SEN/Robbo/Hun: Essendon players have received show cause notices

[Keys]

So ASADA seems satisfied that a banned substance was given to players based on circumstantial evidence, they have the consent notices signed by players and their own admissions that they were injected albeit in the belief that what they were being given was legit. But because essendon have been either unable or unwilling to divulge what each individual player was given ASADA are giving show cause to all players that were injected. Up to them now to prove that they weren't given a banned substance

If someone at bomber land knows who got what, it might be time to fess up

 

[Simon Wiggins]

It does not matter how other sports are run

It does juxtapose the AFL against a sport that's actually interested in combating PED use though

 

[TedDougChris]

I know what you are saying, but surely a case has to be heard under our laws, if it has occurred in our backyard by our people. This is standard everywhere else in the world.

nope - move on here.....

 

[Jobe Watson]

you weren't about 4 posts back, but nevermind.....

Well, fact is he is a convicted drug dealer.

But when he turns star witness for ASADA, he becomes (in ASADA's words) an "altruistic" fella. According to ASADA, he's a great bloke to have at our club - a well educated, reformed man who would never mess with banned drugs since it almost cost him his life due to the "use and misuse" in a former life.

Didn't stop the AFL from listing our association with this fantastic, upstanding person in the charges sheet as if it were a crime.

 

[The_Reaper]

I know what you are saying, but surely a case has to be heard under our laws, if it has occurred in our backyard by our people. This is standard everywhere else in the world.

But we're not actually talking about laws.
The AFL accepted WADA is an authorised body to regulate drug use.
They accepted the regulations and rules that WADA have in place and how any transgressions would be dealt with.

The AFL and Essendon have accepted the process. An Australian court will not judge the case of whether or not Essendon players took TB4 but whether or not the agreed WADA process was followed.

 

[Hearts to hearts]

Indisputable evidence like a drug test though?

Drug tests are disputable and are regularly disputed.

Whatever the evidence is that ASADA has gathered, the recipients of the show causes will need to offer equalling compelling evidence that contradicts or undermines it. If they can.

If they can't - maybe because they misplaced the records - they will probably witter on about process instead.

 

[The_Reaper]

If say essendon players took a drug test and it comes out that they are not positive does that not prove they didn't take the drug

By that logic Ben Cousins never took shit.

Besides tests can't find TB4

 

[base615]

Paul Little: "No EFC player has ingested illegal thymosin beta-4. Anyone suggesting that they have, is probably lying".

This is how shady they are in their wording. Ingestion indicates consumption through through the gastrointestinal tract, not injection. A true but misleading statement from little Paul

 

[blue harvest]

Speculation. Collingwood admitted to not having records for players they injected. Hiding something?

Essendon were banned from finals and received a 2m cop for poor governance, which included not properly documenting player injections.

Lots of devastating circumstantial evidence + no records = hiding something.
There was no evidence against Collingwood and they made any statement voluntarily.

 

[TerryWallet]

Love Robbo's article , what a Toss. It is not up to Essendon to decide whether they want to fight the investigation , it is up to 34 individuals to decide.

If one player decides to accept guilt and spill the beans for leniency there is not one thing Little can do about it. Little may very well have been able to control players at the club but who knows how ex players, players at other clubs will act

For all we know, Monfries could be already sitting out and going for the reduced sentence.

You are correct.

This is now 34 individual cases.

 

[Jobe Watson]

You mean the convicted drug dealer who is James Hird's old mate from his playing days?

Yeah, same one who is on record as saying Hird is strictly anti-drugs and would never use banned performance enhancing substances.

Wonder if ASADA ignored this claim from their star witness like they ignored testimony from Jobe Watson.

 

[matthew_s]

Any mention of the Taco Juice either? Or was that complete bullshit too?

FFS, mention of it in the show cause notices (or lack thereof) has not a single iota of meaning as to whether the allegation was true or not. The whole point of the story around the unknown 'Mexican' substance was that it was unknown and showed the absolute lack of care about what was being injected into Essendon players.

And given the official Essendon press release attempting to clarify the geographical origin of the substance, even the most obtuse must acknowledge the substances existence!

 

[Underdog]

If say essendon players took a drug test and it comes out that they are not positive does that not prove they didn't take the drug

Firstly, the test would have to be for that particular drug.

Secondly, the drug could be undetectable when the test was done for a variety of reasons.

 

[TedDougChris]

Well, fact is he is a convicted drug dealer.

