Stephen Dank has 11 days to hand over papers about supplement program to former Sharks players

Remove this Banner Ad

I Rock said:
No I'm not. I'm not making anything of anything in regards to any clubs. I trying to converse with someone desperate to try to point fingers at others to justify the behavior of the club they support.

Someone who will ignore and sub quote to suit his agenda. And them practice ten fold what he complains others are doing to Essendon.

Again mxett that report on first clance does look disturbing. However once you take a breath a realise what is a actually written, it could mean a number of things. The only article you have shown that remotely suggests what you are trying to claim/push is questionable at best.

The only real thing we can definitely say about documents was the one that simply said documentation was inadequate. And again this could mean a variety of things. However for you to claim that it 100% means 12 or any other number of clubs didn't document all substances is just wrong. That's what I am arguing with you. Not that it did or did not happen that way, just that based on what you have provided you cannot claim it to be 100% fact.

To do so is not only wrong but very hypocritical on your behalf given the way you post about information reported and provided that shows guilt towards certain Essendon staff.

Should the AFL provide clarification to the public on this survey. 100% they should. Do I think other clubs should be punished if they have breaches, of course I do.
Click to expand...

Mate, it's the usual obfuscation, denial, excuses, deflection, finger pointing at others (note auskadi's latest tweets) and the rest of the usual bs. It's part of the game plan. Some get caught in their own bs and want to go off tangent and not deal with the issue at hand.
Twist words, backtrack, u-turns, repeat what's been proven as bs and point the blame elsewhere etc etc. We've seen the references to others, including, Hawks, Collingwood, Brisbane and on and on. When they run out of defences it's time to change tack and look to someone else to blame. Rogue elements, it wasn't Hird or Reid (club favourites) it was Caro, AD, ASADA, WADA, Finnis, AFLPA, Baker & McKenzie, Masters, on and on and on.
It's about time some of these deniers face facts and man up. Your club ****ed up. It's been sanctioned by the AFL. If there's anymore to be had ASADA/WADA will issue their decision. One way or the other.In the shit or cleared.
Just stop blaming and pointing the finger at others.
IT IS A MESS OF YOUR OWN DOING. NO-ONE ELSES!
 
Armchair Critic said:
A charge sheet is not a document intended for use by the defense , I thought that was pretty obvious
Click to expand...

I think though, people have misunderstood the document handed down. Essendon were CHARGED with ONE offence - bringing the game into disrepute. The 33 other pages were the "statement of grounds for laying the charge".
 
jenny61_99 said:
I think though, people have misunderstood the document handed down. Essendon were CHARGED with ONE offence - bringing the game into disrepute. The 33 other pages were the "statement of grounds for laying the charge".
Click to expand...

Correct, Essendon would have never agreed to doping charges as it would have been seen as an admission of guilt toward the ongoing ASADA investigation . That is what IMO their fight with the AFL was, just stretching out the initial AFL punishment being handed down for as long as possible. The AFL believe they needed Essendon out of the finals. Solution charge Essendon under Section 1.6 and use all the evidence against them to base the charge on.

Little thought at the time he had the wind behind his back and could maybe rally the other clubs against the AFL process; he was given a quick dose of reality and punishment was handed down. Now the question is; given Essendon have not yet been formally charged with any doping offence. Yet the bases of the Code of Conduct charge includes doping code breaches; will the AFL with the ASADA investigation possibly given further evidence against Essendon as a club. Have to further punish the EFC (I'm not speculating on potential charges & punishment to individuals) or can/will they say although the EFC have now been charged under doping violations punishment has already been served.
 

Log in to remove this ad.

I Rock said:
Correct, Essendon would have never agreed to doping charges as it would have been seen as an admission of guilt toward the ongoing ASADA investigation . That is what IMO their fight with the AFL was, just stretching out the initial AFL punishment being handed down for as long as possible. The AFL believe they needed Essendon out of the finals. Solution charge Essendon under Section 1.6 and use all the evidence against them to base the charge on.

