Moved Thread Why this OTC quote has been blown out of proportion
- Thread starter MG MG
- Start date
- Tagged users None
- Status
- Banned
- #27
No one ever knows anything. Jobe Watson? Does he exist or is he a figment of your imagination?
Forward Press
Hall of Famer
Banned.
- Moderator
- #29
Yes, he did.
He clearly and unambiguously said he was administered AOD-9604 (a WADA prohibited substance) in 2012 via a program of injections orchestrated by the club.
I'm not sure you understand how 'beyond the balance of probabilities' works.
- May 13, 2012
- 15,812
- 5,968
- AFL Club
- GWS
- Other Teams
- Brumbies, Socceroos
Jobe signed a consent form which listed a few substances.
He received some injections during the season.
Was AOD contained within any of the injections which Jobe received?
That's precisely what ASADA needs to prove.
Jobe won't know that - only the people administering the injections would know what was contained in the injections. Records were kept of what was administered to each player, so I would think that would constitute reasonable evidence.
I'm not sure if last night's interview on its own is sufficient to warrant an infraction notice, you need some hard evidence of AOD actually being injected into Jobe, not some speculation that it may or may not have happened.
And that's before we get to the possibility that at some point last year, ASADA actually cleared AOD as a legal substance.
He received some injections during the season.
Was AOD contained within any of the injections which Jobe received?
That's precisely what ASADA needs to prove.
Jobe won't know that - only the people administering the injections would know what was contained in the injections. Records were kept of what was administered to each player, so I would think that would constitute reasonable evidence.
I'm not sure if last night's interview on its own is sufficient to warrant an infraction notice, you need some hard evidence of AOD actually being injected into Jobe, not some speculation that it may or may not have happened.
And that's before we get to the possibility that at some point last year, ASADA actually cleared AOD as a legal substance.
Rack Watts
Here's MASON
We'll box on, you and I!
If you were lining up in the 100 metres at the Olympics knowing the runner in the next lane used PEDs would you feel dudded? (Raelene Boyle does because the best athlete didn't win gold)
How many Bombers that took PEDs ran out against the Suns - the cleanskins lost.
If you don't hold players responsible & blamed coaches, nurses etc .. the fall guy industry would grow quicker than the people smugglers have in recent years ...
How many Bombers that took PEDs ran out against the Suns - the cleanskins lost.
If you don't hold players responsible & blamed coaches, nurses etc .. the fall guy industry would grow quicker than the people smugglers have in recent years ...
Serious subject, funny thread
- Moderator
- #35
They need to prove it 'beyond the balance of probabilities'. Not 'beyond reasonable doubt'.
Consider ASADA have consent forms explicitly stating that AOD was to be administered, verbal evidence (including admissions) from Players, Coaches and Support staff that it was administered, the head of the Sports science department sought permission to administer it, the head coach and CEO got a presentation on the drug etc etc etc.
We can take a survey if you want, but that's so far beyond the balance of probabilities its not funny.
No one (not even fishardansin) honestly believes that it wasn't taken.
Jesus. Jobe Watson honestly believes he took it!
Astoundingly it seems as if Essendon are clinging to the belief that they can get off an orchestrated campaign of administering a prohibited substance to half the list because... they made a mistake.
Isn't obvious to the ******s out there that Essendon, in their mind, have 100% concrete evidence that AOD 9604 was not, or is not, considered an illegal substance, according to ASADA, at the time they were using it? The ACC report even states this.
It doesn't matter that WADA have come out and categorically stated that AOD 9604 is banned, as they were the body that directed the Essendon sports science department to get their information from ASADA.
Jobe has then gone on to say that there's plenty to come yet and when it does finally come out the players will all be fine.
We also have Tim Watson stating that he's entirely comfortable with what's occurred in regards to the well being of his son. Sure, many people may not take him at face value, but they're the sort of people who have already convinced themselves that Essendon have been systematically doping it's players under the careful instruction of James Hird.
