Gutted. Was my favourite player outside the MFC.

You'd have to think he was told it was OK to make these statements. Very odd to say this stuff otherwise (though I guess we all knew it anyway).

Gutted. Was my favourite player outside the MFC.

...that said, I doubt he would have said anything unless it was carefully planned and they were certain it would not damage their position. This is all very weird to be honest.

how the hell does he still think it was ok to take?

if it isn't on the OK list its banned. simple.

No such thing as an "OK list"

Just a Prohibited List (which includes a blanket - all new drugs not passed fit for human use)

WADA prohibited list

...that said, I doubt he would have said anything unless it was carefully planned and they were certain it would not damage their position. This is all very weird to be honest.

Maybe it is a ploy to damage the investigation?

It is very strange for a player to admit to taking a banned drug and for him to just 'suit up' for the next game.

Surely, the question of whether he should be playing next week should come up?

There has to be something involved here that is a difference between ASADA & WADA.

Unless, of course, a deal's been done in the back rooms.

And if that's the case then the integrity of our game is in tatters but we already knew that.

I have always thought it would be. Most likely no findings nor action to be had til after the draft etc.. Then it'll be a slap on the wrists, naughty boys, but you werent to know

...that said, I doubt he would have said anything unless it was carefully planned and they were certain it would not damage their position. This is all very weird to be honest.

Not so weird, as predictable !!

its Essendon, not Melbourne

Of course he got advice on this disclosure and of course Essendon will get off.

That's why he's relaxed.

I am astounded that more is not being made of this. But, as usual, justice does not prevail.

He and his mates will be playing untouched for ever...

A doctor called into radio 3aw? This morning saying he wanted to give an Olympian an injection. The Olympian said I need to know it is cleared before I do anything. They rang the agency gave the name if the drug got a clearance AND a reference number in case it was later questioned. The doctor commented "it is not hard" to get right. Each athlete is told he/she is accountable. Ignorance is not an excuse no matter how harsh this may seem

You wAnt to make a bet, there clubs gone, he's admitted it because he knows it will be out in a few weeks anyway, he's just trying to limit the damage by saying he thought it was all above board, my guess is there pleading ignorance and hoping for a reduced sentence, in the end all up to WADA anyway, it doesn't matter who you are they don't hand out suspended sentences to drug cheats regardless of the fact that they thought it was legal, I actually feel sorry for them there about to become the next Justin Charles of the AFL, I'm glad we went cap in hand to the AFL before the Bombers, because there won't be much left in the coffers once this disasters sorted out.

This is obviously strategic. Take their highest profile player, captain, Brownlow winner, almost as teflon-coated as their coach and have him cough up a half-guilty plea: ‘I done it but I’m innocent cos I was told it was legal.’ Poor Jobe, what a tragedy it would be etc etc.

It looks like they’re hoping to run a case based on either (a) someone else at the club taking a massive fall for ‘misleading’ the players or (b) a concerted campaign against Dank and his emails and supposed distortions of WADA advice.

Maybe they’re too used to the AFL’s ways, where a half-guilty verdict can seem entirely logical (one club half-guilty of tanking, for example ... or was it not guilty of half-tanking?)

Whether this sort of thing will wash with ASADA is another matter, but perhaps it will. Having the players sign waivers and insisting they submit themselves to injections might be taken as sufficiently coercive to get them off.

I wouldn’t like to be in the way if Watson et al do get rubbed out and they can prove that they only took banned substances on the insistence of someone else. The loss of income/reputations would take some compensating, whether by the club or Dank or anyone else involved. Could get very costly.

Essendon might also be trying to line up a legal case against ASADA’s findings if they are adverse (well, they will be now), arguing that it’s oppressive to ban players who took stuff on the basis of wrong advice, coercion etc.

There’s a long way to go but Essendon are clearly happy to indulge in a propaganda war in the comfortable (smug) belief that nobody can do anything to them. Yet.

(Edit: I give up trying to fix the smoking demon. It's obviously a 'b') - fixed it for you - Andy

Edited June 25, 201312 yr by Demonland

with all the latest interviews and luvvy duvvy press, its obvious that the penalty and the story is being softened for the AFL

they don't like controversy about THIER game.

its definitely getting to the softening stage with jobe saying I want the truth to come out

what a load of rubbish . there was NO RESTRICTIONS on this story in march and both he and the club wouldn't talk about it for 3 weeks and then used the legal reasons excuse to avoid the subject

ITS BEGINING TO LOOK A LOT LIKE AFL SOFTENING

THERE A EXCUSES EVERY WHERE

A doctor called into radio 3aw? This morning saying he wanted to give an Olympian an injection. The Olympian said I need to know it is cleared before I do anything. They rang the agency gave the name if the drug got a clearance AND a reference number in case it was later questioned. The doctor commented "it is not hard" to get right. Each athlete is told he/she is accountable. Ignorance is not an excuse no matter how harsh this may seem

Unless your a footballer, AFL or NRL.

...that said, I doubt he would have said anything unless it was carefully planned and they were certain it would not damage their position. This is all very weird to be honest.

Spot on Nasher.

