Investigation into Essendon Fitness Program

Remove this Banner Ad

Status
Not open for further replies.
Lance Uppercut said:
right, so it will be open season to call Essendon supporters fwits, will it? You'll be engaging in a bit of that action?
Click to expand...
I personally don't understand how Essendon supporters can stand by the Essendon administration if found guilty of injecting illegal substances into young athletes. No matter who they are - these administrators will destroy your club if found guilty. All the facts from WADA emails, ACC insinuations, ASADA investigations all point to atheletes being systematically injected with banned substances. It will up to the supporters to rebuild the club, it's your club not "theirs"
 

Log in to remove this ad.

Ive said it before you can just keep breaking this case down to the basics and the use of IV's is a home run just on its own


http://www.abc.net.au/news/2013-05-02/email-exchange-reveals-drugs-in-sport-twist/4666602

CARO MELDRUM-HANNA: This has since been called into question by a detailed series of more than 100 text messages sent between Essendon coach James Hird and Stephen Dank throughout 2012. The texts refer to almost every player in Essendon's squad, 22 in all, and detail a supplements regime which included multiple IVs and injections. The texts name Essendon's biggest stars. In the texts, they discuss the use of a variety of supplements, including Uniquinone and Thymosin.

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2013-05-02/email-exchange-reveals-drugs-in-sport-twist/4666602

http://www.heraldsun.com.au/afl/mor...reach-doping-law/story-e6frf9jf-1226578316393

Whether those infusions carried legal drugs or banned peptides, it is the manner in which they entered they body that would breach the AFL's code.The AFL's code makes it clear intravenous infusions are "prohibited except for those legitimately received in the course of hospital admissions or clinical investigations".

http://www.heraldsun.com.au/afl/mor...reach-doping-law/story-e6frf9jf-1226578316393
 
pinot said:
I personally don't understand how Essendon supporters can stand by the Essendon administration if found guilty of injecting illegal substances into young athletes. No matter who they are - these administrators will destroy your club if found guilty. All the facts from WADA emails, ACC insinuations, ASADA investigations all point to atheletes being systematically injected with banned substances.
Click to expand...

That's the problem.

Those "facts" that you are referring to actually have not be proven to have taken place by the investigators!!!!!

The ACC report never actually named Essendon. First "fact" thrown on the scrap heap.
The redacted e-mails look about as legit as a questionable restraining order. There goes the second "fact".
The ASADA investigations are barely on the ground. Players haven't been interviewed at this point. Until that investigation is completed, then we will all know the FACTS. We don't now.

These are the only facts that cannot be denied.

That Dank was employed by Essendon.
That Dank created a program which was voluntary. We know that Watson, Fletcher, Hille and Reimers did not participate. We knoiw McVeigh did, but, McVeigh makes the point his program was based on vitamins.

Anything else is yet to be proven as a fact.
 
SaintsSeptember said:
Speculation by a sports expert, like Newton speculated gravity.
Do you have any contradicting evidence that muscles gained by the use of suppliments rapidy reduce when the suppliment is stopped?
Click to expand...

Nick Bideau is a sports expert? Wasn't he the bloke who when a coach had a fair bit of controversy follow him? Sorry but his credibility is pretty well non-existent.
 
IanW said: ↑
You stupid stupid little f.ck, you have no idea of the why's and wherefores of the program.

The ONLY useful thing you've done in anything you've posted is to provide a window to the koolaid-drinking f.ckwits in the middle of this.​

Wow:rolleyes:
 
snax said:
IanW said: ↑
You stupid stupid little f.ck, you have no idea of the why's and wherefores of the program.​
​
The ONLY useful thing you've done in anything you've posted is to provide a window to the koolaid-drinking f.ckwits in the middle of this.​

Wow:rolleyes:
Click to expand...

For the record, I removed the first section of the first line.

I stick behind the rest of it though.

Mxett has been continually and consistently useless. His entire "contribution" could be replaced with "But Essendon would never do anything wrong ! It had to be legal because Essendon did it".
 
IanW said:
For the record, I removed the first section of the first line.

I stick behind the rest of it though.

Mxett has been continually and consistently useless. His entire "contribution" could be replaced with "But Essendon would never do anything wrong ! It had to be legal because Essendon did it".
Click to expand...
doesn't matter if you removed it. You thought it was ok to call someone an fwit. And a "stupid little ****". I think you need to stop taking things so seriously champ.
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

Lance Uppercut said:
right, so it will be open season to call Essendon supporters fwits, will it? You'll be engaging in a bit of that action?
Click to expand...

In my experience most Essendon supporters have always been fwits. ;)

I'm sure you consider many opposition supporters the same.

But it shouldn't be open season for anyone to call another such things directly.

For all I disagree with the stuff you put out, you seem a reasonable (if misguided) chap. :D
 
pazza said:
That's the problem.

Those "facts" that you are referring to actually have not be proven to have taken place by the investigators!!!!!

The ACC report never actually named Essendon. First "fact" thrown on the scrap heap.
The redacted e-mails look about as legit as a questionable restraining order. There goes the second "fact".
The ASADA investigations are barely on the ground. Players haven't been interviewed at this point. Until that investigation is completed, then we will all know the FACTS. We don't now.

These are the only facts that cannot be denied.

That Dank was employed by Essendon.
That Dank created a program which was voluntary. We know that Watson, Fletcher, Hille and Reimers did not participate. We knoiw McVeigh did, but, McVeigh makes the point his program was based on vitamins.

Anything else is yet to be proven as a fact.
Click to expand...

Pazza,

Theres a whole bunch of signed forms, showing what players are consenting to take.

If any of those forms mention AOD-9604, then there is enough evidence to ban those players for showing intent to use the prohibited substance.

And thats enough.

