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

[Redleg 38,028]

Even IF AD had actually 'forewarned' Essendon, I don't understand why Tania Hird is complaining about something that was to their advantage

She is not complaining about that per se, she is complaining because AD has denied it, ipso facto he is calling the Hird version incorrect, to state it as mildly as I can.

[Redleg 38,028]

Make me glad the Mclardy was able to get us out of the tanking investigation relativley unscathed. This club owes cuddles a fair bit I recon.

Agree.

[ManDee 7,093]

She is not complaining about that per se, she is complaining because AD has denied it, ipso facto he is calling the Hird version incorrect, to state it as mildly as I can.

And that is some form of defence?

Andrew told us to fess up. So now we are not guilty right?

If AD said anything it was to help EFC, now the Hirds s41t in their faces.

They have no scruples the Hirds. Sack him and move on.

[Sir Why You Little 34,908]

I have always believed the Golden Boy is guilty. What i do not understand is why he has attacked the AFL so viciously.

If he knew his "lawyer"wife was going to speak on the national broadcaster, why would he sanction it?

He got a cool $mill out of his club with an assured return contract. I do not agree with it, but he got it.

Why with that money banked would you not then STFU...?

The lawyer wife must be very average at her proffession.

"It just don't add up"

Edited March 21, 2014 by why you little

[Whispering_Jack 28,092]

So am I right in saying:

1. If the players genuinely didn't believe they were taking banned drugs but did they're gone. Yes if it's proved to the reasonable satisfaction of the panel that the drugs they took were banned.

2. If a rogue sports scientist injects them with a banned substance when they are told they are getting something else they're gone.Yes if it's proved to the reasonable satisfaction of the panel that the drugs they took were banned.

That all the Essendon players will get infraction notices because presumably they all received the same drugs, or there is a reasonable probability they received banned drugs. Yes if it's proved to the reasonable satisfaction of the panel that they took drugs that were banned.

I'm confused. I thought the so called 14 were at risk because they thought they were taking AOD 9604 and it was banned. If the others didn't know they were taking banned substances then surely under the "unconscious" rule they would be gone as well (assuming they were conscious at the time). Yes, you're confused but so are many others and some of the seeds of that confusion are being deliberately sown by those with a vested interest in achieving a favourable outcome for themselves and others. The difference between being conscious and unconscious goes to the issue of consent - if the players were conscious when they signed the waivers and conscious when they ingested the drugs, don't you think that's different to the case of the unconscious athlete who was operated on in that state and later failed a drug test? Also, I don't know what substance the so called 14 were at risk for taking or the exact circumstances. My guess is that they've admitted to taking TB4 and/or AOD 9604 and are in trouble.

[old dee 22,982]

The wife has just finished the career of James.

Why has she spoken?

It is just bizzare!!

Forest and trees wyl

[What 18,810]

I have always believed the Golden Boy is guilty. What i do not understand is why he has attacked the AFL so viciously.

If he knew his "lawyer"wife was going to speak on the national broadcaster, why would he sanction it?

He got a cool $mill out of his club with an assured return contract. I do not agree with it, but he got it.

Why with that money banked would you not then STFU...?

The lawyer wife must be very average at her proffession.

"It just don't add up"

because they know hes about to be smashed by ASADA

and the players are getting infractions

Zero chance he ever works in the AFL again or any other sport

[daisycutter 28,684]

well wyl, it will all be irrelevant if asada cite him

[Redleg 38,028]

because they know hes about to be smashed by ASADA

Don't think Hird will get a Notice.

[Cards13 9,117]

He knew, told her to wait until he was out of the country.

Plausible deniability.

Haven't heard from the Hird have we. He hasn't come out to admonish her or distance himself from her comments. He knows what was said. Thick as thieves those...[censored].

Remember this is not about James:

"As I said, this is me wanting to say something, this actually has nothing to do with him."

Read more: http://www.theage.com.au/afl/afl-news/james-hirds-future-under-a-cloud-20140321-hvl0s.html#ixzz2wYyrBWRD

[Sir Why You Little 34,908]

well wyl, it will all be irrelevant if asada cite him

yes i know. But why take down his club and the AFL too. Vlad was an ally.

It is trully bizarre this interview from last night.

Attacking Dank or ASADA makes sense.

This doesn't!!!!

[Bedraggled Dee 336]

So am I right in saying:

1. If the players genuinely didn't believe they were taking banned drugs but did they're gone.

2. If a rogue sports scientist injects them with a banned substance when they are told they are getting something else they're gone.

That all the Essendon players will get infraction notices because presumably they all received the same drugs, or there is a reasonable probability they received banned drugs.

I'm confused. I thought the so called 14 were at risk because they thought they were taking AOD 9604 and it was banned. If the others didn't know they were taking banned substances then surely under the "unconscious" rule they would be gone as well (assuming they were conscious at the time).

From my readng of the code

Point 1. Yep, they are gone if it can be shown to the satisfaction of the panel they took banned substances regardless of the absence of a positive test.

Point 2. Yep they are gone. The responsbility is placed on the athelete. It is written that way for a very good reason.

I dont believe that everyone was given or can be shown to have taken the same substances so therefore any infractions will be specific to individuals and based on the available evidence. AOD is banned and was banned during 2012 but from what I have read I dont believe that any of the breaches in Danks show cause letter refer to the use of AOD. I cant prove it but my opinion (which is not really worth much) is that use of AOD wont be pursued. the infractions will come to those players where evidence exists they used Hexaralin or Thymonsin Beta 4 which unlike AOD are on the banned lists even if the players were not given specific details of what they were receiving.

[daisycutter 28,684]

yes i know. But why take down his club and the AFL too. Vlad was an ally.

It is trully bizarre this interview from last night.

Attacking Dank or ASADA makes sense.