But when he turns star witness for ASADA, he becomes (in ASADA's words) an "altruistic" fella. According to ASADA, he's a great bloke to have at our club - a well educated, reformed man who would never mess with banned drugs since it almost cost him his life due to the "use and misuse" in a former life.

Didn't stop the AFL from listing our association with this fantastic, upstanding person in the charges sheet as if it were a crime.

Understand that. But didn't stop your club from having this upstanding bloke/convicted criminal associated with the supply of material that was then used on the playing group.

I know you are coming from the angle that 'please be consistent here' - from an AFL/ASADA perspective. But you also need to be consistent on the same thing that was used at your club. We just sacked a doctor once we found out he had links to Bikies. You employed such a guy as the supplier for your supplements program....

 

[Big Sim]

Well they lost against Saad so it does not mean they will win. The real problem is if you fight, they will go for 2 years for sure, if you roll over and players admit guilt they would probably settle for 6 months but Little seems hell bent on going the whole 9 yards.

You really think they would go to these lengths and settle for six months?

 

[Unnamed1]

Being in an Australian Court doesn't change anything. The Court would be ruling more about process rather than weighing up evidence. It would be ruling more based on the WADA code because the AFL signed up to it and that includes any employee (player). You should be thankful about WADA's weight of evidence anyway. If it was going by Australian Courts this would be closer to Civil case rather than a criminal case, which would mean that it would be based on "balance of probabilities" instead.

Wrong, appeals to the AAT are only in relation to whether ASADA has complied with its legislative framework and whether there is sufficient evidence for a possible ADRV to have been committed. Appeals to the AAT do not cover issues such as possible sanctions under an individual sport’s anti-doping policy or whether an actual ADRV has occurred.

 

[mickeyjuice]

Indisputable evidence like a drug test though?

Look, if you have NO IDEA of how it works (despite any number of drug issues with athletes over the years) why do you keep posting inane rubbish? Go and do some reading and LEARN something.

 

[KennyHunter9]

EFC may suddenly "discover" the paperwork that mysteriously went missing. Hope they remember to back date the files.

 

[Frank Grimes]

Love Robbo's article , what a Toss. It is not up to Essendon to decide whether they want to fight the investigation , it is up to 34 individuals to decide.

If one player decides to accept guilt and spill the beans for leniency there is not one thing Little can do about it. Little may very well have been able to control players at the club but who knows how ex players, players at other clubs will act

I wouldn't be surprised if there will be at least one player to accept guilt and spill the beans. I think it would be one of Crameri, Monfries or Gumbleton. They are no longer with Essendon and figure they can get a big pay day if they just accept it and sue the club.

 

[mickeyjuice]

Anyone heard from Spike McVeigh tonight? Has he had anything more to say about Reimers?

 

[Unnamed1]

I know what you are saying, but surely a case has to be heard under our laws, if it has occurred in our backyard by our people. This is standard everywhere else in the world.

Ugh, wrong, there is no difference here. That's why they can show cause. Right now they are still presumed innocent. If they can't show cause, it's up to ADRVP to adjudicate (find guilty or not) based on ASADA's evidence

 

[Big Sim]

I wouldn't be surprised if there will be at least one player to accept guilt and spill the beans. I think it would be one of Crameri, Monfries or Gumbleton. They are no longer with Essendon and figure they can get a big pay day if they just accept it and sue the club.

Is essendon looking after their legal bills too?

 

[blue harvest]

Could be something here. Supposing Essendon did shred records, they may have done so thinking 'innocent until proven guilty'. We'll, in Australian law, sure. But not under the terms of WADA. For that, you need to prove your innocence. Perhaps Essendon moved too hastily in removing documents that also could have helped their case.

If you were about to be accused of something, would you shred all your supporting documentation the night before?

 

[TedDougChris]

I wouldn't be surprised if there will be at least one player to accept guilt and spill the beans. I think it would be one of Crameri, Monfries or Gumbleton. They are no longer with Essendon and figure they can get a big pay day if they just accept it and sue the club.

I think it'll come if ASADA offer up a reduced sentence. 6 - 12 months for coming forward, 2 years for everyone else....

 

[davis_756]

If say essendon players took a drug test and it comes out that they are not positive does that not prove they didn't take the drug

Armstrong was probably tested 10000 times and never tested positive, its a myth that the tests actually matter its paper trails and people talking that prove guilt.

The chemists working on the cheats side are paid to stay 1 step ahead of the drug testers and they always will.