Essendon face AFL probe/Players found Guilty by CAS

[YellowandBlackBlood]

That's only as long as they are a signatory. I just meant literally speaking. I can't see the AFL removing itself and drawing up its own code. That just wouldn't be a good look, and image how bad it would look if this happened again and they dealt with it in house, again. There would be no path of appeal for the plaintiff then either.

That's only as long as they are a signatory. I just meant literally speaking. I can't see the AFL removing itself and drawing up its own code. That just wouldn't be a good look, and image how bad it would look if this happened again and they dealt with it in house, again. There would be no path of appeal for the plaintiff then either.

The AFL actually resisted signing with WADA until the very last moment and only the threat of a loss of any government funding forced its hand.

I'd say it was for this very reason, they don't want other agencies having the power to make game changing decisions.

The AFL tribunal set the bar too high when it came to comfortable satisfaction. Gerard Whateley said they would have found Lance Armstrong innocent with their interpretation.


I now think that the players are stuffed.

Lance Armstrong confessed and even before that they had witnesses who were confessing to being involved in the same doping program and naming Armstrong as a participant.

Think about this.

You go to a pub and order light beers so you can safely drive home. It turns out that the bartender you are trusting to serve your drinks likes to lace them with vodka, but he claims it is non-alcoholic vodka. The orders for it aren't clear either way.

You weren't breathalysed on the night and there is no evidence to say that you ever consumed any vodka at all.

If the cops came around 3 years later and suspended your licence for 2 years I reckon you would be dirty.

I have hated Essendon all my life but if these players are suspended it is a disgrace.

Sorry but that is one of the poorest analogies I have ever seen about this saga.

The players went off site to receive many many injections which was very different than anything they had ever done before.  They signed confidentiality agreements which is contrary to the AFL anti-doping code too.

Go and look up rule 7.4 of the code and tell me if they fulfilled any of that before you make any other comparisons.....

[1965]

Sorry but that is one of the poorest analogies I have ever seen about this saga.

The players went off site to receive many many injections which was very different than anything they had ever done before.  They signed confidentiality agreements which is contrary to the AFL anti-doping code too.

Go and look up rule 7.4 of the code and tell me if they fulfilled any of that before you make any other comparisons.....

 

[one-eyed]

Essendon still going with the dog ate my homework excuse  .



Mark Thompson backs existence of documentation from Essendon’s 2012 supplements program

    Adam Baldwin
    FOX SPORTS
    May 14, 2015


MARK Thompson has joined Essendon coach James Hird in confirming the presence of a spreadsheet documenting the club’s controversial injection regimen.

Thompson revealed he had seen an A3 copy of an excel document detailing the injection of permitted substance Thymomodulin to players when he was an assistant coach in 2012.

Crucially, a lack of records has created mystery around what the players were injected with and remains a major reason why WADA this week elected to appeal the not-guilty verdict.

Such documentation would go some way to proving players were not administered prohibited substance Thymosin beta-4.

However, Thompson couldn’t confirm whether this document was provided to ASADA as part of the joint investigation.

“I don’t know where it was given, but I’ve seen it and I assume that they (ASADA) took all the paperwork,” Thompson told Fox Footy’s AFL360.

On Tuesday night current coach James Hird insisted the document was supplied to ASADA by then club chief Ian Robson.

Hird went on to suggest that it’s disappearance was the fault of the anti-doping body.

“It’s not Essendon who’s destroyed anything. It’s not an accusation — it’s a fact,” Hird said.

Earlier in the program co-host Gerard Whateley revealed a source, who he described as “having intimate knowledge of the investigation”, had cast doubt over the validity of the document.

“ ... The spreadsheet that is in the hands of investigators commenced in the middle of the year — the program had long been in operation by then — and it did not quantify injectables,” Whateley said.

“There was an internal email regarding Thymomodulin, which didn’t contain anything that could be regarded as a spreadsheet and that email, again, surfaced well into the year.”

