• 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.

Play Nice Jobe Watson hands back Brownlow Medal

Remove this Banner Ad

Status
Not open for further replies.
Because there is nothing we hate more than drug cheats.

Everyone knows the rules before they choose to inject drugs. Make sure what you are doing is above board and take responsibility for your actions. Don't rely on others telling you it is ok.

There is no sympathy out there from other athletes, even Essendon supporting ones like Andrew Bogut.
What you've just said doesn't answer my question. Maybe try reading the post you're replying to next time.
 
AFL Tribunal had a different interpretation of "comfortably satisfied" . Wasn't an error.
Jobe believes he took the AOD and Thymosin which he believed both were ok to take, that's why he believes he's innocent....CAS found in their opinion there was a good chance the 34 were given TB4..now as to who and when, they don't know. From that any reasonable man with half a brain would have thought the same if in Jobe's shoes.
But Thymosin he believes he took isn't actually OK (despite the Danksters assurances it was) to take so he wouldn't be innocent.

Also he probably shouldn't have signed up for a collective defence. Did none of the players any favours. The players mistakenly thought that the confusion over who got what would save them.
 
Cheat
verb
gerund or present participle: cheating
  1. act dishonestly or unfairly in order to gain an advantage.
If there was no intention or mental element how can one act dishonestly or unfairly? The word 'cheating' does not apply here.
Er...might want to look up unfairly too.

It's unfair to gain an advantage from taking a performance enhancing substance when your opponents are not using them. Thus Essendon players were banned for being drug cheats. Much like many many international athletes before them who were given drugs by others that were illegal.

I don't think Essendon's players set out to take banned substances. But they willingly turned a blind eye to the possibility - especially senior players like Watson who failed to take issue with being treated like an experimental pin cushion. His leadership and that of senior people at Essendon was utterly woeful. Crazy that sycophants and family friends in the media still push the great leader line. I've never seen a club more devoid of leadership.

They cheated, they were banned and they live with that against their names. That involved Watson inevitably losing the medal.
 

Log in to remove this ad.

But Thymosin he believes he took isn't actually OK (despite the Danksters assurances it was) to take so he wouldn't be innocent.

Also he probably shouldn't have signed up for a collective defence. Did none of the players any favours. The players mistakenly thought that the confusion over who got what would save them.

Thymodulin(?) was not banned. The players just thought what they were taking was not banned, no one has yet proved otherwise, not even CAS/WADA.
 
Er...might want to look up unfairly too.

It's unfair to gain an advantage from taking a performance enhancing substance when your opponents are not using them. Thus Essendon players were banned for being drug cheats. Much like many many international athletes before them who were given drugs by others that were illegal.

I don't think Essendon's players set out to take banned substances. But they willingly turned a blind eye to the possibility - especially senior players like Watson who failed to take issue with being treated like an experimental pin cushion. His leadership and that of senior people at Essendon was utterly woeful. Crazy that sycophants and family friends in the media still push the great leader line. I've never seen a club more devoid of leadership.

They cheated, they were banned and they live with that against their names. That involved Watson inevitably losing the medal.

He's the one who called a meeting and had the forms arranged. Dane Swan and few other players have said they would have done the same thing.
 
Er...might want to look up unfairly too.

It's unfair to gain an advantage from taking a performance enhancing substance when your opponents are not using them. Thus Essendon players were banned for being drug cheats. Much like many many international athletes before them who were given drugs by others that were illegal.

I don't think Essendon's players set out to take banned substances. But they willingly turned a blind eye to the possibility - especially senior players like Watson who failed to take issue with being treated like an experimental pin cushion. His leadership and that of senior people at Essendon was utterly woeful. Crazy that sycophants and family friends in the media still push the great leader line. I've never seen a club more devoid of leadership.

They cheated, they were banned and they live with that against their names. That involved Watson inevitably losing the medal.
You are contradicting yourself. If there was no intent or knowledge (which you seem to agree with) then you can't label them cheats.

Sure, the players copped their whack and were banned essentially for being naive. But they never cheated.
 
Hird is right though Dank hasn't been found guilty of giving any performance enhancing drugs ergo how can you prove the players cheated.

It used to be that you couldn't secure a murder conviction without a body. That's changed lately with advances in forensic science.

Essendon was convicted despite disposing of the body. Deal with it.
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

Should that burden lay with Essendon or should WADA have the onus of proving that what was taken was in fact against WADA code?

Problem is as much as I would have liked the Essendon players involved to have gotten off free, it didn't help not having any record of what was injected, injecting at some other venue across the road from training ground and players signing conceptual forms, this does not paint a pretty picture...

Right or wrong, Basically WADA says. ..

If it looks like a rat, smells like a rat, sounds like a rat, and acts like a rat, is it still a rat?
 
Should that burden lay with Essendon or should WADA have the onus of proving that what was taken was in fact against WADA code?
well the problem was Bombers couldn't "find"!the paperwork so unfortunately we have to assume the worst. See if we didn't EVERYONE would follow suits and "lose" the evidence
 
well the problem was Bombers couldn't "find"!the paperwork so unfortunately we have to assume the worst. See if we didn't EVERYONE would follow suits and "lose" the evidence
Neither could WADA. How is it that a lack of evidence can somehow be construed to mean that Essendon is guilty? It's like the opposite of what a fair and just investigation is intended for.
 
Seems like an administrative issue which Essendon was punished for. But if WADA can't prove what the contents of the injections were why is it that people assume the worst?

Completely correct

An administration issue it certainly was.

We will inject our players outside the club and cover it up from the competition. You woukd think if they had done nothing wrong the process would be transparent but it was far from this.

Anyway you twist it it's an illegal practice and the club got what they deserved.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Remove this Banner Ad

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top