Play Nice The CAS Appeal thread - update: appeal fails (11/10/16)

[Cold Sober]

Take bambi,s medal it will make a lot of brain deads happy but stuff me when it comes to few past winners keeping theirs and a premiership medal or two to go with it dont feed me anymore bullshit about proof
Hypocrites,feminists,do gooders,Trump,umpires, thank christ for drugs

 

[The_Wookie]

Take bambi,s medal it will make a lot of brain deads happy but stuff me when it comes to few past winners keeping theirs and a premiership medal or two to go with it dont feed me anymore bullshit about proof
Hypocrites,feminists,do gooders,Trump,umpires, thank christ for drugs

Perhaps lay off them first thing in the morning

 

[gutsroy]

Is a link to the SFT's decision in German already available? Just had a quick look on bvger.ch, couldn't find anything.

 

[CoggaRules]

the line that amuses me here is the one about the suspensions not being much of a penalty because the players went to Europe/became a barista in NYC.

Last I checked, WADA don't dictate what you do with your free time if you're suspended, so long as it's not actively associated with your club and the sport generally. Professional footballers have a lot of money generally and guess what, if they're told they can't play for a year, they will probably go on a holiday at some point. That's just a reality.

What would you rather, that they serve the year off in a dark dungeon?

It's a completely facile gripe.

Naaa serving out 2 years * would be more logical when right now their absence has dealt the team they have returned to the pick of the crop. It's totally laughable to suggest on one hand it's not the players fault but the clubs and now because the club that was supposedly at fault benefit by boosting their list. If the AFL were on the level the ban on the players should have gone hand in hand with the club being out of the draft and only eligible to trade back in. That's a punishment that covers every base in culpability. This BS Brownlow argument is purely a beat up to make it seem that full toll was taken. Total farce from the AFL and those that feed from their hand, the media, with their contrived scripted push for moving on and good blokes let's feel sorry for them stance. Go ask Matt Shirvington what he thinks about drug cheats? 4 years should be the penalty because drug cheats like ther good blokes from Essendon have built muscle mass with these drugs and muscle mass don't disappear when you keep working on it. FFS the tankers were sent into oblivion when they got nabbed for salary cap breaches and have been wandering in the wilderness ever since because of the sanctions they copped draft wise back then. And here we have an imbecile like Lloyd suggesting he would be surprised if they didn't play finals by making the 8 even too 4 next year after they were found guilty of drug cheating 4 years ago and confirmed today. Like what an absolute farce

 

[Satan]

Still waiting on dank to release the imformation to save the players

Waiting

Waiting

 

[ChampTurboBucko]

Naaa serving out 2 years * would be more logical when right now their absence has dealt the team they have returned to the pick of the crop. It's totally laughable to suggest on one hand it's not the players fault but the clubs and now because the club that was supposedly at fault benefit by boosting their list. If the AFL were on the level the ban on the players should have gone hand in hand with the club being out of the draft and only eligible to trade back in. That's a punishment that covers every base in culpability. This BS Brownlow argument is purely a beat up to make it seem that full toll was taken. Total farce from the AFL and those that feed from their hand, the media, with their contrived scripted push for moving on and good blokes let's feel sorry for them stance. Go ask Matt Shirvington what he thinks about drug cheats? 4 years should be the penalty because drug cheats like ther good blokes from Essendon have built muscle mass with these drugs and muscle mass don't disappear when you keep working on it. FFS the tankers were sent into oblivion when they got nabbed for salary cap breaches and have been wandering in the wilderness ever since because of the sanctions they copped draft wise back then. And here we have an imbecile like Lloyd suggesting he would be surprised if they didn't play finals by making the 8 even too 4 next year after they were found guilty of drug cheating 4 years ago and confirmed today. Like what an absolute farce

Your post doesn't adddess what I said at all and also makes no sense.

 

[Gypsy King]

Take bambi,s medal it will make a lot of brain deads happy but stuff me when it comes to few past winners keeping theirs and a premiership medal or two to go with it dont feed me anymore bullshit about proof
Hypocrites,feminists,do gooders,Trump,umpires, thank christ for drugs

Hird has kept his brownlow when there are serious doubt he was clean throughout his career.

 

[jenny61_99]

Still waiting on dank to release the imformation to save the players

Waiting

Waiting

 

[compact72]

You're not trying hard enough

Take it you still hate the dogs

 

[jenny61_99]

Take it you still hate the dogs

I barracked FOR the doggies in the GF. But I still hate Bevo.... or at least I did... until he handed his medal over to Bob. **** I hate that he made me like him for that minute. Bastard.

