Investigation into Essendon Fitness Program

Remove this Banner Ad

Status
Not open for further replies.
SpiderBurton22 said:
Feel like a fool quoting my own post, but Jobe was just doorstopped outside his place and pulled out the "Sorry can't make any comments due to the ongoing investigation".

What about last night Jobe?
Click to expand...

Its beyond a JOKE... the scripted spin that keeps coming out of Windy Hill and the Afl and its drip feeding when it wants to is a complete disregard to the people who pay memberships to this game. Bomber Thompson is still yet to be interviewed.... ITS A JOKE.
 
There's been a few silly sausages saying the ACC clears AOD...

Someone on the Essendon board claims a person rang up Finey with the report which says "WADA cleared it" on Page 40.

People are also claiming that it's not in any way performance enhancing.

Just to clear that up...

http://www.crimecommission.gov.au/s...ganised-crime-and-drugs-in-sports-feb2013.pdf

Page 39...


AOD 9604
AOD9604 is not currently prohibited under category S2 of the WADA Prohibited List.
AOD9604 works by mimicking the way natural Gh regulates the metabolism of fat by
stimulating lipolysis (the breakdown or destruction of fat) and inhibits lipogenesis (the
transformation of non-fat food materials into body fat). Reports by Caldaza Ltd have
shown that AOD9604 had positive (anabolic) effects on cartilage tissue formation as well
as enhancements in the ‘differential of muscle progenitor cells (cells that create muscle
cells) to muscle cells’. Other purported benefits of AOD9604 include increasing muscle
mass and IGF-1 levels. AOD-9604 is not approved for human use.
 
It is amazing, with all this media speculation, how easy it is to spot those journos etc with a vested interested in the game and who will defend what has gone on until their last breath, and those who don't have a vested interest in the game.

The AFL media community is a small, incestuous little world with conflicts of interest all over the place - club ties, former and current players, people beholden to the game for an income, relatives, friends and hangers-on.

It doesn't really make for unbiased, comprehensive coverage of issues like these.
 

Log in to remove this ad.

If I walk along the edge of the precipice of a cliff, and a little bit gives way and I fall, who is to blame?

This whole debacle, the enquiry, the angst that bombers supporters goes through, the responsibility of 'rogue staff', the angst that the rest of the AFL goes through, the sullying of the reputation of champion players like Job Watson, it all lies at the feet of one guy, one guy in denial - James Hird.
 
Watson has admitted to taking AOD and AOD is deemed to be a s0 substance, thus strict liability. It seems so simple on the face of it... Having said that, I would really like to know what it is that has EFC thinking that they are in the clear.

Tim Watson's comments today were particularly interesting. They were very precise and indicated that the club has received information that effectively exonerates the players due to the fact that AOD is not a banned substance (without disclosing the information or the source). I doubt he would make these statements if there was no basis, given the risk of tarnishing his standing as a reputable jorno. So, the question becomes, how in the world can EFC claim AOD is not banned, when WADA has stated twice (last time was today) that it is not an approved substance?? Ultimately, there can be two reasons for this:

(1) They interpret s0 differently than WADA.
- Possible, but it wouldn't make me as confident as Jobe and Tim seem to be.
- WADA won't change their determination so, it EFC will be in for a fight on this.
- Application of the code, strictly does not help EFC's cause.

(2) They received information from ASADA that the substance did not breach s0, that is yet to be released.
- Also possible, yet, even in this instance, they have still technically breached the code.
- ASADA may be staring down the barrel of a pretty serious law suit should they have provided information that ultimately got EFC players banned - so maybe it is in their best interests to let them off?? I doubt it - WADA still has the final say.

The way I see it, the above points are best case scenarios for EFC (on the info we have right now). Even assuming one of those points is correct, I still can't share any of the EFC optimism - could there be something else??
 
So according to Jobe Watson..... providing that your football club gives you assurances that its ok to take a certain drug and you adhere to the advice of your football club then you are exempt from ASADA/WADA and the AFL Anti-doping policy and have no responsibility. This is going to get ugly now......
 
SEN just reporting that apparently Robbo is preparing a story which claims the EFC believe AOD is NOT a prohibited substance, and they have documentary evidence to confirm this

no mention of what that documentation is though (nothing on source or nature)
 
Jim Boy said:
If I walk along the edge of the precipice of a cliff, and a little bit gives way and I fall, who is to blame?

This whole debacle, the enquiry, the angst that bombers supporters goes through, the responsibility of 'rogue staff', the angst that the rest of the AFL goes through, the sullying of the reputation of champion players like Job Watson, it all lies at the feet of one guy, one guy in denial - James Hird.
Click to expand...



