Essendon face AFL probe/Players found Guilty by CAS

[Judge Roughneck]

My queen

[Judge Roughneck]

James Hird inc. Having a go at kB and Patrick smith

Delusion
Deflection
Delusion
Drug cheats

[Judge Roughneck]

Gee whiz bomber

Loved the comments from the eminent oncologist, Mark 'Bomber' Thompson:

He insists his players aren't facing health risks over the club's 2012 supplements program, despite revelations the AFL was monitoring them over fears of cancer and hormonal problems.

Thompson said on Friday the Essendon players had been extensively briefed by club officials regarding the supplements given to them.

"I think it's OK. The players have been communicated to by specialists and the drugs, the supplements that we have given the players, they know that they're not harmful," Thompson told reporters.

"There's no risk. One actually helps in part of the treatment for cancer.

"So we haven't got a problem there at all as far as our communication and our players' awareness of what's healthy and what's not."

http://www.afl.com.au/news/2014-07-04/no-cancer-risk-thompson

All this assurance despite being able to provide a shred of evidence about what was given to whom in what dosage.  Is it just me or are these idiots some primal form of uber-ostrich that have their collective heads dug so deep in the sand they feel earth tremors before seismic monitoring devices?   

[WilliamPowell]

Caro goes whack 

  and has the guts to write what a lot of people every single AFL person except for Essendon supporters and sycophants think

 

Edited for accuracy

Was actually going to type that Smokey but some on here get upset and accuse one of having no right to speak for them 

[Judge Roughneck]

John Ralph is a really quality journalist isn't he. not a twit.

[one-eyed]

Stephen Dank, the man at the centre of the Essendon supplements scandal, insists the players knew what they had been administered and has described the club’s internal report into his injecting program as ''absolute rubbish''.

As tensions rise amid the fall-out of a saga that threatens to hijack a second straight AFL season, Dank insisted the players had not been duped in his 2011-12 peptides program.

‘‘I would say it would be very unusual for the players to say they didn’t know what they were taking,’’ Dank said on Tuesday. ‘‘I think that, in my personal opinion, they not only knew what they were taking but they understood what they were taking. The reasons for why I say that, again, will be discussed in the appropriate forum.’’

http://www.theage.com.au/afl/afl-news/essendon-players-knew-what-they-had-been-given-claims-stephen-dank-20140708-zt0kq.html



That's why what you gave the players was all properly recorded, Dank ..... oh that's right it wasn't! 

Dank is throwing the Essendon players under the bus. If an athlete knowing knows what he/she has taken then say hello to a two-year ban.

[Muscles]

I thought the story was that only Essendon said that there were no records kept? 

 I thought that Dank always claimed to have kept records, he just refused to disclose them?

[one-eyed]

I thought the story was that only Essendon said that there were no records kept? 

 I thought that Dank always claimed to have kept records, he just refused to disclose them?

You may be right Muscles about what Dank has claimed. However, if they exist then why won't Dank come forward and reveal them?

[one-eyed]

Forget the sideshow, the story is about the Essendon players
Damian Barrett 
afl.com.au
July 9, 2014 3:33 PM


THERE'S no risk. One, actually, helps in part of the treatment for cancer - Mark Thompson, Essendon coach, July 4, 2014.

And there it is. Just when we'd either forgotten, had our thoughts hijacked by the lawyers and sideshow arguments, or maybe could no longer care what this entire Essendon drugs investigation was actually about, Mark Thompson reminded us.

It is about a group of men, some of them teenagers, whose blind faith in those in charge at Essendon Football Club saw them administered drugs their bodies didn't need, all in the self-proclaimed whatever-it-takes pursuit of success.

Absorb, for a moment, what Thompson said. Essendon players, none of whom had been diagnosed with cancer, were given a drug to treat cancer. Confirmed.

Hey, not only are there no cancer worries down the track for our players, not that Thompson or anyone else at his club will ever know for sure, but hey, they've actually been given an anti-cancer drug.

It is many things, Thompson's statement, mainly a summary of the brazen arrogance with which Essendon went about its operations two years ago.

It is also offensive - to people who actually don't have a choice but to, every single day, take drugs which treat cancer, simply to ensure they stay alive. If you don't have cancer, why take a drug which treats it?

Thompson this year has admirably gone about his role as coach. He has never baulked at addressing the wrongs of the past, and his constant protection of players is leadership at its finest. But his words last week were poorly chosen and delivered.

