Bombers scandal: charged, <redacted> and <infracted>

[beelzebub 22,271]

Starker was always blamed !!

[beelzebub 22,271]

If they did keep records they are stuffed.

If they didn't keep records they are more stuffed.

Im not sure even records are required so much. Maybe this is a bit of a furphy. Its the acquisition or ordering of use of banned substances thats the nail. How much , how often... as compared to just did...even once

[jnrmac 19,252]

Not sure I would trust Dank too much either.

Notwithstanding his right to save his own bacon, he could have protected the EFC players and scuttled the integrity of ASADA and it's investigation if he had even carefully released the proof/evidence that establishes that ASADA had said it was legal.

At the very least he has flown so close to the wind at three clubs in what he has done that I would not be placing much reserve on his integrity or judgment.

And given EFC dismissed and demonised him I don't blame for not trusting the Club at all.

The scenario for Dank is this as I see it. Co-operate with ASADA and the AFL . If you don't like the outcome go to court.

Don't co-operate. Wait until they force you to go to court by making accusations. Defend those accusations in court.

The latter has many more benefits for Mr Dank. He only has to respond to information they have and 'charge' him with. If he fesses everything in the beginning and lifts up his skirt he has nowhere to hide should they conconct an outcome for him. Probably the smart option to take the latter.

A bit like the tax department on a fishing expedition. Fess up early and let them have their way with you or wait til they charge you with some misdemeanour based on incomplete information. Defend it with the additional information you possess and bingo - they can't try you twice for the same crime as it were.

[jnrmac 19,252]

Im not sure even records are required so much. Maybe this is a bit of a furphy. Its the acquisition or ordering of use of banned substances thats the nail. How much , how often... as compared to just did...even once

Yeah but... the difference with Wade lees is that he ordered the substance. Therefore he took the rap. If Dank ordered the substance its hard to prove what the individual players took. The players might get off...

[daisycutter 28,661]

The scenario for Dank is this as I see it. Co-operate with ASADA and the AFL . If you don't like the outcome go to court.

Don't co-operate. Wait until they force you to go to court by making accusations. Defend those accusations in court.

The latter has many more benefits for Mr Dank. He only has to respond to information they have and 'charge' him with. If he fesses everything in the beginning and lifts up his skirt he has nowhere to hide should they conconct an outcome for him. Probably the smart option to take the latter.

A bit like the tax department on a fishing expedition. Fess up early and let them have their way with you or wait til they charge you with some misdemeanour based on incomplete information. Defend it with the additional information you possess and bingo - they can't try you twice for the same crime as it were.

good luck with the tax office.......missing records don't wash........guilty until proven innocent

[beelzebub 22,271]

Danks is no bunny...he waits to see what he actually has to fight.. He's vermin, but a fox none the less.

Still...you can catch and kill foxes if you know your stuff

[rumpole 480]

Danks has said he wont speak to ASADA or EFC because he does not trust them with material he believes will exonerate him.

He said he will wait to be called as a witness in a court and he will then show he has proof of drugs, dosages, times and players.

He said he has proof the injected drugs were legal at the time.

Im not agreeing or disputing these "facts" but I dont trust EFC to do the right thing for anyone.

Now I wouldnt trust ASADA after all this time either.

Sorry if Im coming off a long lead and preaching to the choir but I havent read everything in this thread.

It's indeed a pity that you haven't read more of this thread because it might help you understand why most wouldn't trust Dank. But if you think about it, the very story about him refusing to come forward with proof that the injected drugs were legal (he's apparently also signed a statutory declaration saying he has no records) until he could do so in court is exactly why many don't just not trust him but also hold him in complete contempt.

Here is a man who claims the program that he and Hird oversaw at Essendon was completely above board and has proof to back it up has done nothing to calm the distress and suffering of the players affected and their families. Remember, these are the young men who were placed in his professional care and who has tossed them and their club under a bus. If he's telling the truth about the injections being legal then he owes them a professional duty to disclose what he caused to be injected into their bodies.

Trust this man?

Don't make me laugh!!!

[Damo 3,012]

It's indeed a pity that you haven't read more of this thread because it might help you understand why most wouldn't trust Dank.