This doesn't!!!!

i know, truly bizzare and only serves to alienate more people

[Sir Why You Little 34,908]

i know, truly bizzare and only serves to alienate more people

hey. Let them burn. But Mrs H. is a lawyer. She too would know the consequences surely.

WJ or Redleg why would the wife take this course. Surely it will put her cred at risk to?

Maybe its already fugged....

Great mini series coming up.

[Bitter but optimistic 21,556]

i know, truly bizzare and only serves to alienate more people

Yep, I've jumped off the James Hird bandwagon now.

[Slartibartfast 16,020]

My guess is that they've admitted to taking TB4 and/or AOD 9604 and are in trouble.

So if the 14 "go" and the rest don't on the basis that they admitted to taking those drugs and the others didn't why on earth didn't they shut up?

the infractions will come to those players where evidence exists they used Hexaralin or Thymonsin Beta 4 which unlike AOD are on the banned lists even if the players were not given specific details of what they were receiving.

How will they know which players were given those drugs if there are no records?

Let's hope this soap opera finishes quickly and disappears.

don't you think that's different to the case of the unconscious athlete who was operated on in that state and later failed a drug test?

Yes I do. I'm not suggesting there aren't "shades" in all of this. But I do think that my example of the doc putting some AS in a pain killer without telling the player is different again and shouldn't lead to a banned athlete. Under these rules it does.

It's why I think the rules are plain wrong. Saad took an energy drink. Absolutely dumb and finished his career. Seems to me this punishment is inappropriate.

[Lucifers Hero 37,323]

hey. Let them burn. But Mrs H. is a lawyer. She too would know the consequences surely.

WJ or Redleg why would the wife take this course. Surely it will put her cred at risk to?

Maybe its already fugged....

Great mini series coming up.

Maybe they are angling for Hird to be sacked and they can pocket another $2m and maybe get compensation for breach of contract (ie the coaching role for 2015/16). Let's face it he is close to being 'untouchable'. The Hirds aren't stupid but they sure are cunning and have proven they will burn all and sundry.

We can only hope the old adage about '...give them enough rope and....' applies.

[Tatu 416]

I am staggered that Mrs Hird can dump on AD for making that (alleged) warning call to Essendon at great risk to himself of criminal prosecution. With friends like her who needs enemies.

James Hird isn't the only [alleged] criminal in this case..... Funny how bomber Thompson's involvement here has been push aside? Pretty sure most involved were at Geelong with him, at some point? Also the warning call from AD reeks of full blown corruption... How did the league know to call the bombers? What else does the league allow to go on at other clubs(other elite clubs)? Are AFL matches fixed? For the sole purpose of making money? We know they fix the fixture, why wouldn't they fix the matches too? It would be simple for them... Turn a blind eye to dirty rich clubs, force the hand of umpire's and pay off the smaller clubs with hand outs...easy...

I believe the only reason we even heard about this, is because someone forgot to pay off the government....

The real victims here are the supporters.... We are the ones who pay for this [censored]... We are also the ones who have allow it to happen year in year out.... Aussie Rules is our game, not AD's or the AFL's..... IT'S OURS!!

[Sir Why You Little 34,908]

Maybe they are angling for Hird to be sacked and they can pocket another $2m and maybe get compensation for breach of contract (ie the coaching role for 2015/16). Let's face it he is close to being 'untouchable'. The Hirds aren't stupid but they sure are cunning and have proven they will burn all and sundry.

We can only hope the old adage about '...give them enough rope and....' applies.

Could be.

Makes CEO Little look like an absolute buffoon if they pull it off.

Maybe The Golden Boy went to France to find a Bunker to live in. He may need it.

[daisycutter 28,684]

Could be.

Makes CEO Little look like an absolute buffoon if they pull it off.

Maybe The Golden Boy went to France to find a Bunker to live in. He may need it.

france it still littered with great german coastal bunkers too wyl

[Sir Why You Little 34,908]

france it still littered with great german coastal bunkers too wyl

yes i know i have seen some of them bck in 84.

Hitler's last bunker in Berlin was a night club for a while. I have a mate who went. Said it was rather surreal!!

[nutbean 8,837]

Someone help me here. Have I missed something with Tania Hird.

"Andrew D told us something ( tipped us off about the investigation ) and he shouldn't have".

Biggest red herring ever ? Lag AD in for his indiscretion but that still is not the issue.

Its like Ivan Milat saying that Andrew D tipped him off that he was being investigated for murder. The issue is not whether someone disclosed what was being investigated but whether or not you are a murderer ?

Edit - not trying to suggest that Hird is a murderer but I just don't get what she was driving at ? The issue is - did they take banned substances and what was his involvement and knowledge.

Edited March 21, 2014 by nutbean

[daisycutter 28,684]

wonder how dank's little sportsman's lunch is going

[Lucifers Hero 37,323]

Could be.

Makes CEO Little look like an absolute buffoon if they pull it off.

Maybe The Golden Boy went to France to find a Bunker to live in. He may need it.

Little is in the classic 'catch-22' and am sure he rues the day he went to bat for Hird and EFC funded 'Team Hird'.

Little should have paid more attention to what Hird did to his so-called-good-friend, David Evans.

Edited March 21, 2014 by Lucifer's Hero

[Sir Why You Little 34,908]

Maybe they are angling for Hird to be sacked and they can pocket another $2m and maybe get compensation for breach of contract (ie the coaching role for 2015/16). Let's face it he is close to being 'untouchable'. The Hirds aren't stupid but they sure are cunning and have proven they will burn all and sundry.

We can only hope the old adage about '...give them enough rope and....' applies.

i would have thought Essendrugs $1 mill payout would have cleared them of anymore contractual problems. But you could be right.

He is a c..t that is now a fact.