Play Nice WADA v Essendon 34: Guilty, 2 Yr Susp. (backdated to Mar 2015). Affects 17 current AFL plyrs.

[Chief]

Chief facebook?! Really?

I can't even comprehend the rubbish my own supporters post on there.

Wow. OK.

Assurance that not everyone is taking joy from this becomes "Really? Facebook?"

 

[hench]

James Hird has called the suspension of Essendon players a "miscarriage of justice".

http://www.theage.com.au/afl/afl-ne...s-miscarriage-of-justice-20160111-gm3vbg.html

 

[JeffDunne]

you mean this one?



Right, except that the wada code doesn't have clear penalties for team doping - the bit I asked you to justify. In fact, it gives explicit power of team based sanctions to...? Do you want to guess? That's right Jeff. To the governing body. It is solely up to the AFL in their absolute discretion.

I hoped you'd look it up and school yourself but clearly you didn't. Which is a shame because you couldn't have been more wrong and you could have saved face

Ok Mr Pedantic.

WADA has clear triggers for team doping penalties.

Triggers I might add, the AFL hasn't enacted.

 

[McCrabblett]

*Sigh*

So apparently, all Marsh and McLaughlin has really achieved is giving those living in denial - and who clearly haven't read the report - another excuse to defend players. "The WADA code isn't set out for team sports."

As I said in a previous flippant post - are we giving AFL players that little credit that we assume they're all ******* spineless idiots with the inability to say "this guy isn't even a doctor, what the **** is he injecting into me"?

Give me a spell, and give the players some credit.


The more I think about Marsh, the angrier I get.

I wonder he could point to a single example of someone being "prosecuted by investigation" who was, as he says "um... ah... not a drug cheat." Cos I follow sport and particularly anti-doping pretty closely, and I'm struggling to come up with anything.

The other thing that enraged me is that I've worked for a trade union in the past. Yes, we represent people who have done the wrong thing - we make sure they're represented, that they get a fair hearing, and where possible we negotiate an outcome.

What we do NOT do (and this will shock the union bashers out there) is blindly stand up for those who have done the wrong thing. It tarnishes us as a union, and we lose credibility among the 99.9% of members we have who do the right thing and contribute to the union for ideological reasons around collectivism, not because of what the union can do for them.

As I said in a previous post, I'd be furious if I were an AFLPA member with another club, because my union is now using MY money, MY resources, and MY credibility to try and defend prove drug cheats. Why wasn't the AFLPA included in the politically motivated Royal Commission? This was just as bullshit, just as self-serving, and just as unrepresentative of members as anything else I've seen in the union movement.

I hope the player reps of each club are in talks this afternoon about removing his self-serving arse.

Its the latest in the great Footy Exceptionalism trope. That there is something so unique and demanding about the cloistered world of AFL clubs that we can't expect normal standards of behaviour that apply to every other person on the planet.

But dude..its like...you know, the club...the boys...hang tight....stick fat...whatevs...pressure...

Get on the gear, get on the piss, do what the **** you want...just blowing off steam you know mate, nobody can understand the environment, the pressure, the yada yada yada.

Well hear this you bunch of overprivileged ****wads. You are not that special. You obey rules. Or you face ****ing consequences. And nothing about being in an AFL team absolves you of normal ****ing responsibilities. End of lesson.

 

[Harvey Leadpipe]

Just devastated really. For the players.

I guess this is what happens when Australia signs up to an overseas sporting body that is designed for singular athletes and not teams.

The ruling is an opinion based on the lowering of the bar of 'comfortable satisfaction' and provides ZERO factual evidence that banned substances were taken. It's a scary precedent that has been set. Guilty until proven innocent.

Anyway, it's a stupid situation which should never have happened. I only wish that Essendon and eleven other clubs had better documented their injection programmes. I am obviously waiting for the other 11 clubs, who were also guilty of inadequate injection reporting and governance, to have their day in court and hope their outcome is better than that which Essendon received.

Meh. The players? Stuff them. Put your energy into being devastated for kids with chronic illnesses, domestic violence victims, the disabled, refugees, the mentally ill etc. But a handful of dopey, physically advantaged, privileged dills who play sport for a living? Who cares. Wouldn't worry me what sport they played, or who they played for, no sympathy here.