The important thing is that this comes AFTER all players have been interviewed by ASADA. Not only that, but it's also nearing the end of this saga and I'm fairly sure all parties involved would have a pretty good idea of where this is headed.
It doesn't matter that WADA have come out and categorically stated that AOD 9604 is banned, as they were the body that directed the Essendon sports science department to get their information from ASADA.
Jobe has then gone on to say that there's plenty to come yet and when it does finally come out the players will all be fine.
We also have Tim Watson stating that he's entirely comfortable with what's occurred in regards to the well being of his son. Sure, many people may not take him at face value, but they're the sort of people who have already convinced themselves that Essendon have been systematically doping it's players under the careful instruction of James Hird.
The important thing is that this comes AFTER all players have been interviewed by ASADA. Not only that, but it's also nearing the end of this saga and I'm fairly sure all parties involved would have a pretty good idea of where this is headed.
Jobe.
MG MG
Norm Smith Medallist
- Aug 20, 2012
- 6,872
- 1,733
- AFL Club
- Essendon
- Other Teams
- Liverpool, CA, Sydney FC
- Thread starter
- #38
"My Understanding after it being given through Bruce Reid and the club that I was receiving AOD. (I believed) that is was legal at the time and that's what I was told I was being given"
Jobe Watson, Monday 24th
Jobe Watson, Monday 24th
Lol! Mxett, that you? How you holding up bud?
Very good point. AFL clubs have so much media training and guides these days, Jobe wouldn't have said it if he wasn't told to/gained permission to say it.
However is it other injections they were receiving that might land them in hot water? Or just the AOD.
Apparently he didn't get the okay from EFC to say what he did.
I bet Jimmy was shocked watching OTC last night.
You are free to your opinion.
If I was betting on this, I'd definitely be putting money on no suspensions.
Black Diamond
Sleight of Hand
The whole premise of the OP seems to be:
- Watson was told he was going to be administered a banned substance notwithstanding he didn't know it was illegal; but
- Essendon are so shifty that they would tell him he was to be administered the substance, but then spiked the injection with something else anyway; therefore
- Watson is completely clueless about what he actually took (in which case nothing he says about the substances he was given can be believed, but that is another tangent).
- Moderator
- #46
Pursuant to : http://www.bigfooty.com/forum/threads/the-safety-catch-is-off-please-read.1006594/
Since it seems people have forgotten this - let me reiterate for you. Playing the man is bannable. Report offensive posts and they will be dealt with by our moderating team. Respond to offensive posts in kind and you will also find yourself on the outer.
This warning has been posted to ALL current ASADA threads on this sub forum because apparently its necessary.
Since it seems people have forgotten this - let me reiterate for you. Playing the man is bannable. Report offensive posts and they will be dealt with by our moderating team. Respond to offensive posts in kind and you will also find yourself on the outer.
This warning has been posted to ALL current ASADA threads on this sub forum because apparently its necessary.
At least you'd get very good odds.
Wouldn't you look into what it is?
It's not like he is being given a flu-shot, and a 2 second Google search would have rung alarm bells
getting laser eye-surgery, and the procedure Waiver forms have a lot of technical terms
spent 1 minute on Google, Found that it was ok, and worded purely for legalities
It's not like he is being given a flu-shot, and a 2 second Google search would have rung alarm bells
getting laser eye-surgery, and the procedure Waiver forms have a lot of technical terms
spent 1 minute on Google, Found that it was ok, and worded purely for legalities
- Moderator
- #49
What's your legal reasoning for this?
It's beyond any reasonable doubt that last year the players took it, and the club administered it to them.
Its also well established that the substance they took and was administered was prohibited under S0 of the WADA/ ASADA code at the time it was taken.
Its also well established (via case law and the code itself) that the athlete bears strict liability for any prohibited substance. In other words the defence of 'I thought/ was told it was OK to take' doesn't protect a player who takes a prohibited substance.
What loophole or reasoning am I missing here?
Is the OP for real?
- Status
