Essendon players could avoid sanctions over alleged peptide use Jon Ralph, Mark Robinson
Herald Sun
July 16, 2013 9:56PMESSENDON's players will not face ASADA sanction from its use of AOD-9604, it was claimed last night.
The club’s confidence the players will escape penalty stem from their knowledge that the anti-obesity drug was not banned in 2012.
It was claimed last night, and later confirmed by Essendon sources, the club inquired to anti-doping body ASADA about its players taking the drug in early 2012 and was told it was not a prohibited substance.
Former sports scientist Stephen Dank has also confirmed he spoke to ASADA about the drug.
Dank has also confirmed he administered the drug to Essendon players on the belief that it was safe for use.
Essendon has previously refused to comment on reports that a leading ASADA investigator told them on May 6 this year: ''I don't believe it (AOD-9604) should ever have been on the prohibited list.''
The Dons were allegedly told by ASADA the prospects of a prosecution for the use of AOD-9604 was ''very, very, very low''.
Essendon sources told the Herald Sun the statement by the lead investigator was made in front of a large collection of Essendon players and coaches.
The Herald Sun has previously put that allegation to ASADA, which declined to comment.
If true, the statements aired on AFL 360 would clear Essendon's players of use of AOD-9604.
But ASADA is also investigating the possible use of other drugs which could be illegal or performance-enhancing.
But while it could be the smoking gun if proven by Essendon, ASADA was still maintaining last night it had never told a sporting body AOD-9604 was permitted.
Australian Crime Commission boss John Lawler confirmed last night that the policing body had been given advice by ASADA that the drug was not illegal under the S.2 anti-doping provision.
But ASADA said the drug was still illegal under the S.0 catch-all provision for banned substances not fit for human use.
That S.0 catch-all is the basis of WADA's concrete ruling that the drug is illegal for sport and will result in bans for those who use it.
ASADA's statement to Fox Footy stated: ''ASADA has not advised any party that AOD-9604 is permitted in sport. ASADA correctly advised ACC that AOD-9604 was not prohibited under S.2 of the WADA prohibited list, however made no reference to its status under S.0. There is no difference between the substances WADA and ASADA consider prohibited.''
WADA has consistently stated AOD-9604 was illegal from January 2011, with Essendon captain Jobe Watson admitting he believed he took the substance.
Even if ASADA exonerates or fails to prosecute Essendon players, WADA could come over the top with an appeal.
But if Essendon was explicitly told by ASADA that it could take AOD-9604 before it started injecting players, the chances of suspensions are remote.
AFL chief executive Andrew Demetriou told the program last night he could not comment on the claims.
''All I will say is that there is some uncertainty around the status of AOD-9604 and what I don't want to do is pre-empt the outcome of the investigation. The public, the media, and the football world are demanding answers. They want to know, they should know and we are all very keen to get to the outcome of the ASADA investigation and that's when those questions will be answered, and I am not going to provide any more commentary than that.''
AFL 360 host Gerard Whateley was adamant Essendon players would escape penalty.
''Essendon players in my opinion will not receive infraction notices. If you are getting advice from the body you are told to report to that it is not prohibited, then I don't believe - as the chief investigator stated - that such a charge could be sustained.
''It's not a technicality. It runs right to the core of what this is all about. It wasn't a banned substance under definition in Australia in 2012 under the best advice you could get.''
http://www.heraldsun.com.au/sport/afl/essendon-players-could-avoid-sanctions-over-alleged-peptide-use/story-fni5f6kv-1226680402347