In all walks of life, people have rules and regulations to follow in order to maintain, and gain in their employment. Sport is a pretty easy one. Team sport probably easier, as nearly everything else (schedules, flights, appearances, training times etc) is done for them anyway.

1. Listen to the coach.
2. Don't be a drug cheat.
3. Eat well??

Simple really.

All this concern for the players is misguided hogwash. Maybe a handful could use the year off to start some form of education so they could re-learn point 2 above.

 

[Vapor]

Btw, is this the part where Bombers supporters apologise to Caroline Wilson?

 

[Better Loosen Up]

James Hird is doing a live 50 minute interview at The Ethics Centre.

You cannot make this stuff up.

Is that what the AFL are now calling their Head Office?

 

[Lebbo73]

Yes they certainly can. They just say 'we're pulling out of WADA compliance' and write their own doping code (exactly like American sports do). There is nothing in Austraian domestic law (the ASADA Act) that requires them to comply to either ASADA or WADA. Its a domestic competition. Thats how the Yanks get away with it too.

The only drawbacks of thumbing your nose at WADA is that many international competitions and sports refuse you entry (or if you want to compete in an international sporting event that adheres to the WADA regime). Not being WADA compliant is a block to participation in such events. Cyclists, Olympic athletes, Soccer players and the like are all caught up.

In a sport like the AFL (an entirely domestic privately owned competition) if the governing body doesnt care if its athletes smash steriods, then they can juice up and play the game as much as they like.

Its no different to how WADA (and even our domestic body ASADA) cant stop you from arranging a backyard cricket competiton in your local neighborhood, or force you to require that the people that play in your competition are drug free (or force you to comply with the ASADA regs). You can run your own competiton however you want, and allow (or prohibit) athletes who dope if you so desire.

The AFL anti doping code is an instrument of the AFL that mirrors the WADA code fairly closely (not exactly). It is an entirely voluntary thing by the AFL though. If the AFL wanted to, they could tear their own doping code up and allow even the most juiced up athlete to play in the competition, and there isnt a thing WADA or ASADA could do about it.

The AFL comply for a number of reasons (keeping the Federal government happy, the publicity and international compliance factor of being WADA compatable, integrity of the sport etc). There is ne legal reason that requires them to do it though.

Everything you have said is right. However, I am pretty sure that if the AFL was not WADA compliant, it would have no ramifications for the players. In the scheme of world sport, the AFL is a closed competition with no real WADA requirement.

 

[ODNBlue]

 

[Chief]

Collectively the Afl media should be ashamed of itself.

It's an industry that thrives when the league is healthy. They are not independent journos seeking the truth.

 

[Reagan Smash]

Is there a journalist in this country with a backbone who will call a spade a spade ?

Some of the shit about the players being victims is cringeworthy

 

[Grave Danger]

James Hird will conduct his only extensive interview on the supplements saga this Sunday at 7:40pm on ABC News 24 TV.

The interview will be conducted by Tracey Holmes.


Yeah, that'll be balanced

 

[Dave Smith]

bad luck gillon and andrew

 

[The_Steadier]

Yes they certainly can. They just say 'we're pulling out of WADA compliance' and write their own doping code (exactly like American sports do). There is nothing in Austraian domestic law (the ASADA Act) that requires them to comply to either ASADA or WADA. Its a domestic competition. Thats how the Yanks get away with it too.

The only drawbacks of thumbing your nose at WADA is that many international competitions and sports refuse you entry (or if you want to compete in an international sporting event that adheres to the WADA regime). Not being WADA compliant is a block to participation in such events. Cyclists, Olympic athletes, Soccer players and the like are all caught up.

In a sport like the AFL (an entirely domestic privately owned competition) if the governing body doesnt care if its athletes smash steriods, then they can juice up and play the game as much as they like.

Its no different to how WADA (and even our domestic body ASADA) cant stop you from arranging a backyard cricket competiton in your local neighborhood, or force you to require that the people that play in your competition are drug free (or force you to comply with the ASADA regs).

