Will ASADA/WADA appeal? - UPDATE: ASADA will not appeal - WADA has appealed

Will ASADA/WADA appeal?

  • Yes

    Votes: 256 65.1%

  • No

    Votes: 137 34.9%
  • Total voters
    393

Remove this Banner Ad

romeoh said:
You are missing the point- forget that it is your club and apply this to the future and any club if you can Mxett.
There is a problem with the burden of proof.
No positive tests, no documentation. Very few will confess. The documentation is still a problem-go and watch 360 tonight for an example-there is documentation that makes convincing links to Charters, Alavi, Danks and illegal substances according to Whatley. But there is still real difficulty in 'proving' that those substances went into a body-its not that hard to understand is it?
So yep, in the very unlikely event that there are lots of texts saying do this and we took that ( like who will send texts and emails like that now?) then its really tricky and we need a better system. Otherwise what is to stop the next club from saying 'sorry no test, no docs'?
Click to expand...
Asada should be capable of prosecuting players without records of the use of banned substances though. I mean how many cheats are going to firstly record and then keep a log detailing the use of banned substances?
 
BloodRet said:
So I'm confused. Has Dank chosen not to hand over a list of what the players were administered but still has it in his possession, or has he 'lost' the track of what players were given?
Click to expand...
His most recent claim I believe is that full and detailed records were left intact and onsite, at EFC after he left.
 

Log in to remove this ad.

mxett said:
Asada should be capable of prosecuting players without records of the use of banned substances though. I mean how many cheats are going to firstly record and then keep a log detailing the use of banned substances?
Click to expand...
Exactly. Pretty sure in cycling if you are a no show for a blood/urine it is automatic suspension ( tantamount to guilt)
Maybe in future we need to bring in if the documents/records are a no show= automatic suspension ( tantamount to guilt).
What else can we do?
 
romeoh said:
Exactly. Pretty sure in cycling if you are a no show for a blood/urine it is automatic suspension ( tantamount to guilt)
Maybe in future we need to bring in if the documents/records are a no show= automatic suspension ( tantamount to guilt).
What else can we do?
Click to expand...

I suggest we enforce mandatory random injections.

At any time an AFL official can appear with an unknown substance for injecting into a player.
 
romeoh said:
Exactly. Pretty sure in cycling if you are a no show for a blood/urine it is automatic suspension ( tantamount to guilt)
Maybe in future we need to bring in if the documents/records are a no show= automatic suspension ( tantamount to guilt).
What else can we do?
Click to expand...

So then you order the illegal stuff off book, order legal stuff on book and your records reflect the legal stuff. Only way to do it seems is to catch them in the act of injecting and then test the shit.
 
romeoh said:
Exactly. Pretty sure in cycling if you are a no show for a blood/urine it is automatic suspension ( tantamount to guilt)
Maybe in future we need to bring in if the documents/records are a no show= automatic suspension ( tantamount to guilt).
What else can we do?
Click to expand...
They arent the same. AfL players who refuse drug tests will also face a ban. The documentation of substances used is no gauge because all teams need to do is hand over records for everything legal. Whos to say they arent the entire records, and the 10% showing peds is never recorded at all
 
Jobe Watson said:
Lol.

Essendon are clean.

Fact is McDevitt had a mare on this one. I don't think he should be sacked yet but he's done a dreadful job with this case. Had the chance to drop it when he took power and the advisers warned that the case wasn't that strong but his bravado and arrogance prevailed, leading to a humiliating defeat.
Click to expand...

don't be a dolt thinking this is all about mcdevitt, the ADRVP, an independent body that reviews ASADA's work agreed that the case should be pursued. mcdevitt fulfilled his obligations as CEO of ASADA perfectly well.
 
Last edited:
mxett said:
Asada should be capable of prosecuting players without records of the use of banned substances though. I mean how many cheats are going to firstly record and then keep a log detailing the use of banned substances?
Click to expand...

You would be surprised , how else do you analyse data, compare results etc etc. It would obviously be done in code but of course data would be kept
 
mxett said:
They arent the same. AfL players who refuse drug tests will also face a ban. The documentation of substances used is no gauge because all teams need to do is hand over records for everything legal. Whos to say they arent the entire records, and the 10% showing peds is never recorded at all
Click to expand...
Ok well then if there is a chain of evidence but no eyewitness to the actual injection = enough proof of guilt. People still have to source the stuff from somewhere.
So other than being quite reasonably glad your club dodged a bullet, have you got a solution?
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

Armchair Critic said:
You would be surprised , how else do you analyse data, compare results etc etc. It would obviously be done in code but of course data would be kept
Click to expand...
That's what I think-they have to be recording it in some form-need to work out a way to police that somehow.
 
ThatsjustDappa said:
What I don't understand in all this is two ex-judges reviewed the case evidence and recommended ASADA to proceed. Did they just have a different view of what constitutes comfortable satisfaction compared to the tribunal?
Click to expand...

I think a big problem was not having Alavi and Charter available to testify. When Downes reviewed the case, so far as I'm aware those two were scheduled to testify. The failure of ASADA to even secure an affidavit from them made their job much tougher.