Seemed a contrived answer and would have been approved by the club, which raises the question - why would you admit that, why would the club want this to be public?

An attempt to throw off the investigation? Me thinks probably not

An attempt to periodically start to admit guilt so the AFL wont be too heavy handed like the Crows and Tippet draft tampering scandal? Me thinks probably yes

Either way you look at it one thing is for certain: there is no way the AFL can sweep this under the rug.

Ignorance isn't a defence against the law. That applies for approved or banned substances for sports.

I have a few mates involved with VFL clubs and they say to their players google everything. From headache tablets to cold and flu - do not take anything unless you have researched it because its your body and you will be accountable... FFS there is an WADA phone app for checking substances

Whats interesting about this admission is that its slightly different from some of the things we have heard.

We previously heard that they signed a consent form however they were not aware of the drugs they were being injected with. Its interesting that now Watson said he was told it was AOD9604 and that it was proved.

Now there is an onus on the players to have checked and they aren't the victims of lack of information as they have painted themselves to be.

Hearing him saying it was a new frontier and he has never taken that many injections before reminds me of that story going around that an 18 year old kid was injected more than 50 times... really sad.

Wade Lees can miss 2 years of football. The AFL can't survive at the same level without Essendon or without Essendon's best 22 for

It's sad but it will get handled different.

And lets be honest it's some what fair. Do we really believe in a strict ruling that completely screws a club and the comp when they were completely misled by a rogue force in Dank?

It is a bit like the poster on the Spencer tribunal thread said - the AFL do treat their "favourites" very differently from their "easy targets".

He, and the Bummers, will get a gentle rap over the knuckles and will move on.

Dimitriou is always on about :"the integrity of the game"; if MFC can go down $500k for being not guilty of the undefined offence of tanking, this should be worth tens on millions, but it wont of course.

The commission are as conflicted in their deliberations as are the tribunal and the MRP.

The guy has admitted to taking illegal substances; who knows how much it helped him win the Brownlow.

Edited June 25, 201312 yr by monoccular

It is actually out of the AFLs hands

WADA and ASADA administer their own justice away from the prejudices of the AFL.

AFL should of course act now that an admission has been made but just you wait - they will say "we are waiting for the investigation to be complete"

They're not waiting for Milne's investigation and court case to be complete are they??

Does anyone know what this means in relation to Trengove? Was he found to have used that substance on his foot or had he been told about it but never actually used it?

It is a bit like the poster on the Spencer tribunal thread said - the AFL do treat their "favourites" very differently from their "easy targets".

He, and the Bummers, will get a gentle rap over the knuckles and will move on.

Dimitriou is always on about :"the integrity of the game"; if MFC can go down $500k for being not guilty of the undefined offence of tanking, this should be worth tens on millions, but it wont of course.

The commission are as conflicted in their deliberations as are the tribunal and the MRP.

The guy has admitted to taking illegal substances; who knows how much it helped him win the Brownlow.

Cleary a lot of you do not take interest in cycling, the fans and the industry and so behind. ASADA will determain the penalty, not the AFL. ASADA will crack down, and crack down hard.....Essendon are goners.

Does anyone know what this means in relation to Trengove? Was he found to have used that substance on his foot or had he been told about it but never actually used it?

It's never been officially clarified but to put it simply if Essendon get off I'm very confident Melbourne will.

Essendon will still face an AFL sanction for their practices regardless of the ASADA findings. Melbourne might as well but it will be much lesser if its the case.

It is actually out of the AFLs hands

WADA and ASADA administer their own justice away from the prejudices of the AFL.

This is a common misunderstanding. Neither WADA or ASADA administer any justice. They simply determine innocence and guilt and have recommended penalties. It is up to the relevant competition, in this case the AFL to administer justice. Of course they are under pressure to accept the advice on penalties from ASADA but i have no doubt in this instance this advice will be negotiated given the stakes and the size of the AFL.

This is a common misunderstanding. Neither WADA or ASADA administer any justice. They simply determine innocence and guilt and have recommended penalties. It is up to the relevant competition, in this case the AFL to administer justice. Of course they are under pressure to accept the advice on penalties from ASADA but i have no doubt in this instance this advice will be negotiated given the stakes and the size of the AFL.

don't know whats right any more, but at post 38 ive let my feelings be known

its softening

its softening

ITS SOFTENING

get ready for retired and past people to take dive

more quotes from :inside the club:

its softening

Edited June 25, 201312 yr by jazza

This is a common misunderstanding. Neither WADA or ASADA administer any justice. They simply determine innocence and guilt and have recommended penalties. It is up to the relevant competition, in this case the AFL to administer justice. Of course they are under pressure to accept the advice on penalties from ASADA but i have no doubt in this instance this advice will be negotiated given the stakes and the size of the AFL.

The AFL will be in a very public arena when making those decisions so I think they will have to take that into account. What would be worse for them, the view that a side has cheated or that the AFL is weak when handing out punishments. I know which one of those scenarios I would take if I was Demetriou.

If the afl don't follow the asada recommendations would they be risking sponsorship, funding from government etc?

They would be the only spring body in the world to ignore a wada direction.