Little thought at the time he had the wind behind his back and could maybe rally the other clubs against the AFL process; he was given a quick dose of reality and punishment was handed down. Now the question is; given Essendon have not yet been formally charged with any doping offence. Yet the bases of the Code of Conduct charge includes doping code breaches; will the AFL with the ASADA investigation possibly given further evidence against Essendon as a club. Have to further punish the EFC (I'm not speculating on potential charges & punishment to individuals) or can/will they say although the EFC have now been charged under doping violations punishment has already been served.
Click to expand...

Lance Uppercut has always maintained Essendon - the Club - wouldn't receive any further sanctions. That the AFL would put forward to ASADA that they had already issued sanctions and that should be that. The problem with this approach is that Essendon haven't been charged under the anti-doping code. So if infractions notices are issued to players AND officials, I believe they would then have to deal with the Club on that basis. They keep saying "at this stage there is no evidence" - but if infraction notices are issued, there clearly would then be evidence. I personally think Essendon have been hit pretty hard as a Club, but that the personnel responsible have not. It is there that I think the true sanctions need to focus. I'm not sure ASADA/WADA would agree.
 
jenny61_99 said:
Lance Uppercut has always maintained Essendon - the Club - wouldn't receive any further sanctions. That the AFL would put forward to ASADA that they had already issued sanctions and that should be that. The problem with this approach is that Essendon haven't been charged under the anti-doping code. So if infractions notices are issued to players AND officials, I believe they would then have to deal with the Club on that basis. They keep saying "at this stage there is no evidence" - but if infraction notices are issued, there clearly would then be evidence. I personally think Essendon have been hit pretty hard as a Club, but that the personnel responsible have not. It is there that I think the true sanctions need to focus. I'm not sure ASADA/WADA would agree.
Click to expand...
I am also of the belief that if ASADA find breaches and recommended infractions then I can't see the AFL having no choice but to further punish the club. It's funny that the AFL say no breaches have been found given the multiple amount "grounds for sanction" in the code of conduct charge. Even having one that specifically states is a breach of the AFL & WADA code. But as the AFL said Melbourne never tanked.
 
Club has been punished. Wriggle room for players to avoid infractions. Somebody has to cop it.

Doc Reid should but lawyered up with the AMA.

Not looking good for James.
 
Aussie in exile said:
The NRL can afford to cut the Sharks. The AFL can't afford to cut the Bombers.
Click to expand...

nah mate NRL is in exactly the same position as the AFL. Both broadcasting rights (and the $1BN associated) rely on the signed off number of games per week. Neither administration can afford to lose a club.

The Sharks are a minnow however compared to EFC though.
 
JRoo said:
I see the #standbyhird suicide squad member is now right trying to deflect away from his clubs disgusting behaviour in potentially putting their players health and safety at risk, an inconvenient fact that one of our resident Jones town posters doesn't want to mention.



You and the rest of the #standbyhird don't give a damn about the health and safety of your players, never have never will and your disgusting behaviour in trying to justify sticking unknown products into trusting peoples arms is abhorent but not unexpected. Here is a hint, don't #standbyhird, you should#stanbytheplayers and proper processes and remove anyone, and I mean anyone including your little demi go JH if they allowed this abhorent behaviour to occur. Most other clubs would have done the right thing and removed a cancer from their club, the #standbyhird group want to welcome the cancer back to their club.
Click to expand...

Mate, there's no need for that. Poor form.
 
Why is Paul Little very publicly severing Essendon's interests from James Hird's interests and aligning Essendon back with the AFL?
 
MaddAdam said:
Why is Paul Little very publicly severing Essendon's interests from James Hird's interests and aligning Essendon back with the AFL?
Click to expand...
why do people ask rhetorical questions?

Having said that, I think it's a bit too long a bow to draw to insinuate what you have in the very same article where Little confirm's Hird's return, no?
 
Lance Uppercut said:
why do people ask rhetorical questions?

Having said that, I think it's a bit too long a bow to draw to insinuate what you have in the very same article where Little confirm's Hird's return, no?
Click to expand...
I just think Little is mending bridges ATM, he implies as much with the mention of McGuire.
 
Lance Uppercut said:
why do people ask rhetorical questions?