If the CAS includes the power to subpoena witnesses, or to demand documentation then that's the obvious next step. Having Dank, Charter and Alavi being forced to testify under oath that they weren't involved in a supply chain of TB4 to the Bombers should wipe the smiles off a few of the faces here. ASADA should be co-ordinating this with WADA now - we'll step out of the way if you guys are prepared to step in immediately. If, however, the CAS doesn't confer these powers, then I'm not sure ASADA have any space left to maneuver. The silence of fine, upstanding men like Charter and Dank will have saved the EFC.
 
BRWB said:
So then you order the illegal stuff off book, order legal stuff on book and your records reflect the legal stuff. Only way to do it seems is to catch them in the act of injecting and then test the shit.
Click to expand...
But how can that be done-lots of testing? Tracy Holmes on RN today said its $1500 a test and some very low % test positive. So not effective enough for lots of financial outlay. Think we have a problem.
 
romeoh said:
Ok well then if there is a chain of evidence but no eyewitness to the actual injection = enough proof of guilt. People still have to source the stuff from somewhere.
So other than being quite reasonably glad your club dodged a bullet, have you got a solution?
Click to expand...
im glad my club were found not guilty because 1. there wasnt enough evidence to show they cheated, and Im not prepared to call them cheats without a conviction, 2. they never intended to cheat IMO so if they got lucky so be it, and 3. I think they have suffered enough over the last 26 months anyway.

I have no solution for a lack of positive test, no damning records, and no smoking gun. I'd love to know how many cheats have been caught on records of banned substances alone
 
JP2 said:
I think a big problem was not having Alavi and Charter available to testify. When Downes reviewed the case, so far as I'm aware those two were scheduled to testify. The failure of ASADA to even secure an affidavit from them made their job much tougher.

If the CAS includes the power to subpoena witnesses, or to demand documentation then that's the obvious next step. Having Dank, Charter and Alavi being forced to testify under oath that they weren't involved in a supply chain of TB4 to the Bombers should wipe the smiles off a few of the faces here. ASADA should be co-ordinating this with WADA now - we'll step out of the way if you guys are prepared to step in immediately. If, however, the CAS doesn't confer these powers, then I'm not sure ASADA have any space left to maneuver. The silence of fine, upstanding men like Charter and Dank will have saved the EFC.
Click to expand...

Yeah, I'm no lawyer but it seems a couple of problems:

1 - ASADA were grossly unprofessional in the massive leaking that went on (even if it was only via the AFL which I doubt)

2 - ASADA are a lame duck with none of the coercive powers of a Court. That EFC even took them to Court over their investigation is crap IMO.

Solution? A new Act that confers appropriate powers to ASADA, BUT with these powers comes responsibility like with ACCC, total confidentiality. I'd suggest sporting bodies appointing Tribunal's to these matters is crap. Send it all straight to the Federal Court.
 
Armchair Critic said:
Unless I see a complete chain of custody I am not going to put much weight in the testing of the substance TBH. I understand it lower standard than proof beyond reasonable doubt but from my own personal experience it is an integral part in the validity of tests
Click to expand...

Well you will never get a complete chain of custody for anything but an AAF, so perhaps you're setting your standards a little high for a non AAF breach investigation
 
JP2 said:
I think a big problem was not having Alavi and Charter available to testify. When Downes reviewed the case, so far as I'm aware those two were scheduled to testify. The failure of ASADA to even secure an affidavit from them made their job much tougher.

If the CAS includes the power to subpoena witnesses, or to demand documentation then that's the obvious next step. Having Dank, Charter and Alavi being forced to testify under oath that they weren't involved in a supply chain of TB4 to the Bombers should wipe the smiles off a few of the faces here. ASADA should be co-ordinating this with WADA now - we'll step out of the way if you guys are prepared to step in immediately. If, however, the CAS doesn't confer these powers, then I'm not sure ASADA have any space left to maneuver. The silence of fine, upstanding men like Charter and Dank will have saved the EFC.
Click to expand...
werent Charter and Alavi's testimonies tabled anyway?
 
mxett said:
Asada should be capable of prosecuting players without records of the use of banned substances though. I mean how many cheats are going to firstly record and then keep a log detailing the use of banned substances?
Click to expand...

If that is the case, we should just refer direct to CAS as the AFL tribunal obviously had an agenda, that due to not being able to compel witnesses to confirm statements, they will never find anyone guilty.

With new peptides, growth hormones and synthetic variants available with very little to no ability to test for them, tribunals that require such standards are compelled to rule only one way.
 
thegerman said:
If that is the case, we should just refer direct to CAS as the AFL tribunal obviously had an agenda, that due to not being able to compel witnesses to confirm statements, they will never find anyone guilty.

With new peptides, growth hormones and synthetic variants available with very little to no ability to test for them, tribunals that require such standards are compelled to rule only one way.
Click to expand...
you really think charter and alavi's failed confirmation of their testimonies made a difference?
 

Remove this Banner Ad

Will ASADA/WADA appeal? - UPDATE: ASADA will not appeal - WADA has appealed

Similar threads

The_Wookie
Play Nice Happy 10th Anniversary (of the Essendon/ASADA Saga)
2
Replies
30
Views
3K
blackcat
blackcat
Back
Top