The possibility of Essendon innocence: a travesty of justice or conspiracy theory for the ages?

Remove this Banner Ad


Thoughts? In your opinion, does this change the initial mainstream narrative about the Essendon drug saga?

No change re Essendon
1) The substance was a banned substance on the WADA list
2) Essendon did not co-operate and present their full drug regime
3) Essendon did not keep full records and or destroyed the records


Yes a change re ASADA re failing to marry their list with WADA
 

Log in to remove this ad.

No change re Essendon
1) The substance was a banned substance on the WADA list
2) Essendon did not co-operate and present their full drug regime
3) Essendon did not keep full records and or destroyed the records


Yes a change re ASADA re failing to marry their list with WADA
Actually you have got this a bit wrong.
It wasn't explicitly listed as a banned substance by WADA or ASADA at the time. It is now.
It was however banned under other categories such as S2 and S0 which don't name all substances as such, but discuss things like growth hormones and examples of such substances and whether stuff is appoved for human use.
This is where the public gets confused and sucked in by disingenuous reports which play on the wording around banned substances.
 
Last edited:
Give Jobe his Brownlow back and take Andrew McGrath off them.
Give us back our 2 x 1st round draft picks, 2 x 2nd round draft picks, Jake Carlisle, Michael Hibberd, Paddy Ryder and Stewart Crameri all at their peak... and our elimination final loss... oh wait...

Nothing will happen. It’s over, let’s move on.
 
I'm sure this article will lead to further well-balanced, respectful discussion on BigFooty.
I think even most Essendon supporters are sick of it now so I’m hopeful it’s not the circus that was the HTB. It’s just a few tin foil hat wearing nuffies still convinced Essendon was the victim of a conspiracy.
 
Was it on ASADA S0 and S2 category? Don’t our athletes check ASADA site?

Even if they did, it was clear they didn’t follow the info on the site to contact ASADA when they didn’t find the substance listed. If just one player had’ve done that, the entire 34 would’ve been spared

Interesting timing with this article. Robbo is obviously carrying someone’s water for some purpose with this article now, but who it’s for is a mystery. Could one of the new coaches be looking to import the coach in charge at the time the 34 players were suspended for doping, and this is their way of trying to smooth the waters for his return to football? Are the AFL looking to withdraw from WADA and this is the start of conditioning the public?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

Even if they did, it was clear they didn’t follow the info on the site to contact ASADA when they didn’t find the substance listed. If just one player had’ve done that, the entire 34 would’ve been spared

Interesting timing with this article. Robbo is obviously carrying someone’s water for some purpose with this article now, but who it’s for is a mystery. Could one of the new coaches be looking to import the coach in charge at the time the 34 players were suspended for doping, and this is their way of trying to smooth the waters for his return to football? Are the AFL looking to withdraw from WADA and this is the start of conditioning the public?
Maybe but I suspect this will do anything but smooth waters for anyone.
 
Irrelevant! ASADA website doesn't decide what is banned, WADA does. It's been banned by WADA since 2010. If Essendon had've rang ASADA, as they should they would've been told it was banned whether it was on the website or not. That's why WADA followed up at the CAS and won.



"
Former ASADA CEO Richard Ings, who led the organisation from 2005-10, said the findings didn’t change anything because Thymosin Beta-4 was on the World Anti-Doping Authority’s banned list in 2010.
Ings said none of the new evidence impacted the decision reached by the Court of Arbitration for Sport.
“WADA determine what’s banned. Not ASADA,” he tweeted. “And no one argues successfully that TB-4 is not banned. EFC34 were well represented at both hearing. They lost.” "
 
But McDevitt, ASADA chief at the time said it was up to the players to check ASADA website to see what's banned.

At the time this substance was not listed on ASADA site. So WADA may determine but seems ASADA ****** up.

Far from the End.

It's the end. That's what players are told and is required. Call ASADA to make sure. Irrelevant whether it's on the website or not. It's nothing comes up on the website it says essentially that it doesn't mean it's not banned and to check with ASADA. They'd would've said straight up that it was banned. TB4 has been banned by WADA since 2010.

So it is done.
 
Essendon?

Innocent?

giphy.gif
 
Irrelevant! ASADA website doesn't decide what is banned, WADA does. It's been banned by WADA since 2010. If Essendon had've rang ASADA, as they should they would've been told it was banned whether it was on the website or not. That's why WADA followed up at the CAS and won.



"
Former ASADA CEO Richard Ings, who led the organisation from 2005-10, said the findings didn’t change anything because Thymosin Beta-4 was on the World Anti-Doping Authority’s banned list in 2010.
Ings said none of the new evidence impacted the decision reached by the Court of Arbitration for Sport.
“WADA determine what’s banned. Not ASADA,” he tweeted. “And no one argues successfully that TB-4 is not banned. EFC34 were well represented at both hearing. They lost.” "
ASADA receive their banned substances list from WADA. ASADA evidently failed to update their website for a couple of years. That’s quite plausible.
 
When you went to the website and typed in name Thymosin beta 4 in came up as see ASADA for further information, not inject yourself to the eyeballs.

The end.

WADA couldn’t even prove substance was even within 100km radius of Windy Hill let alone in anyone’s eyeball or arse. Same organisation that refused to investigate Russian olympians with a tonne of way more stronger direct evidence.
 

Remove this Banner Ad

The possibility of Essendon innocence: a travesty of justice or conspiracy theory for the ages?

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top