Now the Herald-Sun have a secret tape of Hird, Corcoran, Bomber et al?

[The Dodger]

Who'd a thunk it?

So its exactly as everyone was saying at the time. Essendon were going to get done...Demetriou (seems to be able to distance himself after "stepping down" a while ago) intervened and tried his usual negotiated outcomes routine with ol' Gil and now its all about how Gil promised this and that.

 

[efcboy]

Seems a bit of a stretch that players were in on the whole concept as some posters here suggest. If they were in on it why would they mention thymosin on the consent forms?

 

[pebblesofsand]

Can someone tell me exactly what drugs did the EFC allow to be injected into its players?

Until the EFC finally answers that question the club stands condemned and deserves the contempt of the AFL and AFL supporters.

 

[matthew_s]

I cant wait for the next tape to be released.

Someone should take odds on when, I'm thinking the eve of round 1?

 

[Moquo]

I cant wait for the next tape to be released.

Someone should take odds on when, I'm thinking the eve of round 1?

Put me down for April 24

 

[mxett]

Can someone tell me exactly what drugs did the EFC allow to be injected into its players?

Until the EFC finally answers that question the club stands condemned and deserves the contempt of the AFL and AFL supporters.

Unless Dank changes his tune and produces records he never kept there's no way this will change. The administrators of the club in 2012 will need to live with this on their consciences forever. Essendon, the football club, will move on

 

[NoAFLinmycomp]

Seems a bit of a stretch that players were in on the whole concept as some posters here suggest. If they were in on it why would they mention thymosin on the consent forms?

Not all - the leadership group. Has to have been a core group that knew how suspect the program was, to keep the group aligned and docile, deflecting too many questions, etc.

Also partly explains why they stuck with the consolidated defence - I think that some of the younger, newer players should have a beef with the senior players.

 

[mxett]

Not all - the leadership group. Has to have been a core group that knew how suspect the program was, to keep the group aligned and docile, deflecting too many questions, etc.

Also partly explains why they stuck with the consolidated defence - I think that some of the younger, newer players should have a beef with the senior players.

If that were true we would have seen a leaked smoking gun by now. No way a group of senior players could have kept such a secret for so long. Players, friends, team mates talk. It would have leaked to family or friends of players, especially those that have been lost to the system or left the club under poor terms

 

[GTOA]

The NSW Supreme Court compelled him to hand over all his records covering his work with NRL players.

He responded that he had none. At all. Not a single piece of paper. Not a single computer file. Not a single invoice.

Yet we should entertain the possibility that he is sitting on evidence which would have saved 34 players?

I love it.

Maybe he wants to get paid to release the documents.

Maybe he is extorting money from Essendon, to pay him and he will release the documents to them.

If Dank is asking for money, ASADA and WADA don't care, and aren't going to pay. Why would they pay for something they claim doesn't exist and may lose them their case? Better to not interview Dank, not get any documents, and prosecute 34 players so that they can ask for more funding.

 

[GTOA]

I believe that most people fail to see the significance of the one dissenting panelist. Even though he was outnumberd 2 to 1, it wouldn't matter if he was outnumbered 100 to 1.
What it clearly demonstrates, is the guilty verdict was based on opinion, not fact.
Having all heard the same evidence, they couldn't agree on what actually happened.
This speaks volumes, but no one is listening.

Maybe it should have to be a unanimous verdict from now on, and unless all agree, there is no case.

 

[GTOA]

hey Dickwhistle...

Essendon got done for governance over the supplements saga. They were found guilty of NOT KEEPING RECORDS ON WHO GOT WHAT! They were not punished over the supplements because the investigation and no tribunal had been convened yet to cover the actual doping part of it.

Governance = keeping records
doping = taking the shit

Two different crimes therefore should equate to two different punishments! And if there were two different crimes, then Essendon losing pick 1 or at least having it moved to the end of the first round would have been just punishment!

But then again... Essendon are a protected species at AFL house. Ron Evans did everything within his power to keep the fact that your mob won a premiership while cheating the salary cap a secret... but he failed... and then the golden shower tried everything within his power to cheat his way to another premiership.

A Carlton supporter criticising Essendon for cheating the salary cap and wanting them to lose first round picks.

Pot! Kettle! Black!

Carlton, the most corrupt team of all (you even had two presidents who got charged with crimes).

 

[GTOA]

hey Dickwhistle...

Essendon got done for governance over the supplements saga. They were found guilty of NOT KEEPING RECORDS ON WHO GOT WHAT! They were not punished over the supplements because the investigation and no tribunal had been convened yet to cover the actual doping part of it.

