If we and the Bombers are an 'island' , ill eat my hat!

Vlad you can call us on a disclosure matter which could be no more than camouflage , but l doubt if you can call us on an illegal substance matter which is 10,000,000 times more relevant.

P.S. I suspect there could be 5-6 +clubs with real issues here. (not just us) and could you be running away?

Step up to the plate son.

Premierships and browlows are at hand here.

Maybe all results past 2000 should be declared null and void.

No slur intended against the 20 year servant. I believe, and I never put it higher than that, it was the junior medico had a bit to say re re tanking.

I agree with your comments re Daff. Honourable fellow who was sorry to leave.

What proof do you have on Dr Fried? It's a serious allegation which you have not provided any evidence.

And if I were true that a junior doctor had significant evidence about tanking then it only highlights the comedy capers that implemented the strategy in the first place.

If we and the Bombers are an 'island' , ill eat my hat!

Vlad you can call us on a disclosure matter which could be no more than camouflage , but l doubt if you can call us on an illegal substance matter which is 10,000,000 times more relevant.

P.S. I suspect there could be 5-6 +clubs with real issues here. (not just us) and could you be running away?

Step up to the plate son.

Premierships and browlows are at hand here.

Maybe all results past 2000 should be declared null and void.

Vlad isn't making any judgment on illegality at MFC but by making an incorrect disclosure about the nature and status of relationships and practices in this area, the Board have embarrassingly demonstrated that they are not on top of what is happening in the Club.

As a result, how can the AFL have confidence in what is happening at MFC? In addition MFC's faux pas has now opened to the ASADA investigation and an AFL investigation.

Peter Jackson will have a mandate from the AFL to go through MFC forensically like a dose of draino.

And all you have put up in defence is fluffy hoopla and speculation in regard to other clubs.

And all you have put up in defence is fluffy hoopla and speculation in regard to other clubs.

And let's face it, a lot of what's been written here including some of what you've been telling us is also fluffy hoopla and speculation so why not wait and see what Peter Jackson uncovers before rushing to judgement?

And let's face it, a lot of what's been written here including some of what you've been telling us is also fluffy hoopla and speculation so why not wait and see what Peter Jackson uncovers before rushing to judgement?

Sorry. My comments are based on statements made by the MFC and the AFL in regard this matter. And I made no judgement on the outcomes of Jacksons brief. I can see you are not the discerning type

I can see you are not the discerning type

Not when it comes to putting up with BS but carry on regardless.

Not when it comes to putting up with BS but carry on regardless.

Need you prove your credentials further.

Vlad isn't making any judgment on illegality at MFC but by making an incorrect disclosure about the nature and status of relationships and practices in this area, the Board have embarrassingly demonstrated that they are not on top of what is happening in the Club.

As a result, how can the AFL have confidence in what is happening at MFC? In addition MFC's faux pas has now opened to the ASADA investigation and an AFL investigation.

Peter Jackson will have a mandate from the AFL to go through MFC forensically like a dose of draino.

And all you have put up in defence is fluffy hoopla and speculation in regard to other clubs.

you keep making this claim with absolutely no evidence

jackson is hired to do a job for the mfc not the afl. there is no afl takeover here

jackson's appointment does not represent any change in the normal club-afl relationship

Gee and all along I thought that we employed Mission to get our guys fit

Shows you I know nothing about running modern footy clubs

What you do is employ people to get people to who knows somebody who can enhance performance

Is that how it works ??

you keep making this claim with absolutely no evidence

jackson is hired to do a job for the mfc not the afl. there is no afl takeover here

jackson's appointment does not represent any change in the normal club-afl relationship

And climate change does not exist either.

If we and the Bombers are an 'island' , ill eat my hat!

Vlad you can call us on a disclosure matter which could be no more than camouflage , but l doubt if you can call us on an illegal substance matter which is 10,000,000 times more relevant.

P.S. I suspect there could be 5-6 +clubs with real issues here. (not just us) and could you be running away?

Step up to the plate son.

Premierships and browlows are at hand here.

Maybe all results past 2000 should be declared null and void.

This philosophy did not save us in the tanking saga.

Everyone knows numerous clubs tanked to maximise draft picks.

We were so amateur at it that we invited the sanctions.

The same looks like applying here.

Saying other clubs are up to their eye brows won't save us

And climate change does not exist either.

this is the best evidence you offer to support your supposition? pathetic

(p.s. as an aside it is interesting you refer to 'climate change' and not 'global warming')

What proof do you have on Dr Fried? It's a serious allegation which you have not provided any evidence.

And if I were true that a junior doctor had significant evidence about tanking then it only highlights the comedy capers that implemented the strategy in the first place.