“I offer that with no opinion, that’s the facts,” Whateley concluded.

http://www.foxsports.com.au/afl/afl-premiership/mark-thompson-backs-existence-of-documentation-from-essendons-2012-supplements-program/story-e6frf3e3-1227354036769?from=public_rss&utm_source=twitterfeed&utm_medium=twitter

[WilliamPowell]

Yes there was a spreadsheet, Robson confirmed that on SEN yesterday, also confirmed it had been handed to ASADA

Chip Le Grand one of the better journos whose been covering this from the get go said on SEN yesterday that no one is disputing the existence of the spreadsheet and yes ASADA have it

But the quality of information on it was next to useless, hence why it the tribunal hearing the players lawyers didn't even bother trying to discredit it so pathetic is its contents. It was another example of the Bombers poor governance and record keeping

Even Whately on 360 last night mentioned the contentd or lack there of in said spreadsheet

Nice try at diverting attention Jimmy & Bomber but all you've done is highlight yet again how incompetent the EFC was during this whole disgusting mess

[Yeahright]

That's only as long as they are a signatory. I just meant literally speaking. I can't see the AFL removing itself and drawing up its own code. That just wouldn't be a good look, and image how bad it would look if this happened again and they dealt with it in house, again. There would be no path of appeal for the plaintiff then either.

That's only as long as they are a signatory. I just meant literally speaking. I can't see the AFL removing itself and drawing up its own code. That just wouldn't be a good look, and image how bad it would look if this happened again and they dealt with it in house, again. There would be no path of appeal for the plaintiff then either.

The AFL actually resisted signing with WADA until the very last moment and only the threat of a loss of any government funding forced its hand.

I'd say it was for this very reason, they don't want other agencies having the power to make game changing decisions.

The AFL tribunal set the bar too high when it came to comfortable satisfaction. Gerard Whateley said they would have found Lance Armstrong innocent with their interpretation.


I now think that the players are stuffed.

Lance Armstrong confessed and even before that they had witnesses who were confessing to being involved in the same doping program and naming Armstrong as a participant.

Think about this.

You go to a pub and order light beers so you can safely drive home. It turns out that the bartender you are trusting to serve your drinks likes to lace them with vodka, but he claims it is non-alcoholic vodka. The orders for it aren't clear either way.

You weren't breathalysed on the night and there is no evidence to say that you ever consumed any vodka at all.

If the cops came around 3 years later and suspended your licence for 2 years I reckon you would be dirty.

I have hated Essendon all my life but if these players are suspended it is a disgrace.

I wouldn't be reaping the rewards 3 years later and making big bucks if it was vodka

[The Big Richo]

Sorry but that is one of the poorest analogies I have ever seen about this saga.

The players went off site to receive many many injections which was very different than anything they had ever done before.  They signed confidentiality agreements which is contrary to the AFL anti-doping code too.

Go and look up rule 7.4 of the code and tell me if they fulfilled any of that before you make any other comparisons.....

I work with the code every day.  All 7.4 shows is how derelict the medical officers were in their duty.

As I understand it the players signed agreements to receive the treatments, not confidentiality agreements.

Players go off-site for medical treatment all the time, for all sorts of reasons so nothing especially unusual there either.

I don't think the analogy is poor at all, the players are being charged with taking illegal substances based on the fact they were obtained by Dank. No positive tests, no witness, no confession. Being convicted of that isn't justice.

[YellowandBlackBlood]

Sorry but that is one of the poorest analogies I have ever seen about this saga.

The players went off site to receive many many injections which was very different than anything they had ever done before.  They signed confidentiality agreements which is contrary to the AFL anti-doping code too.

Go and look up rule 7.4 of the code and tell me if they fulfilled any of that before you make any other comparisons.....

I work with the code every day.  All 7.4 shows is how derelict the medical officers were in their duty.

As I understand it the players signed agreements to receive the treatments, not confidentiality agreements.

Players go off-site for medical treatment all the time, for all sorts of reasons so nothing especially unusual there either.

I don't think the analogy is poor at all, the players are being charged with taking illegal substances based on the fact they were obtained by Dank. No positive tests, no witness, no confession. Being convicted of that isn't justice.