There was a period of time when Essendon's drugs program was aligned with consent forms signed by its players.

There was also a period when certain substances were administered before those forms were signed.

The AFL Players' Association has confirmed this, and remains doubly concerned as to what happened in this period.

Was the cancer drug administered before or post the consent forms? Maybe both.

In a story which will never have the full truth revealed, facts such as Thompson's confirmation of use of a drug which treats cancer, and the AFLPA's fears of the pre-consent period are crucial to its telling.

Forget all the sideshows. Of who said what to whom on the night before Essendon officially self-reported. The claim of illegality levelled at the joint ASADA-AFL probe. The identity of "the Triple M mum". The AFL's Dr Peter Harcourt's address in Zurich. Essendon chairman Paul Little's belated regret that David Evans asked for the club to be investigated. Former coach James Hird's court action.

Forget all of it and instead focus on the fact that fit, young men were given a drug to treat cancer. And another drug to combat obesity. And other drugs.

Focus, also, on the fact Little was a senior member of the Essendon board when it decided to self-report, and then commission Ziggy Switkowski to investigate the club's actions in a report which found the Bombers, in the late 2011 and 2012 period in question, had combined to "create a disturbing picture of a pharmacologically experimental environment never adequately controlled or challenged or documented within the club in the period under review".

Yet Essendon now will happily sheet all blame back to just a few people. It wants us all to believe that Stephen Dank is to blame for virtually everything, and that he is a man not to be trusted.

Yet as it discredits him at every turn, it trusts him, and demands that everyone else do so too, when he says he didn't give Essendon players WADA-banned drugs.

He may not have, but 34 past and current players have been issued with ASADA show-cause notices relating to alleged use of thymosin Beta 4 during Dank's time at the club.

The full truth, that commodity Hird was initially so desperate to discover, and the one which was supposedly going to put him and everyone at Essendon in a far better place, will never be revealed.

We all need to get our heads around that.

http://www.afl.com.au/news/2014-07-09/its-all-about-the-essendon-players

[Muscles]

I thought the story was that only Essendon said that there were no records kept? 

 I thought that Dank always claimed to have kept records, he just refused to disclose them?

You may be right Muscles about what Dank has claimed. However, if they exist then why won't Dank come forward and reveal them?

Fair point, OE.  Dank has always claimed to have records that would prove the supplements program to be WADA compliant.  He would have been able to kill this investigation stone dead if he revealed them. 

So that would seem to raise four possibilities;

1.  He has the records and they don't contain any banned compounds, but by not revealing them he believes he may gain some kind of benefit that would more than compensate him for the damage to his reputation.
2.  He has the records and they are damning, but by not revealing them he believes he may avoid any adverse consequences stemming from the contents of the records.
3.  He's bluffing and doesn't have any records, but by claiming that they do exist, he believes he may avoid adverse consequences or gain some sort of advantage.
4.  He has the records and is seriously upset about the way he's been treated by all parties involved in the situation and simply won't cooperate with any of the parties.

Maybe it'll all become clear in the fullness of time, or maybe it won't.

[Smokey]

I vote 3.

[Judge Roughneck]

THERE'S no risk. One, actually, helps in part of the treatment for cancer - Mark Thompson, Essendon coach, July 4, 2014.

I don't intend to be brazen. Yet i cannot help but wonder why Mr Thompson does not attend the Royal Children's Hospital alerting the Oncology department to such information.

[(•))(©™]

5) He has fraudulently obtained records.
Jail.

Lock the idiot up.
stuffn weasel.

[one-eyed]

ASADA says it will pursue alleged 34 Essendon players even if investigation declared unlawful.

    Michael Warner and Grant Baker
    Herald Sun
    July 11, 2014 8:00PM

ASADA has signalled it will pursue doping cases against 34 former and current Essendon players — even if its joint investigation with the AFL is declared unlawful.

The Australian Sports Anti-Doping Authority outlined its intended defence in the Federal Court fight against the Bombers and suspended coach James Hird on Friday.

A three-day trial begins on August 11.

The ASADA defence includes the assertion that the anti-doping body could relaunch an investigation into the Bombers if it loses the court case using beefed-up powers given to it last year.

“Even if ASADA obtained information unlawfully in the course of the joint investigation (which is denied), the grant of relief should be refused on discretionary grounds because ASADA could lawfully obtain all of the exact same information (again) by the issue of disclosure notices ... and then issue fresh show-cause notices to the players,” ASADA said in documents lodged on Friday.