Trust this man?

Don't make me laugh!!!

I thought I made it clear I didnt trust him, merely that I wouldnt trust ASADA or EFC.

Buffoon

[dee-luded 2,958]

That is my reading of the situation too.

We are witnessing an organised, planned distraction. These people are not fools, they are dishonest narcissistic self righteous cheats. Make no mistake they are focused on getting the best outcome for the Hirds and they obviously don't care about anyone else. The EFC the players, AD the AFL, David Evans , Little can all go to hell so long as they get the big payout. This is true evil at work, and we are only seeing the tip of the iceberg.

I think the Hurds & their legal eagle know that Hurd won't be allowed to coach again within the AFL, & so they are making lots of noise to force a payed out sacking of contract.

essendon will sit on hands whilst more & more "noise" washes over this season, until the AFL agree to cop the fee for the 2 yr payout. the turdid team know what they are doing, & hurd went for his eagle for a reason.

but IMO using the wife to make the noise whilst james is O/S is another pathetic effort in the deliberate exercise of footy embarrassment.

I feel sure that come the end of season, bomba will still be in the hotseat on gamedays, & 'james' can buy himself his own lawn mowing business from a popular local franchise, after his 3 paid years, all for 1Yr of schooling overseas.

I think essendon know now that hurd cannot coach next year & maybe hurd has been told? the bummers will sit on hands until the AFL come to the party with re$cue dollar$...

Edited March 25, 2014 by dee-luded

[beelzebub 22,271]

can we not just leave the Hirds in France....works for me

[Red and Bluebeard 2,047]

can we not just leave the Hirds in France....works for me

Didn't realise you hated France so much, BB :-)

[Rhino Richards 1,467]

Im not sure even records are required so much. Maybe this is a bit of a furphy. Its the acquisition or ordering of use of banned substances thats the nail. How much , how often... as compared to just did...even once

Then how does that incriminate the players who did not directly acquire or order the substances. The club did.

So the club ordered/acquired substances, how do we know who consumed them? Ah yes the records.....

[Rhino Richards 1,467]

The scenario for Dank is this as I see it. Co-operate with ASADA and the AFL . If you don't like the outcome go to court.

Don't co-operate. Wait until they force you to go to court by making accusations. Defend those accusations in court.

The latter has many more benefits for Mr Dank. He only has to respond to information they have and 'charge' him with. If he fesses everything in the beginning and lifts up his skirt he has nowhere to hide should they conconct an outcome for him. Probably the smart option to take the latter.

A bit like the tax department on a fishing expedition. Fess up early and let them have their way with you or wait til they charge you with some misdemeanour based on incomplete information. Defend it with the additional information you possess and bingo - they can't try you twice for the same crime as it were.

Danks is up against potential charges from ASADA, ACC, potentially Workcover and possibly others depending on the fallout. The potential violations will probably differ based on the statute determined that's breached.

His career in reputable sport is finished, his name is tarred for good. He has not worked in a professional reputable sporting body for at least two years.

The guy is on an ultimate self survival story who in his self protection mode owes nothing to no one.

And if he goes, it will be in Court and he probably plans to take all and sundry with him.

And your analogy with the Tax office is misguided and Danks would not be wise to follow that line.

[rumpole 480]

I thought I made it clear I didnt trust him, merely that I wouldnt trust ASADA or EFC.

Buffoon

In the first place, nothing in the quoted caption makes that clear at all.

Secondly, your post related to trusting EFC or ASADA but stated you were neither "agreeing nor disputing" his position.

Thirdly, I pointed out some good reasons to dispute his position and why many don't trust Dank in this saga.

Fourthly, you haven't come up with any rebuttal at all but instead chose to resort to insult.

So who's the real buffoon?

[Whispering_Jack 28,028]

There's a definitive piece on Stephen Dank and whether he can be trusted. It's this interview by Baker and McKenzie of Fairfax which has been covered here before but is worth the revisit - The science of Stephen Dank.

I understand that there's a second part to this interview which has, for legal reasons, never been published.

