the ACC with their report which said multiple times that AOD9604 wasnt banned by wada.

When asada were asked about their communications with Dank they said "no comment"?

The Age reported ASADA believe their case regarding the use of AOD9604 at Essendon is weak.

Hmmmmmmmm
Click to expand...

It is actually quite likely that this happened.

The problem is that Dank seemed to focus on S2. Even when warned about S0, he simply thanked 'Irene' for saying it was cleared under S2.

I truly believe that Dank spoke to some incompetent, lazy muppet at ASADA who told him that it was all good under S2 without either checking S0.

Maybe Dank knew it was banned under S0 but uses S2 as a legal loophole, so he can tell people it isn't specifically banned and technically isn't lying. Or maybe like the idiots at ASADA, he actually didn't know.

ASADA may have farked you guys on AOD. Problem for you is that they need to heck you again or they are gonna get farked by WADA. Essendon needs some concrete evidence.

But as people keep forgetting, there is a 50% chance dons were taking Thymosin and if they were, AOD won't even matter.

It is a high stakes game now. Either heads roll at Essendon or ASADA. Or maybe both.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Remove this Banner Ad

Similar threads

Satan
Pharmacist involved in essendon saga sadly found dead
Replies
3
Views
871
Satan
Satan
The_Wookie
Play Nice Happy 10th Anniversary (of the Essendon/ASADA Saga)
2
Replies
30
Views
3K
blackcat
blackcat

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top