 

[compact72]

I barracked FOR the doggies in the GF. But I still hate Bevo.... or at least I did... until he handed his medal over to Bob. **** I hate that he made me like him for that minute. Bastard.

I think he's learnt how to deal with the media a bit better now

Will always be that tension lol

 

[CoggaRules]

Your post doesn't adddess what I said at all and also makes no sense.

of course it makes no sense to your mob.. As i said, Carlton who we commonly call the tankers were sent into the wilderness back in the days because of their salary cap breaches with draft sanctions and they are still trying to recover...i.e. that is what a penalty that sends a message is all about. Your drug cheating mob, who the highest court on the planet for these things, concluded there is NO DOUBT, I repeat it just so you dont miss it, NO DOUBT that the players took banned substances and 4 years on, you have had a year where you blooded some newbies on the back of last years draft, a year where your drug cheating players had a year to relax, take a break, keep fit with no pressure and come back now and the bonus of no 1 draft pick in both drafts...like what sort of penalty is that? its absolutely laughable. And here is Lloyd you fav son stating that he would be surprised if you dont play finals next season with top 4 a real possibilty...so can you direct me to where the AFL sent a clear message that cheats will be dealt with?
FFS, clubs take 5-6 7 or more years to build a list to compete and the drug cheats 4 years on have a list that can make top 4...that is absolutely shambolic handling of club that has cheated.
On the point of Matt Shrivington, during the Olympics the Ox on the morning show asked him about Gatling and how he felt about the booing etc....Shrivos response, drug cheats deserve what they get and fact is it isnt enough and should be out for at least 4 years, because they have ENHANCED their physiques with banned substances and their physiques dont just dissappear because of in this case a 1 year holiday.
The Brownlow stuff is pie in the sky stuff...the masses are onto it, but it means SFA now...if they take it off him, if they dont means shit, the fact is that they all should be still banned and the club should not be at the draft with pick 1 in their hands...

 

[Muggs]

Chip's article today summarises the case for both parties

"The submissions delve into the detail of the AFL rules, AFL player rules, the CAS code, CAS precedents and, most significantly, changes to an AFL anti-doping code made after the AFL tribunal heard the case against the players but before it handed down its judgment.

The version of the code in force at the time the Essendon players were charged and tried was silent on whether appeals before CAS are limited or de novo. The revised code makes clear the rights of all parties to a de novo hearing before CAS.

At its simplest, the case came down to a chicken-and-egg argument over CAS’s normal procedures and the AFL’s own rules. The lawyers for the players argued that the most important authority in the case was the AFL’s contractual arrangement with all players which sets out the anti-doping rules and disciplinary processes.

CAS’s proper role, the players argued, was to resolve the Essendon case according to the rules of the AFL.

“It is contract and contract alone that bind the players to the CAS process,’’ Rush submitted.

According to the AFL rules and players rules, appeals against a decision of an AFL tribunal are limited.

Under this construct, Australian contract law has precedence over CAS’s usual way of doing things.

The Australian government, on behalf of ASADA, argued the opposite; that CAS’s power to review the full facts of any case trumped AFL rules. ASADA’s argument was that the onus was on the AFL to ensure its anti-doping rules were consistent with the World Anti-Doping Code.

A contract between the AFL and a footballer could not dictate to CAS how it decided an anti-doping case.

“The domestic rules of the AFL must take CAS as they find it,’’ Gleeson submitted.

“Viewed on their own, the AFL player rules are irrelevant to the nature of an appeal which might be brought to CAS by WADA."

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/spo...tory/b44c0f8ef61895fa0a09c9462b2a34e7?login=1

Also has some stuff on what the retired judges said

Appeal documents obtained by The Australian reveal that former High Court judge Kenneth Hayne, former Federal Court judges Ray Finkelstein and Neil Young and former Victorian Supreme Court judge Jack Rush all submitted legal opinions to the Swiss court challenging the grounds on which CAS determined the bitterly fought case.

Young warned that CAS’s decision to conduct a second, full hearing of the case exposed the players to a form of double jeopardy and offended “fundamental principles of justice and fair dealing’’ by giving the World Anti-Doping Agency a powerful appeal right not available to other parties.