Is English your second language?

I said it was a belief.

The evidence which encouraged me in that belief was a paragraph in a Caroline Wilson article.

http://www.theage.com.au/afl/afl-news/wada-declares-obesity-drug-illegal-20130423-2ibhh.html

WADA has declared that the anti-obesity drug is on the banned substances list ...

http://www.theage.com.au/afl/afl-news/wada-declares-obesity-drug-illegal-20130423-2ibhh.html

WADA has declared that the anti-obesity drug is on the banned substances list ...

Slight technicality: AOD-9604 is prohibited because it hasn't been classified as suitable for human therapeutic use. It's not actually on the banned substances list.

The end result may be virtually the same.

The evidence which encouraged me in that belief was a paragraph in a Caroline Wilson article.

An oxymoron of the highest order!

2013

Danking and Tanking and copping a spanking

this is the best evidence you offer to support your supposition? pathetic

(p.s. as an aside it is interesting you refer to 'climate change' and not 'global warming')

I have given you the evidence. Btw the Australian reported the same as the Hun and Age.

And by the way how is the MFC-AFL relationship at all normal given the way we have conducted ourselves. I don't think the AFL views much at MFC normal on or off the field.

Is English your second language?

I said it was a belief.

The evidence which encouraged me in that belief was a paragraph in a Caroline Wilson article.

Rank accusation to make based on a belief.

I have given you the evidence. Btw the Australian reported the same as the Hun and Age.

And by the way how is the MFC-AFL relationship at all normal given the way we have conducted ourselves. I don't think the AFL views much at MFC normal on or off the field.

So you admit you have no evidence.

You do realise Vlad denied this but you'd rather believe a propagated media opinion piece.

You would improve your posts if you made clearer distinctions between opinion and fact.

Sorry. My comments are based on statements made by the MFC and the AFL in regard this matter. And I made no judgement on the outcomes of Jacksons brief. I can see you are not the discerning type

"the Board have embarrassingly demonstrated that they are not on top of what is happening in the Club"... who made this statement other than yourself? That is YOUR view of things and is merely speculation on your part based purely on your disdain for the current board.

http://www.theage.com.au/afl/afl-news/wada-declares-obesity-drug-illegal-20130423-2ibhh.html

WADA has declared that the anti-obesity drug is on the banned substances list ...

Not on the list, classified by default as prohibited but the implications are the same.

This is interesting, if they can back it up:

Essendon is also believed to have received advice from anti-doping authorities last year that suggested the use of AOD-9604 was permitted.

Even the ACC report released in February (in relation to AOD-9604) states:

While these substances are not prohibited by WADA, due to a lack of long-term clinical studies on the use of these substances or their off-label use, their potential impact on the health of playersboth short and long-termis unknown.

So whilst the responsibility is on our professional coaching staff and players to be aware of the facts it is problematic IMO when such important and supposedly rigid guidelines are misunderstood particularly within the authoritative ranks. What WADA have just released clearly contradicts the ACCs interpretation as per their report.

Edit: link added http://www.crimecommission.gov.au/sites/default/files/files/organised-crime-and-drugs-in-sports-feb2013.pdf

So you admit you have no evidence.

You do realise Vlad denied this but you'd rather believe a propagated media opinion piece.

You would improve your posts if you made clearer distinctions between opinion and fact.

I think it a widely reported media matter that if its wrong both aggrieved parties should take action against the media outlets.

I would have thought its irony Daisy you commenting on opinion and fact. But we live in strange times indeed.

"the Board have embarrassingly demonstrated that they are not on top of what is happening in the Club"... who made this statement other than yourself? That is YOUR view of things and is merely speculation on your part based purely on your disdain for the current board.

hardtack, let's say they were on top of things...

Don't you think when they conducted an internal review of their sports science matters, that perhaps they may have found that Bates had dealt with Dank? And if so, they may have come forward to the AFL, and clarified the matter, rather than dismiss any dealings with Dank apart from submitting that he applied for a job, but was unsuccessful/wasn't needed...??

The size of the internal review is questionnable and the top brass are responsible for it, the findings are misleading given what has transpired and hence it is indeed embarrassing for the Board, the fans and the AFL. Despite it being a somewhat correct answer based on their "apparent knowledge" at the time, to a direct simplified question provided by the AFL.

"the Board have embarrassingly demonstrated that they are not on top of what is happening in the Club"... who made this statement other than yourself? That is YOUR view of things and is merely speculation on your part based purely on your disdain for the current board.

The Club made the admission when they reported failures in reporting protocols. How do you view it? Business as usual.......