It remains to be seen whether the ASADA investigation has been able to tie the use of the substances to individual players and that is the question that lies at the heart of why this has taken so long to reach a conclusion. My guess is that this has a lot to do why Judge Downes was appointed to oversee the end game and why the revelation of late last month that ASADA now has access to the ACC records was significant.

All this is why the James and Tania Hird story that may or may not unfold today is merely a sideshow to what is becoming a seemingly never ending story.

[jabberwocky 2,301]

Dank

"But at the end of the day, right, if we have to wait for an absolute blueprint piece of scientific literature on everything that is used in exercise we would end up using nothing."

That statement alone seems to underpin the philosophy behind the Essendon program.

[Sir Why You Little 34,753]

Dank

"But at the end of the day, right, if we have to wait for an absolute blueprint piece of scientific literature on everything that is used in exercise we would end up using nothing."

That statement alone seems to underpin the philosophy behind the Essendon program.

And that is exactly why you should wait for absolute proof Mr. Dank.

You are playing with young athletes lives here not chess pieces

"Get me the good stuff we are playing Carlton this week" Hird knew all this and he is still throwing grenades.

Just incredible.

[LooseLou 20]

BT on 3AW reported that Dank once again claimed that the players would get off and that he would only present evidence in court. To me there is a logical reason for this. In court the burden of proof is on the accuser and the defendant only has to create reasonable doubt. Under an infraction notice from ASADA the accused has to prove (unequivocally?) prove their innocence. Dank stands a better chance in a court of law than he does at ASADA.

[Rhino Richards 1,467]

Can ASADA issue infraction notices on Danks? I would have thought so. If so I would have thoight he would be black balled and banned from any WADA compliant sporting body in the world. No Court needed there.

If the ACCs interest in Danks is in the importation and distribution of banned substances then he has an interesting battle on his had if ASADA has outlawed him.

[Ted Lasso 17,033]

Jobe Watson admitting on the footy show he took AO6 should mean he will certainly get an infraction notice correct?

i thought a confession or information from a reliable source of wrongdoing was enough.

[Rhino Richards 1,467]

I had a flu shot on Monday.

At least I thought what the nurse gave me was a flu shot.

Come to think of it, I dont know if it was a flu shot.

I am not a GP or a scientist so I would not know what is in the flu shot or what should be the proper ingredients in a flu shot.

I have placed my faith in the medical professionals that provided me with the flu shot.

At this point in the absence of the medical records documenting the work flu shot program, I believe that I had a flu shot but cant prove it.

[jazza 1,323]

I thought I made it clear I didnt trust him, merely that I wouldnt trust ASADA or EFC.

Buffoon

just curious why dont you trust asada.

what have they done to make you distrust them??

[Damo 3,012]

I did trust ASADA but as time goes on, I dont understand why they cant/dont announce anything.

Its just the passage of time that is becoming suspicious to me.

If I was Dank (and I dont want to assume his guilt) I think he has been smart in waiting for the notice to appear in court as LooseLou above has stated.

[jazza 1,323]

I did trust ASADA but as time goes on, I dont understand why they cant/dont announce anything.

Its just the passage of time that is becoming suspicious to me.

If I was Dank (and I dont want to assume his guilt) I think he has been smart in waiting for the notice to appear in court as LooseLou above has stated.

i think the problem asada have is a lot of information presented to the ACC has been tabled before a federal court judge.

so asada has to present evidence that cant be disputed and taken to court,hence the appointment of a ex judge to their board.

just on jobes testimony and the named players saying they "thought" they took these peds is enough to convict.

its going to happen ,but when seems to be everybodies question.

patience grasshopper,the hammer will fall.

asada/wada wont be negligent with their investigation.

Edited March 26, 2014 by jazza

[jabberwocky 2,301]

I had a flu shot on Monday.

At least I thought what the nurse gave me was a flu shot.

Come to think of it, I dont know if it was a flu shot.

I am not a GP or a scientist so I would not know what is in the flu shot or what should be the proper ingredients in a flu shot.

I have placed my faith in the medical professionals that provided me with the flu shot.

At this point in the absence of the medical records documenting the work flu shot program, I believe that I had a flu shot but cant prove it.

I'm sure that your medical records will accurately reflect what you trained health professional has treated you with.