If you work with the code then you would realise that rule 7.4 puts the responsibility fairly and squarely on the player:

Before the commencement of the AFL Competition in each year each Player must advise his Club Medical Officer in writing of all substances and medications he is taking or using or has taken or used since the last Match in which the Player participated in the previous year. The Player must promptly advise his Club Medical Officer in writing of all substances and medications he subsequently takes or uses during the AFL Competition in that year. Each Club Medical Officer must maintain and keep a written record in respect of each Player of all substances and medications so advised to him. Such records will be the property of the Club.

Didn't Bruce Reid write a letter saying that he had no idea for 3 whole months what was being injected into the players??????

The players broke the rules.  There is no doubt about that.  The only question is whether WADA can prove to a comfortable level of satisfaction that they took TB4.

Comfortable satisfaction would be:

• A strong supply chain - tick
• A signed consent form - tick
• Player testimonies that corroborate injecting frequencies with TB4 - tick
• No evidence of any other type of Thymosin getting to the club - tick
• A sports scientist convicted of many other WADA infringements - tick
• The club not keeping all records - tick

Sounds like a recipe for disaster for the players if you ask me.


Edit: You are also incorrect with the confidentiality agreements.  Dank made them sign these to protect his IP.  That has been well documented.

[The Big Richo]

Are you suggesting that clause suggests players advise the club in writing of the substances administered to them by the club?

The player responsibility clearly refers to things taken over the off-season/pre-season outside of the supervision of the club.

These guys were participating in a club run program. I'll guarantee you no player anywhere, ever, has advised the club in writing of anything that was administered via a club official. The onus is on the club to maintain those records. Which they failed to do.

Plenty of people should be whacked here but not the players.

[YellowandBlackBlood]

Are you suggesting that clause suggests players advise the club in writing of the substances administered to them by the club?

The player responsibility clearly refers to things taken over the off-season/pre-season outside of the supervision of the club.

These guys were participating in a club run program. I'll guarantee you no player anywhere, ever, has advised the club in writing of anything that was administered via a club official. The onus is on the club to maintain those records. Which they failed to do.

Plenty of people should be whacked here but not the players.

The club doctor did not know what was being given as per the letter so he still needed the players to inform him in writing of exactly what was given.
Dank was NOT an employee of the club. The club hired Applied Orthopaedic Science Pty Ltd of which Dank is a consultant. He was free to come and go as a result. The players still needed to document what was given to them by this consultant.

[Diocletian]

 Think we know now why TBR's so hot for Thompson to coach us.....

[The Big Richo]

Dank was absolutely an employee of Essendon.

He had an office at Windy Hill (I've seen it) and was employed as the club Sport Scientist.

To suggest players are negligent by not writing to inform one club official of what another club official administered them is ridiculous and naive in the mechanics of how elite sporting organisations actually operate.

[Diocletian]

Are you rfctiger74 on Big Footy?

Suck shyte to the players, hope they all cop the maximum. Ignorance is no excuse.  /discussion.

[YellowandBlackBlood]

Dank was absolutely an employee of Essendon.

He had an office at Windy Hill (I've seen it) and was employed as the club Sport Scientist.

To suggest players are negligent by not writing to inform one club official of what another club official administered them is ridiculous and naive in the mechanics of how elite sporting organisations actually operate.

That is simply not true. I know the media report it that way but it isn't true. They may have given him an office but he was not a direct employee. I know this for a fact. I know people that know him. He never lets himself be directly employed by anyone to protect himself. Unfortunately I know much more than most about this.  I knew about specific banned peptides that Dank was giving the players a year before you did and have proof that I knew.  One of my mates was one of the ASADA witnesses.

[The Big Richo]

You may find it is an error to presume what I know or don't know about all of this as well.

Dank was employed by Essendon. It isn't just the media that has reported it.

ASADA issued him with a show cause notice over Essendon, they couldn't do it at Cronulla because he operated with the model you describe there.

[Yeahright]

I knew about specific banned peptides that Dank was giving the players a year before you did and have proof that I knew. 

If even you know what banned substances they took how come ASADA don't?