Governance = keeping records
doping = taking the shit

Two different crimes therefore should equate to two different punishments! And if there were two different crimes, then Essendon losing pick 1 or at least having it moved to the end of the first round would have been just punishment!

But then again... Essendon are a protected species at AFL house. Ron Evans did everything within his power to keep the fact that your mob won a premiership while cheating the salary cap a secret... but he failed... and then the golden shower tried everything within his power to cheat his way to another premiership.

How do you know that his real name is Richard Whistle?

 

[GTOA]

Hahahahaha....Classic, so you're saying there's a possibility Dank has records that can clear the players ? There's a possibility Vitamins McVeigh wasn't lying about those injections he said he thought were vitamins ... But then I'd be lying if I thought it was even a remote possibility of being true.

Maybe you're lying, then!

 

[GTOA]

Rubbish. The case against Lance Armstrong had sworn and signed statements from teammates that he cheated taking banned substances. And the evidence also contained positive drug tests that had previously been covered up. The case against Armstrong was a slam dunk case - sworn statements and positive tests.

The EFC 34 case had neither - no positive tests or sworn statements from anyone that they took banned substances.

Yeah, teammates who were cheats, and were leant on by USADA to say that Lance Armstrong DID take drugs, and they would have their life bans changed to six month bans.

So, of course, with that offer on the table, his teammates would say whatever USADA wanted them to say.

 

[GTOA]

I don't know what they took, and have never claimed to know. Anything is possible with Dank, he's a fruitloop.
I certainly haven't seen enough solid evidence to warrant a guilty verdict though.
If new evidence arises that 100% confirms they doped, I'll humbly accept that with hat in hand.
Until then, this remains a huge farce.

If Essendon were found guilty, then Dank is guilty.

If Dank isn't guilty, then the club can't be, either.

If Dank didn't inject Essendon players, then who did?

ASADA and WADA aren't interested in going after Dank, because it won't get them the newspaper headlines, and therefore govt funding, that bringing down a sporting team would.

 

[GTOA]

And this is the "arms race" that trying to contain doping in sport, faces.

Some of the stuff mentioned in emails, reports, etc is not even cleared for human use. It then takes years to develop, test and ratify repeatable, accurate tests for the sporting bodies to then use.

The rules have to allow for the scenarios of illegal experimental in training and live competition - hence the strategies like catch-all for drugs (not reliant upon marketed brand/product names), athlete responsibility, etc.

Which is why, I fear, one day someone will be rubbed out, who is completely and utterly innocent, because of the catch-all rule?

But none of you will care. Who cares if someone is innocent, and their life is ruined, and their sporting career destroyed, just because WADA are too lazy to put in the time and effort to get only the guilty.

It's like when a teacher punishes the whole class, because she doesn't know which student did the wrong thing.

 

[imperial_oz]

If Essendon were found guilty, then Dank is guilty.

If Dank isn't guilty, then the club can't be, either.

If Dank didn't inject Essendon players, then who did?

ASADA and WADA aren't interested in going after Dank, because it won't get them the newspaper headlines, and therefore govt funding, that bringing down a sporting team would.

I see you are still peddling utter nonsense. How can you honestly expect people to believe that ASADA won't go 'after Dank' even though ASADA did go after Dank, charged him and Dank was found guilty and given a life fan. Thats a fact. Your nonsense about ASADA not going after Dank, you know to be untrue.

As for the rest of the garbage you peddle, ASADA tried to force Dank to testify but lost the case in the NSW Supreme Court. Another fact you conveniently ignore and \hope that people won't remember.

You're like Donald Trump. Constantly saying things we all know to be untrue in the forlorn hope that somebody will be stupid enough to believe you. You're not even smart enough to invent a believable lie

 

[Muggs]

Which is why, I fear, one day someone will be rubbed out, who is completely and utterly innocent, because of the catch-all rule?

If atheltes follow their anti-doping training this won't happen.

Check the substance they plan to take against the ASADA (and now international) "check my substance" website, app or hotline. That will then come up with either safe to use, banned, or unknown. If banned or unknown don't take, that simple. If unknown also look at the ingredients on the package and check them as well if you still thinking about taking it. Save the receipt number.

Play safe on the DCF if tested and declare everything your took.

Not that difficult.

 

[Muggs]

I see you are still peddling utter nonsense. How can you honestly expect people to believe that ASADA won't go 'after Dank' even though ASADA did go after Dank, charged him and Dank was found guilty and given a life fan.

