Saga should be over soon.

Remove this Banner Ad

Status
Not open for further replies.

Log in to remove this ad.

The GG said:
ok, so you're saying that if ASADA agree, it all goes directly to the AFL issuing infraction notices, and leaves the ADRV Panel out of it completely (that is, assuming the AFL is satisfied that infraction ntoices are warranted)
Click to expand...
Yes. In the NRL case, not only was the ADRVP bypassed but infractions and the NRL Tribunal were bypassed too. Those sanctions were imposed by the NRL, not the NRL Tribunal, according to ASADA. The parties can agree to bypass whatever they like. Nobody will object if the players and ASADA agree to bypass the ADRVP completely. If ASADA alone refuse to agree to bypassing the ADRVP they should be castigated for further time wasting.
http://www.asada.gov.au/media/organised_crime_and_drugs_in_sport.html
ASADA statement on NRL decision to suspend 12 players
23 August 2014

Read more...
The Australian Sports Anti-Doping Authority (ASADA) today acknowledged the decision of the National Rugby League (NRL) to suspend 12 current and former Cronulla Sharks players for doping violations.

The suspensions relate to ‘show cause’ notices issued by ASADA on 20 August 2014 for the use of prohibited substances, CJC-1295 and GHRP-6, between March and April 2011.

The suspension imposed on the players was backdated by the NRL to 23 November 2013 to take into account delays in the progress of the matter which were not attributable to the players.

The decision by the NRL to impose the suspension was done in accordance with the provisions contained in the NRL’s anti-doping policy.
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
fishardansin said:
Didn't understand what the case was all about? If I want minimal proof to take up 350 pages dot points help. So here is my reply.

  1. Club wanted the whole thing put off till after the season. Check
  2. There were rumour that provisional suspensions would stand while players took cases to tribunal. So that was motivation to attack investigation.
  3. There was no evidence attached to SCNs and club was confident no one had doped by their own investigation and interim report. So there were a little worried that there was some new evidence of doping that they were unaware of. Part of the early orders contained discovery orders. Club saw there was nothing new, which is why they never appealed.
  4. They were upset at the process of having what should have been confidential interviews with coaches and players consistently leaked to the press ... and the deliberate selective quoting in both that leaking and the interim report. The club successfully brought that to light.
  5. The club was told by ASADA early on that there was nothing wrong with AOD, yet they let players reputations be publicly besmirched by hanging them out to dry with that.
  6. There were deals and promises made between the AFL and ASADA early on which then encouraged our then president to get involved and look for a manufactured investigation and outcome.

I think it was a success. Hird is continuing on because a successful appeal means he'll be suing everyone. Gil, Vlad, Finnis, Caro ...
Click to expand...
Point
2/So the club now acts on rumour?
3/The club was confident no-one had doped=So they were a little worried that there was some new evidence of doping.
4/Its been fairly well documented asada werent leaking,most thought the leaks were from efc staff.
6/Completely unproven.
 
van peebles said:
Point
2/So the club now acts on rumour?
3/The club was confident no-one had doped=So they were a little worried that there was some new evidence of doping.
4/Its been fairly well documented asada werent leaking,most thought the leaks were from efc staff.
6/Completely unproven.
Click to expand...

is point 6 unproven?
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

Klawdy said:
Sad really that the majority of other supporters on this board want the players suspended for 2 years without conclusive evidence of doping. Hypocrisy much?
Click to expand...
No they just want the truth. EFC have had 18 months to provide all the records of what actually happened. The fact they haven't and have spent all that time deflecting, blaming others and going to court to fight the process speaks volumes.
 
The GG said:
many ancient symbols put much faith in images of circularity, signifying the circle of life
we are all merely pissant beings occupying insignificant quantities of carbon in the universe
Click to expand...
Love it. TheGG ratcheting it up a notch.

"The Tao of social media spin doctoring"
 
fishardansin said:
Because they have flimsy circumstantial evidence that 26 vials of TB4 were at the club. There is no proof. There is proof of thymomodulin. All players who said that "thymosin rang a bell" or signed consent forms that have "peptide thymosin" on it have a show cause letter.

Side effects from peptides? I don't think there is anything to worry about that. However, if you get your peptides in red meat you can develop colon cancer if you have too much.
Click to expand...
You have no idea what they have. If there was proof of thymomodulin this would never have got this far.

You don't think there is anything to worry about. But you can't be certain. You don't even know everything they were given yet there is nothing to worry about and ASADA have no evidence.
 
fishardansin said:
Um, those making the claim have to prove it. Essendon have put forward its claim that it was all legal. Seems far more credible than Dank on one occasion getting a different batch of thymosin, don't you think?
Click to expand...
They've put forward the records of all substances administered as required by the AFL? Their claim changes all the time.:D
 
BlueWorld said:
No they just want the truth. EFC have had 18 months to provide all the records of what actually happened. The fact they haven't and have spent all that time deflecting, blaming others and going to court to fight the process speaks volumes.
Click to expand...

The weapon already admitted it was a black ops operation. This means it was set up in a way that it could be denied if it ever came to light. Problem is they weren't counting on their supply chain getting caught in a sting by the feds. All they have left is spin and deflection.
 
fishardansin said:
I'm saying that the AFL could look at ASADA's brief and just decide it's a waste of time. ASADA could essentially agree with that by taking it no further.
Click to expand...
The delusion is incredible.

Do you not think that if ASADA didn't have a strong case they wouldn't devote so much time and energy into prosecuting this case?

This is a make or break case for them in terms of PR for ASADA. And getting it right is paramount. They dropped the AoD because they knew it wouldn't end well. But I'm sure they know they have the goods here to take the case to its conclusion.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Remove this Banner Ad

Similar threads

Satan
Pharmacist involved in essendon saga sadly found dead
Replies
3
Views
853
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