Peter Gordon explores Swiss appeal and injunction on suspension

[LeakyValve]

Are some of the last posts in this fred the end stage of "Anger" for some of our Essendon board members?

It is a pity the EFC and other protagonists in this whole sorry affair don't care as much for you
as you do for them.

 

[Ancient Tiger]

To get a suspension from CAS overturned they'd basically need Dank to take the stand and produce the evidence he has claimed he has kept and that just isn't going to happen because Dank doesn't have anything that will clear the players names

Quite the opposite too. His evidence would put them into even more hot water and the players careers would be in tatters.

 

[Tigerland]

Gordon is going to bat for 2 Dogs players.

It's a free swing (albeit an expensive one and a waste of time).

They'll get laughed at.

 

[QPower]

I suspect the players are guilty and got what they deserved, but CAS did seem all over the place like a mad woman's breakfast in their judgement.

 

[ODNBlue]

I suspect the players are guilty and got what they deserved, but CAS did seem all over the place like a mad woman's breakfast in their judgement.

Oh yes? How so?

 

[Barry Zuckercorn]

The issue is, they know they're not innocent.

They are just upset that they got caught, and are looking at ways to weasel out of it.

This is it in a nutshell.

 

[ODNBlue]

This is it in a nutshell.

No, this is it in a nutshell...

 

[Linda Lovelace]

I suspect the players are guilty and got what they deserved, but CAS did seem all over the place like a mad woman's breakfast in their judgement.

Agreed. I think there was a systematic doping program, but I also think there are shitloads of holes in the CAS decision.

 

[compact72]

Agreed. I think there was a systematic doping program, but I also think there are shitloads of holes in the CAS decision.

You never know. We don't know what evidence they have seen, so it may make sense to the parties more than us

 

[blackshadow]

Agreed. I think there was a systematic doping program, but I also think there are shitloads of holes in the CAS decision.

You never know. We don't know what evidence they have seen, so it may make sense to the parties more than us

It looks like a lot of those maligning the CAS decision are trying to apply normal civil law principles rather than the principles of the WADA code that the CAS abide by.

 

[QPower]

Oh yes? How so?

Errors of fact (eg.the Essendon players delayed the process through their ferderal court action). They were not a party to that action. Essendon and James Hird were. That is a simpleerror of fact.

 

[Chameleon75]

Errors of fact (eg.the Essendon players delayed the process through their ferderal court action). They were not a party to that action. Essendon and James Hird were. That is a simpleerror of fact.

168 (vii) states that it was Essendon and hird that initiated action

 

[compact72]

Errors of fact (eg.the Essendon players delayed the process through their ferderal court action). They were not a party to that action. Essendon and James Hird were. That is a simpleerror of fact.

In fairness, the players could of responded to SCN and got it to move along rather than getting an injunction on them

 

[QPower]

In fairness, the players could of responded to SCN and got it to move along rather than getting an injunction on them

Yes. However, the CAS statement is still an error of fact.

 

[Chameleon75]

Yes. However, the CAS statement is still an error of fact.

I don't believe that is correct

168(vii) states that essendon and hird initiated action

the players had their lawyer participate in the action, and did not object to it when asked by justice middleton, they were not bound as parties to maintain their privacy, but they were active participants

 

[ODNBlue]

I don't believe that is correct

168(vii) states that essendon and hird initiated action

the players had their lawyer participate in the action, and did not object to it when asked by justice middleton, they were not bound as parties to maintain their privacy, but they were active participants

That's how I understood it also...

 

[Thrawn]

Yes. However, the CAS statement is still an error of fact.

CAS basically inferred that the players intended on throwing out the ASADA investigation because they were in support of the club's actions. That's why they didn't use the delay of court proceedings into their penalty.

The fact is that they worked with the club to have it thrown out, now the crybabies think that this somehow should not count when determining cooperation? Stuff 'em. They lied to drug testers, tried to keep this program a secret and tried to throw the case out. Only that they used the club to do it, and were not a party to those proceedings because they thought it wouldn't be used against them.

 

[Thrawn]

Agreed. I think there was a systematic doping program, but I also think there are shitloads of holes in the CAS decision.

Like what?

Please don't tell me you're buying into the AFL and Gordon's PR bullshit.

 

[Boxhead_31]

Doubt there'd be many Essendon supporting Collingwood members.

Who's home game is ANZAC day this year? Could Balemy be trying to look to maximise the crowd by looking for ways to have a somewhat competitive Essendon side take the park opposed to the VFA standard side they will look to be trotting out?


Sent from my Two Cans using A Piece of String

 

[GeorgeCostanza]

Quite the opposite too. His evidence would put them into even more hot water and the players careers would be in tatters.

Not to mention the internet in their pocket...

And this is why I will always consider the players guilty. Players admitted to knowingly taking AOD-9604, yet it was proven that if you did a google search in early 2012 for "AOD-9604" the first result took you straight to a peptides website for purchasing it, with a big warning that said.

"If you are a professional athlete please consult the ASADA or WADA guidelines and your coach, club and/or sporting body before using this peptide".

So to suggest not a single of 35 individual players did not know what they were taking and the legality of it, is borderline ridiculous. Their failure to mention it and keep it quite on ASADA forms only confirms the fact they knew it was banned. 5 year olds know how to use google.

 

[QPower]

CAS basically inferred that the players intended on throwing out the ASADA investigation because they were in support of the club's actions. That's why they didn't use the delay of court proceedings into their penalty.

The fact is that they worked with the club to have it thrown out, now the crybabies think that this somehow should not count when determining cooperation? Stuff 'em. They lied to drug testers, tried to keep this program a secret and tried to throw the case out. Only that they used the club to do it, and were not a party to those proceedings because they thought it wouldn't be used against them.

It was stated as fact not an inference.

Not saying CAS got the verdict wrong, but they were very sloppy along the way and careless in attention to detail.

 

[sonnywalters]

Because it hasn't gone on long enough.... I'm sure the lawyers could drag it out a few more years if they really tried.

the lawyers know people at afl clubs (e.g Balme) are semi-******ed so they keep telling them they can 'win'. money for jam. cha ching!

 

[sonnywalters]

And this is why I will always consider the players guilty. Players admitted to knowingly taking AOD-9604, yet it was proven that if you did a google search in early 2012 for "AOD-9604" the first result took you straight to a peptides website for purchasing it, with a big warning that said.

"If you are a professional athlete please consult the ASADA or WADA guidelines and your coach, club and/or sporting body before using this peptide".

So to suggest not a single of 35 individual players did not know what they were taking and the legality of it, is borderline ridiculous. Their failure to mention it and keep it quite on ASADA forms only confirms the fact they knew it was banned. 5 year olds know how to use google.

It is obviously a conspiracy of silence. Anyone who denies this is so obviously in denial.
21 players - on 30 occasions said they had nothing to declare. I mean Come ON!!!!!!!
At the same time they were texting Dank about 'thymo' injections.
This is open and shut.

 

[sonnywalters]

How did someone as dumb as Peter Gordon become so successful?
I sometimes have to ask this question. Did he win dumblotto?

 

[Thrawn]

It was stated as fact not an inference.

Not saying CAS got the verdict wrong, but they were very sloppy along the way and careless in attention to detail.

This has already been addressed by a couple of posters.

In what areas were they sloppy and careless? These are very experienced arbitrators we are talking about here, in fact I believe the chairman is one of the most experienced arbitrators the CAS has. I think you're buying a little too much into what Gordon is saying. It's a pretty thorough, damning and iron-clad judgement.