Sam Mitchell missed the 'let's all move on' memo.

Remove this Banner Ad

Love ya pazza, but WADA cannot allow a precedent to be set where individuals or teams can take banned substances that are currently difficult or impossible to to detect, and then get away with it because records weren't kept and key witnesses with dodgy and criminal pasts refuse to testify.

The CAS will convict.
Mark my words.
I honestly believe that Essendon will get off unless WADA has a kangaroo court waiting for them.
 
I can't be comfortably satisfied that there is actually Cenovus in that bottle of Cenovus.

Off to Lausane with you sunshine and explain it all in 'Swisse' :p
Blackmores tastes like crap and you know it
 
I think his "apology" drove the knife in even harder. Great sledge all round by Mitch. Certainly got under Hird's skin, eh?
Mitch learnt from the master... he even brought his kids into it!

the kids the kids the kids

luv the succour moms, its for the kids, its all about the kids
 

Log in to remove this ad.

Whoever the players were who saw it, children who have had to see it since it happened and so on.
I'm more worried about having my kids hear Hird say the word hate before the game even started to be perfectly honest.The only word I really don't like them using deep down.Most of the media garbage goes straight over their heads.Hate,idiot,drugs they look up and there is Hirds face bearing down on them
 
Love ya pazza, but WADA cannot allow a precedent to be set where individuals or teams can take banned substances that are currently difficult or impossible to to detect, and then get away with it because records weren't kept and key witnesses with dodgy and criminal pasts refuse to testify.

The CAS will convict.
Mark my words.
That's very certain of you...I really hope you are right.
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

Well isn't that ironic. I thought your point was stupid, petty and completely irrelevant. Whereas, mine was factual and current. Your club did try to gain a pharmacological advantage over their competitors. "Not as good as us". Says James.
Wow! So you're proclaiming that you know better than any of the judges who've viewed the evidence?! Remarkable!

Can't decide if that's more arrogant or more completely delusional. I guess a mix of both
 
Wow! So you're proclaiming that you know better than any of the judges who've viewed the evidence?! Remarkable!

Can't decide if that's more arrogant or more completely delusional. I guess a mix of both


Look mom, the dude who has believed Jimmy & the Jabbers story for 3 years is callin' other people delusional agin :)
 
Wow! So you're proclaiming that you know better than any of the judges who've viewed the evidence?! Remarkable!

Can't decide if that's more arrogant or more completely delusional. I guess a mix of both
So, are you saying Hird DIDN'T try to get a pharmacological advantage over his opponents by hiring Dank to inject his players with whatever? o_O I mean, you know you are off to CAS right?
 
So, are you saying Hird DIDN'T try to get a pharmacological advantage over his opponents by hiring Dank to inject his players with whatever? o_O I mean, you know you are off to CAS right?

Are we simply talking about advantages or unfair advantages? I'm being serious this time.
 
Are we simply talking about advantages or unfair advantages? I'm being serious this time.
I thought we were talking about the most systematic program of deliberate drug cheating ever undertaken in Australian sport.
You know, the one that WADA won't let the AFL corruptly sweep under the carpet.
 
Are we simply talking about advantages or unfair advantages? I'm being serious this time.
I said pharmacological advantage. That is plugging your players with exotic, experimental and off label substances. Not in the spirit if the game, and very likely not within the WADA code. That cannot be argued at any level. It is the very reason we are here and find ourselves headed off to CAS. WADA believe the players were injected with prohibited substances.
 
I said pharmacological advantage. That is plugging your players with exotic, experimental and off label substances. Not in the spirit if the game, and very likely not within the WADA code. That cannot be argued at any level. It is the very reason we are here and find ourselves headed off to CAS. WADA believe the players were injected with prohibited substances.

Erm, why bother going to CAS if it can't be argued on any level? Just ban them now! I was going to try and have a healthy debate with you but I didn't realise it couldn't be argued on any level.
Can you please link me to your definition of pharmalogical advantage? I also didn't realise that was THE definition. I love reading your posts, I just learn so much.
 
Erm, why bother going to CAS if it can't be argued on any level? Just ban them now! I was going to try and have a healthy debate with you but I didn't realise it couldn't be argued on any level.
Can you please link me to your definition of pharmalogical advantage? I also didn't realise that was THE definition. I love reading your posts, I just learn so much.
Sorry, I've perhaps used the wrong wording or you are taking it the wrong way? But can you argue that they were given exotic, experimental and off label drugs? Maybe you can think of something that argues against that? We already know AOD is a prohibited substance that was definitely used, but not being pursued. Now to find out if CAS is comfortably satisfied that TB4 was also used.
 

Remove this Banner Ad

Sam Mitchell missed the 'let's all move on' memo.

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top