This is footnote 10 of the AFL Anti-Doping rules.

10 Demonstrating the “Attempted Use” of a Prohibited Substance requires proof of intent on the Player’s part. The fact that intent may be required to prove this particular Anti Doping Rule Violation does not undermine the strict liability principle established for violations of Clause 11.1 and violations of Clause 11.2 in respect of Use of a Prohibited Substance or Prohibited Method.

http://www.aflvic.com.au/fileadmin/.../Club_Resources/AFL_Anti-Doping_Code_2010.pdf

Proving intent is usually pretty hard. In this case, you have signed forms saying 'I am going to use *blah*.

Oh, and ditto beta-thymosin-4, and ditto melantonin and maybe ditto celebroylson, and so on.

Add Essendon paying for those drugs, and it's easily enough for CAS.

In short, there is already proof.
 
pazza said:
Nick Bideau is a sports expert? Wasn't he the bloke who when a coach had a fair bit of controversy follow him? Sorry but his credibility is pretty well non-existent.
Click to expand...

He has worked in the field.
I'm no expert either but thats the way I've always understood it.
You work out like buggery to get big ( or take the gear to make it easier ), but once you are happy with yourself, its easier to maintain your muscles.

Feel free to post evidence that contravene's this crazy speculation.
 
IanW said:
Pazza,

Theres a whole bunch of signed forms, showing what players are consenting to take.

If any of those forms mention AOD-9604, then there is enough evidence to ban those players for showing intent to use the prohibited substance.

And thats enough.

This is footnote 10 of the AFL Anti-Doping rules.

10 Demonstrating the “Attempted Use” of a Prohibited Substance requires proof of intent on the Player’s part. The fact that intent may be required to prove this particular Anti Doping Rule Violation does not undermine the strict liability principle established for violations of Clause 11.1 and violations of Clause 11.2 in respect of Use of a Prohibited Substance or Prohibited Method.

http://www.aflvic.com.au/fileadmin/.../Club_Resources/AFL_Anti-Doping_Code_2010.pdf

Proving intent is usually pretty hard. In this case, you have signed forms saying 'I am going to use *blah*.

Oh, and ditto beta-thymosin-4, and ditto melantonin and maybe ditto celebroylson, and so on.

Add Essendon paying for those drugs, and it's easily enough for CAS.

In short, there is already proof.
Click to expand...

The payment that was refunded?


And, now days, I read it in the newspaper is enough for prosecution?

Lets hope you're never mentioned in a paper for doing anything wrong if you accept that is a fair trial.
 
I noticed during a commercial break on AFL 360 that Essendon are still running the "Whatever it takes" campaign, despite hurriedly scraping it off walls months ago at Windy Hill.

Either you've got something to hide or you don't need to begin scrapping a suggestive your marketing campaign (which I thought was actually a good one). Either you know things or you don't need to make a defensive PR driven statement.

They all knew then and certainly know now. This is an unwashable stench from a rotten club.
 
jerry springer said:
Whether those infusions carried legal drugs or banned peptides, it is the manner in which they entered they body that would breach the AFL's code.The AFL's code makes it clear intravenous infusions are "prohibited except for those legitimately received in the course of hospital admissions or clinical investigations".

http://www.heraldsun.com.au/afl/mor...reach-doping-law/story-e6frf9jf-1226578316393
Click to expand...

Not quite. You can go up to 50 ml.

But, yeah, anyone who got more than 50 ml in 6 hours, say during a 4 day break up to an important game against Collingwood, is looking at a 2 year ban.

M2. CHEMICAL AND PHYSICAL MANIPULATION
The following is prohibited:
1. Tampering, or attempting to tamper, in order to alter the integrity and validity of Samples collected during Doping Control is prohibited. These include but are not limited to catheterisation, urine substitution and/or adulteration (e.g. proteases).
2. Intravenous infusions are prohibited except for those legitimately received in the course of hospital admissions or clinical investigations.
3. Sequential withdrawal, manipulation and reinfusion of whole blood into the circulatory system is prohibited.

http://www.wada-ama.org/Documents/W...be_effective/WADA_Prohibited_List_2011_EN.pdf

You'd have to be pretty dumb to do that - the rules are black and white.

Mind you, so is "Any pharmacological substance which is not addressed by any of the subsequent sections of the List and with no current approval by any governmental regulatory health authority for human therapeutic use (i.e. drugs under pre-clinical or clinical development or discontinued) is prohibited at all times." and EFC, mxett, lance_uppercut and so on appear to have major issues with understanding that.
 
DonsRule said:
The payment that was refunded?


And, now days, I read it in the newspaper is enough for prosecution?

Lets hope you're never mentioned in a paper for doing anything wrong if you accept that is a fair trial.
Click to expand...

Refunded ? is that more speculation?

Ummm we arent prosecuting here , its an internet forum.

What is being said is that it looks pretty bad for Essendon.
The discussion in defense seems to be somewhat delusional.

I do agree that its too early to lay blame and sack people at the club though. That would require at least the results of Ziggy's investigation, and some time to make a measured response.
 
teknodeejay said:
I noticed during a commercial break on AFL 360 that Essendon are still running the "Whatever it takes" campaign, despite hurriedly scraping it off walls months ago at Windy Hill.

Either you've got something to hide or you don't need to begin scrapping a suggestive your marketing campaign (which I thought was actually a good one). Either you know things or you don't need to make a defensive PR driven statement.

They all knew then and certainly know now. This is an unwashable stench from a rotten club.
Click to expand...

Get you facts straight, when was the last time you were anywhere near windy hill ??

The club still has the campaign plastered all over the building

Oh and the scrapping it off the wall suggestion is false, it called a media beat up, one poster was washed off the wall because it was faded and damaged

But keep on punching champ your a winner ;)
 
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