ASADA will admit its decision to issue the 34 show-cause notices was heavily reliant on information provided by the AFL.

“The Respondent (ASADA) admits that the Respondent’s decision to issue the Notices was based substantially upon information provided by the AFL to ASADA in the course of the joint investigation,” ASADA said.

ASADA also asserts for the first time that the joint investigation with the AFL was part of its wider probe into Essendon.

The anti-doping agency revealed it had moved to investigate Essendon before joining forces with the AFL on February 5 last year.

“ASADA had decided to conduct ASADA’s Investigation before, and independently of, entry into the agreement,” the agency said.

“ASADA admits that in early February 2013 ASADA and the AFL agreed that each would conduct, each with the aid of the other, what both ASADA and the AFL thereafter described, from time to time, as a ‘joint investigation’.

“ASADA’s participation in the ‘joint investigation’ comprised part of an investigation carried out by ASADA under the ACT and NAD Scheme (ASADA’s Investigation).”

ASADA said it will argue before Justice John Middleton that Essendon “requested” and “thereafter expressed support” for a joint investigation.

The agency also disputes that the interim report provided to the AFL last August was in breach of confidentiality laws and alludes to the governance failings of the club and key officials.

“The Applicant (Essendon), the AFL, followers of the AFL competition, and the public at large are all aware of the existence of very serious issues surrounding adherence to anti-doping rules ... in circumstances where the Applicant brought the game into disrepute by failing to implement proper governance and accountability mechanisms,” ASADA states.

Of Hird, ASADA said: “There is, therefore, a compelling public interest against the grant of relief.”

The AFL will not say whether it sought legal advice before establishing the joint investigation.

Asked about its validity earlier this month, new AFL chief executive Gillon McLachlan said: “That will be decided by the Federal Court and that has sort of got nothing to do with us.”

http://www.foxsports.com.au/afl/afl-premiership/asada-says-it-will-pursue-alleged-34-essendon-players-even-if-investigation-declared-unlawful/story-e6frf3e3-1226986128398

[one-eyed]

I thought the story was that only Essendon said that there were no records kept? 

 I thought that Dank always claimed to have kept records, he just refused to disclose them?

You may be right Muscles about what Dank has claimed. However, if they exist then why won't Dank come forward and reveal them?

Fair point, OE.  Dank has always claimed to have records that would prove the supplements program to be WADA compliant.  He would have been able to kill this investigation stone dead if he revealed them. 

So that would seem to raise four possibilities;

1.  He has the records and they don't contain any banned compounds, but by not revealing them he believes he may gain some kind of benefit that would more than compensate him for the damage to his reputation.
2.  He has the records and they are damning, but by not revealing them he believes he may avoid any adverse consequences stemming from the contents of the records.
3.  He's bluffing and doesn't have any records, but by claiming that they do exist, he believes he may avoid adverse consequences or gain some sort of advantage.
4.  He has the records and is seriously upset about the way he's been treated by all parties involved in the situation and simply won't cooperate with any of the parties.

Maybe it'll all become clear in the fullness of time, or maybe it won't.

True Muscles. No doubt Dank and Essendon will continue to spin, deflect, delay and keep things as murky as possible. Like Smokey, I vote for your point (3) as everytime Dank has had the opportunity to back up his claims, he wimps out of it. He did it again when interviewed by Graham Cornes in Adelaide recently.


Dank could have answered the one burning question
  Jon Pierik
    The Age
    July 9, 2014

If there was one question Stephen Dank could have answered during his radio interview with friend and former Adelaide Crows coach Graham Cornes on Tuesday night, it was this.

Dank was asked whether he could detail what peptides had been given to the Essendon players during the club's 2011-12 supplements program. He was asked specifically about Thymosin beta 4, the banned drug the Australian Sports Anti-Doping Authority alleges was given to the 34 former and current players.

Dank's response: "Obviously, I can't because of the impending court action."

Well, that's not right. According to lawyers consulted by Fairfax Media on Wednesday, if Dank knew categorically what had been administered, and those drugs were not prohibited, then there was nothing which could "prevent or inhibit" him clearing up the question those interested in this saga want to know.

http://www.theage.com.au/afl/afl-news/dank-could-have-answered-the-one-burning-question-20140709-zt1e7.html