Having said that, I think it's a bit too long a bow to draw to insinuate what you have in the very same article where Little confirm's Hird's return, no?
Click to expand...


You Hird Loyalist's need a bit more massaging yet;)

The week of the Tania extortion and the $1M handover was Hirdy's last official powerplay.

Shame considering the gracefulness and brilliance of his onfield powerplay legacy.
 
TerryWallet said:
You Hird Loyalist's need a bit more massaging yet;)

The week of the Tania extortion and the $1M handover was Hirdy's last official powerplay.

Shame considering the gracefulness and brilliance of his onfield powerplay legacy.
Click to expand...
I'd actually prefer to keep Thompson, but thanks for your input all the same.

I like the certainty of your post though. Reminds me of something, what is it? Oh that's right: world of pain
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

jenny61_99 said:
Mate, there's no need for that. Poor form.
Click to expand...
Quite right, Jenny.

Folks, there's no need for complete garbage like that.

Discuss the issue passionately if you wish, but the use of suicide metaphors is distasteful in the extreme.

And while we're at it, everyone, for about the millionth time, if you want to use Bay 13 terms and team names, head to...you guessed it, the Bay.
 
TerryWallet said:
No probs.

Just answering your query of why Little isn't officially saying Jimmy is finished yet.

Good to see you on board with ridding the game of caught Team Dopers:thumbsu:
Click to expand...
there's no query - just wry bemusement that people haven't learned their lesson of transposing their own agendas on to absolutely every piece of information. At least I can recognise most of my confirmation bias. Others including you need to learn that lesson IMO
 
Lance Uppercut said:
there's no query - just wry bemusement that people haven't learned their lesson of transposing their own agendas on to absolutely every piece of information. At least I can recognise most of my confirmation bias. Others including you need to learn that lesson IMO
Click to expand...


Would confirmation bias lend one to think that what has happened to Essendon "so far" is not a world of pain?
 
nineteen eighty said:
nah mate NRL is in exactly the same position as the AFL. Both broadcasting rights (and the $1BN associated) rely on the signed off number of games per week. Neither administration can afford to lose a club.

The Sharks are a minnow however compared to EFC though.
Click to expand...

Correct the sharks are a minnow compared to the Bombers, and i still stay that the NRL could cut them without affecting their TV deal.
The NRL could let the Sharks run this season out and then the NRL could put a team on the central coast starting for the 2015 season. There is a ready built staduim there owed by John Singleton a Rugby League fanatic.
Player numbers obviously wouldn't be a problem with the sharks folded and an overseas player market, plus players released from other clubs.
 
Aussie in exile said:
Correct the sharks are a minnow compared to the Bombers, and i still stay that the NRL could cut them without affecting their TV deal.
The NRL could let the Sharks run this season out and then the NRL could put a team on the central coast starting for the 2015 season. There is a ready built staduim there owed by John Singleton a Rugby League fanatic.
Player numbers obviously wouldn't be a problem with the sharks folded and an overseas player market, plus players released from other clubs.
Click to expand...

As long as they are replaced by another team then yes I agree with you.
 
nineteen eighty said:
nah mate NRL is in exactly the same position as the AFL. Both broadcasting rights (and the $1BN associated) rely on the signed off number of games per week. Neither administration can afford to lose a club.

The Sharks are a minnow however compared to EFC though.
Click to expand...

The NRL would love if the Sharks had to Relocatevto Adelaide or Perth although personally I think they should bring in a second NZ team
 
Doss said:
Quite right, Jenny.

Folks, there's no need for complete garbage like that.

Discuss the issue passionately if you wish, but the use of suicide metaphors is distasteful in the extreme.

And while we're at it, everyone, for about the millionth time, if you want to use Bay 13 terms and team names, head to...you guessed it, the Bay.
Click to expand...

But unless they bring some humour with them. They will learn about the Divvy Van.
 

Remove this Banner Ad

Stephen Dank has 11 days to hand over papers about supplement program to former Sharks players

Similar threads

A
This is the way to treat drug cheats
2
Replies
25
Views
2K
PoppedCorn
PoppedCorn

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top