The AFL anti doping code is an instrument of the AFL that mirrors the WADA code fairly closely. Its an entirely voluntary thing by the AFL though. If they wanted to, they could tear their own doping code up and allow even the most juiced up athlete to play in the competition, and there isnt a thing WADA or ASADA could do about it.

Correct except as previously stated the AFL would likely want to remain in the fed govs good graces due to its tax free status and auskick access into schools- not to mention cooperation with stadiums etc.

Not to mention the PR disaster of looking weak on drugs.

It's definitely on the cards though- they are already running the 'bad fit for team sports' line.

I for one won't ever watch football again if they drop WADA.

Football for me is a way of escaping the crappy parts of modern life like corruption and cheating.

I'll turn a blind eye to:
their fixture rigging for TV,
draft and money concessions for expansion clubs,
pathetic reliance on gambling and alcohol revenue

But to effectively condone drug cheating- that's a bridge too far.

My son wont play football that's for sure.

 

[STFU Donnie]

Remind me never to get on McDevitts bad side!

OK. Never get on McDevitt's bad side.

 

[Malifice]

And will continue to do so. Because the AFL does not have the power of the US major sports and never will. Which is why the AFL huffed and puffed and then did what they were told to in the first place.

They could, but they would be an international laughing stock. The insulated sports in the USA have the financial clout (and a big enough domestic market) to simply not care. Until the AFL becomes an olympic or international sport, it can pretty much do what it wants.

This is how the AFL gets away with allowing its players to avoid sanction for cocaine, meth and other other prohibited drugs (all of which are banned under the WADA Code). It created exceptions for certain drugs (and it can make whatever exceptions it wants). The AFL could bring in a three strike policy for anabolic steroids if it wanted to, and there isnt a thing that ASADA or WADA could do about it (other than a declaration that the AFL is not in fact WADA compliant).

Of course, pulling out of the WADA regime entirely will lose the AFL face in the international sporting community, and piss off the Federal government (denying them Federal money and assistance, and possibly giving some momentum to an amendment to the ASADA Act to force compliance).

Theyre better off being WADA compliant (with exceptions). I anticipate (reading between the lines) that the AFL code is going to be amended to remove CAS appeals, dismantle a lot of ASADA's oversight and place all the power for its administration (and a lot more discretion) in the hands of the AFL exclusively.

Far enough not to piss off ASADA, WADA and the Feds, and allowing the AFL to still claim to be WADA compliant, but in reality empowering the AFL Commission to able to do whatever they want and whenever it suits them to do so.

 

[Biggy_Boy]

Why does the notice at the top of BF say 2 years?

 

[Satan]

James Hird will conduct his only extensive interview on the supplements saga this Sunday at 7:40pm on ABC News 24 TV.

The interview will be conducted by Tracey Holmes.


Yeah, that'll be balanced

That will be worth 4c

 

[Chameleon75]

Ok Mr Pedantic.

WADA has clear triggers for team doping penalties.

Triggers I might add, the AFL hasn't enacted.

its entirely at the discretion of the afl

 

[skins62]

This is Hird's Legacy and you got away with it lightly compared to what you should get.

Just wait, if I was Port Adelaide or any of the other AFL teams with suspended ex Bomber players I would be suing Essendon for player payments for at least this year...... And that might be the tip of the iceberg.

A shame for the players they will be labelled drug cheats but it was the club not the players.

 

[Bombermania]

Why does the notice at the top of BF say 2 years?

The suspensions are for two years back dated a year to the start of the earlier suspensions

 

[JeffDunne]

All this concern for the players is misguided hogwash. Maybe a handful could use the year off to start some form of education so they could re-learn point 2 above.

Did somebody mention Carlisle?

 

[mickeyjuice]

Why does the notice at the top of BF say 2 years?

Because it's two years.

 

[Sir Hugh Percy]

Says the guy who argued to the strength of a 150 posts per day, every day for 3 years, that Essendon didn't dope.

In fairness to mxett, he hasn't been arguing that they didn't dope for quite some time.

 

[JeffDunne]

its entirely at the discretion of the afl

So too doping penalties.

Oh wait . . .