To this you can also add that WADA appealed Dank's not guilty findings to CAS and once Dank formally lodged his appeal to the AFL anti-doping tribunal WADA was forced to put a stay on proceedings in line with the WADA code. When Dank's appeal was confirmed ASADA lodged a counter appeal on the charges not relating to the players.

ASADA actually lodged a counter appeal against all of Dank's not guilty findings but quickly dropped the ones directly related to the players, so the CAS case could go ahead at the players request.

Not sure how lodging appeals on not guilty findings is WADA/ASADA not going after Dank?

It was Dank fluffing about that meant his appeals were not heard and thus counter appeals on his not guilty charges, and the players request (i.e. not a WADA/ASADA decision) to be heard separately from Dank that has put us in the current situation.

In theory WADA could apply to have their stay lifted and appeal proceed, but whats the point? He already has the maximum penalty, why waste the cost of a CAS appeal just to give him additional life bans?

Sure pay these costs when they were going to be incurred anyway going after the players, or defending against a Dank appeal but what is the point incurring them when both the players and Dank's own appeals are over and Dank has the maximum penalty?

 

[Hondo]

The whole saga will be a TV mini series one day


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Strapping Young Lad]

Seems a bit of a stretch that players were in on the whole concept as some posters here suggest. If they were in on it why would they mention thymosin on the consent forms?

The players knew the injections were on the edge. They were concerned. They kept asking the coach and staff that the injections were safe.

Lovett-Murray is on the record saying as much.

So the football staff went to the club endorsed witch-doctor, Dank, and went about having a consent form created that would confirm that the Thymosin was all safe and legal....

The problem was that it wasn't safe and legal, because Dank was wrong to think that the compounding of TB4 made it safe against the code.

The players, as directed, had in the meantime kept the injections to themselves as the club thought that the TB4 was their special IP that was going to have them ahead of the other clubs.

"They're doing everything to win this premiership" - Dank to Hird, 2012.
"Not as good as us in that area!!" - James Hird 2012

 

[BattlerGM]

The players knew the injections were on the edge. They were concerned. They kept asking the coach and staff that the injections were safe.

Lovett-Murray is on the record saying as much.

So the football staff went to the club endorsed witch-doctor, Dank, and went about having a consent form created that would confirm that the Thymosin was all safe and legal....

The problem was that it wasn't safe and legal, because Dank was wrong to think that the compounding of TB4 made it safe against the code.

The players, as directed, had in the meantime kept the injections to themselves as the club thought that the TB4 was their special IP that was going to have them ahead of the other clubs.

"They're doing everything to win this premiership" - Dank to Hird, 2012.
"Not as good as us in that area!!" - James Hird 2012

Are you suggesting that Dank knowingly used TB-4 believing it was WADA compliant purely because it was compounded?

 

[Strapping Young Lad]

Are you suggesting that Dank knowingly used TB-4 believing it was WADA compliant purely because it was compounded?

Actually, the two best investigative journalist/ in Oz, Baker and McKenzie, suggested as much.

http://www.theage.com.au/afl/afl-news/essendon-in-doctor-shopping-to-beat-ban-20130722-2qf3x.html

"Essendon's 2012 supplements program involved a ploy to circumvent anti-doping rules banning substances not approved for human use by "doctor shopping" in an attempt to get prescriptions to obtain drugs from a compounding pharmacist.

A small number of Essendon officials last year believed that having drugs prescribed by a doctor and then supplied by a compounding pharmacist meant the World Anti-Doping Agency's ban on substances not approved for human use no longer applied."

 

[BattlerGM]

Actually, the two best investigative journalist/ in Oz, Baker and McKenzie, suggested as much.

http://www.theage.com.au/afl/afl-news/essendon-in-doctor-shopping-to-beat-ban-20130722-2qf3x.html

"Essendon's 2012 supplements program involved a ploy to circumvent anti-doping rules banning substances not approved for human use by "doctor shopping" in an attempt to get prescriptions to obtain drugs from a compounding pharmacist.

A small number of Essendon officials last year believed that having drugs prescribed by a doctor and then supplied by a compounding pharmacist meant the World Anti-Doping Agency's ban on substances not approved for human use no longer applied."

So are you saying it? Or are two journos saying it? And is it being flat out said or being merely 'suggested'

The two best investigative journalists? How do we know those two are the best?
Do you consider The Age reliable?

Sorry for the inquisition. The claim I highlighted is interesting and not one I've heard before. Just wanting to know more about it

 

[Strapping Young Lad]

Stay in school kids.