Succinct and accurate:thumbsu:
 
rfctiger74 said:
SEN just reporting that apparently Robbo is preparing a story which claims the EFC believe AOD is NOT a prohibited substance, and they have documentary evidence to confirm this

no mention of what that documentation is though (nothing on source or nature)
Click to expand...

Was an Age article earlier that eluded to a statement from from EFC.
 
DonsRule said:
Was an Age article earlier that eluded to a statement from from EFC.
Click to expand...


it will be very interesting to see what this documentary evidence is. They would want it to be pretty damn concrete, because IMO it sounds like their one shot in the locker.
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

rfctiger74 said:
SEN just reporting that apparently Robbo is preparing a story which claims the EFC believe AOD is NOT a prohibited substance, and they have documentary evidence to confirm this

no mention of what that documentation is though (nothing on source or nature)
Click to expand...



EFC believe.........good for them.

They are going to be found guilty.

And then David Evans will use Essendon money to fight this to the death in court because HE and Hird are deeply deeply involved in AOD's use at Essendon.
 
This is the most open and closed case.

A) If Essendon players have taken drugs, believed to be the banned substance AOD, then they have to be banned regardless of waiver forms being signed or not. The code states that it is entirely up to the athlete to determine what goes into their body, regardless of waivers, regardless of any other issue surrounding the fact they may not have known. It is the code that the athletes are ultimately responsible. If Jobe injected = Jobe banned and any other player who took drugs.

B) If, somehow Essendon get off, which to be honest is highly likely despite the above, the AFL have to act. They have grounds to impose heavy sanctions on the club for bringing the game into disrepute. If this isn't disrepute I don't know what is. Carlton cheated the salary cap and copped a right whack, now Essendon have cheated the entire league, they deserve due punishment, the heaviest punishment dealt to an AFL club.

It is impossible to now see how Essendon can get off, with players saying they took the banned substance, and it now being common knowledge. It shouldn't take ASADA even a day to impose the correct penalty. I feel ultimately sorry for the players as yes they may not have known, and it could severely effect their livelihood and income and do personally believe that they would never ever cheat the system knowingly, but the reality is that they have taken banned substances. Hopefully, if they are banned they receive full compensation for the 2 years out of the game, and the club is forced to cover all costs related to players.
 
rfctiger74 said:
it will be very interesting to see what this documentary evidence is. They would want it to be pretty damn concrete, because IMO it sounds like their one shot in the locker.
Click to expand...
Probably the same as Craig Harper read out on SEN this morning that it wasnt prohibited in 2012 and Robbo will claim the kudos.
 
Jim Boy said:
If I walk along the edge of the precipice of a cliff, and a little bit gives way and I fall, who is to blame?

This whole debacle, the enquiry, the angst that bombers supporters goes through, the responsibility of 'rogue staff', the angst that the rest of the AFL goes through, the sullying of the reputation of champion players like Job Watson, it all lies at the feet of one guy , one guy in denial - James Hird.
Click to expand...
I actually think James should become the first ever combined EFC Coach, Assistant Coach, CEO, President, Footy Operations Manager, Sports Science Manager, Membership Manager, and chief boot studder.
 
Keyser Soze said:
Question for bombers posters here - if, and I stress if, the clubs view that AOD is not banned proves false or that there is something else players have taken that is banned such that ASADA conclude that players should be banned will Hird be held accountable. If not, why not?
Click to expand...

He bleeds red and black- frankly you don't get any better.
 
Suma Magic said:
Ok fair enough.

It's a very minor point - but does this mean Essendon's claims that Essendon couldn't comment while the investigation were on were false? Or it was just a self-imposed ban, and Essendon could say whatever they wanted about all the interviews etc the whole time?
Click to expand...
We can't comment other than to say we will get off but we will not tell you why we will get off.

We can't comment other than to say we took AOD but we will get off, we will not tell you why we will get off though.

Joke
 
rfctiger74 said:
SEN just reporting that apparently Robbo is preparing a story which claims the EFC believe AOD is NOT a prohibited substance, and they have documentary evidence to confirm this

no mention of what that documentation is though (nothing on source or nature)
Click to expand...

But how??? but how could he know this??? EFC aren't commenting on the investigation until its complete...... have they found Danks letter?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Remove this Banner Ad

Similar threads

Satan
Pharmacist involved in essendon saga sadly found dead
Replies
3
Views
881
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