Hayne said WADA’s right of appeal should have been limited to demonstrating that the AFL tribunal, which previously heard the case, either made an error of law or came to a manifestly unreasonable decision.

“That is what the relevant rules say and it is what they mean,’’ he said flatly.

Rush said CAS’s rehearing of the case which culminated in a guilty finding and two-year ban against every player should have never taken place.

“WADA was not entitled to appeal and the CAS panel was not entitled to review the merits of the AFL tribunal decision,’’ he wrote."

 

[jenny61_99]

Chip's article today summarises the case for both parties




http://www.theaustralian.com.au/spo...tory/b44c0f8ef61895fa0a09c9462b2a34e7?login=1

Also has some stuff on what the retired judges said

That's pretty scary, that some of them couldn't even understand WADA's rights to appeal to CAS.

 

[Muggs]

That's pretty scary, that some of them couldn't even understand WADA's rights to appeal to CAS.

I'm pretty sure they understood this.

They also understand they get paid to defend their clients.

Provided its the best argument they can come up with, does not matter just how s^$* it actually is.

 

[deltablues]

Where TF did you get that one from? Bruce Francis?

"European Law" is a broad term.

But the principle difference, where it does occur, is that "European Law" charges the judiciary to seek the truth.

Whereas English Law is a bare knuckle fistfight between lawyers where the judge is the referee.

If I believed myself to be innocent I know where I'd like to be.

Both systems have upsides and downsides. Under the Common Law system your "bare knuckle fistfight" is constrained by the professional obligation placed on both sides not to mislead the Court. You can get struck off if you do.

This may cause the cynic to chuckle, and sure, the Common Law obligation not to mislead can be abused - but so can the power of the investigating magistrate under the Code Law system. And as the burden of proof is reversed under Code Law, thereby exposing a defendant to the full weight of the State, any such investigatory abuse can be very problematic indeed.

You might not want be there after all...

 

[Ron The Bear]

Robbo surely has totally trashed his rep over this whole saga.
And that's the final nail.

I like the bit about "no one will ever know what truly happened". It's like Dank went to heaven. So accepting.

 

[Ron The Bear]

There is not one argument that can be made for him keeping it.

Maybe that's why they're accepting a submission from Watson. "Give us something to work with Jobe, we've got donuts."

 

[Muggs]

That's pretty scary, that some of them couldn't even understand WADA's rights to appeal to CAS.

What get's me is how much our "senior" legal minds forget about the history of the Australian legal system. Our magistrates court has had, and in some states still do to some extent, de novo appeals to higher courts for the simple reason there was significant difference in the quality of magistrates around the country and some were outright corrupt. Appeals had to be de novo to get around this.

This is the same reason that CAS is de novo due to the huge range of sporting tribunals that use CAS as their appeals body, these are of varying quality and independence.

 

[myblueroan]

Some real contrition.
From the supporters..showing some disgust that this happened at their club and that everyone there was in part responsible.
Admit that Hird's greed and lack of humility invited the situation to unfold.
Admit that club Doc should no longer be at the club.
Admit that Jobe and senior players could have done a lot more but loved the superman bodies they now owned and the adulation that went along with that new found power.
Even now..stubborn refusal to admit guilt. Total lack of humility and shame for all the trouble caused.
Sickening.
They just do not get how angry this makes other supporters.

 

[Thrawn]

“WADA was not entitled to appeal and the CAS panel was not entitled to review the merits of the AFL tribunal decision,’’ he wrote.

Hahahahahaha. How much $$ were these people getting paid? This is almost as bad as when Burnside said that James Hird was a hero. It's amazing what a few dollars can do to otherwise rational and intelligent folk.

 

[Boxhead_31]

His argument is flimsy

Basically, boils down to Jobe is a good bloke is Robbo's arguing point

 

[Boxhead_31]

Robbo had his article in draft mode for months.
Those 34 not on the Essendon list will be visiting their lawyers .
Whatever happened to the Geelong kayaker?

Researching his book on the nearest golf course with his shiny new $20,000 golf clubs funded by the faithful

 

[Helen Wheels]

Important question.

Who out of Cotchin and Mitchell gets Jobe's juiced up hand-me-down Brownlow.
I'd be wanting a freshly minted one!

The medal is clean.
The player is dirty.

 

[Art Vandelay_]

The medal is clean.
The player is dirty.

At one point in time a Brownlow medallist.
Now a cheat for life.