Again, you are not talking sense.
You are basing all of your complaints on the final summary which DID NOT include the actual evidence, any of the submissions by either party, any transcripts of the verbal evidence given or the oral submissions by the lawyers for all parties. Without having access to that material you simply cannot say that it was 'based on opinions and not fact'. You are simply making up stuff. Even one minutes thought would have avoided those comments.
All results of legal or arbitrarial hearings are opinions. Opinions based on the evidence put forward in the hearing. Even jury decisions in 'beyond reasonable doubt' situations are the opinions of the jury as a result of the evidence presented to them. In this instance, the opinions of the CAS arbitrators were that the 34 players did use TB4.
In every case, civil or criminal evidence is weighed and its value assessed, including Lovett- Murray's and it simply was not dismissed because 'it had no merit'. It was assessed against the requirements of the code and it was found not to be sufficient to excuse Lovett-Murray from his obligations under the code. Any understanding of the code would indicate this was a correct assessment. Not liking it simply is not good grounds for appeal, however he is entitled to exercise that right.
As for your comment that you have 'never known of a court anywhere that considers sworn statements inside of it or out to be treated with such disdain', I'd question how many courts you've ever been in during a hearing. ALL evidence given, and sometimes written statements are allowed to be presented as evidence when they are not being subject to cross examination. It is only done under normal circumstances when all parties agree to that occurring, otherwise if the evidence is to be tested then it is done orally and subject to cross examination.
Even so, all evidence has to be weighed by those sitting in judgement. Just because it is a written statement does not make it true, complete or entirely accurate and so must be assessed. Failure to assess any statement and taking it on face value without that assessment would be a failure in the duty of those sitting in judgement.
On a particular note, please detail which sworn statements were actually treated with disdain. You will need to show the contents of the statements and evidence that the arbitrators did actually treat it with disdain rather than making an assessment of it otherwise you will have to admit that you have no idea what actually happened in the adjudication of this matter, just like everybody else outside the CAS arbitrators.
Herald Sun Sport @heraldsunsport 
