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

[dee-luded 2,959]

The point about all of this is, no-one on here knows the facts. The kangaroo court which can be the AFL, are often light on facts and heavy on hype. I could equally say this could also see the demise of a CEO who heads up the game.

that may well be but footy is the peoples game & we are not fools.

we know when we like the behaviour of some, or NOT, & no court room will say anything about that ability...

..... the game has been treated shabbily by this occurrence legal or not... its not how we want it to be done.

[mauriesy 7,378]

What do you want? Seems many on here know the legal process better than me. I guess I should get another job. I have said plenty about the legal process above. If people don't understand that we are not simply "guns for hire" then so be it.

Has Hird been successful in the injunction yet?

[dee-luded 2,959]

What do you want? Seems many on here know the legal process better than me. I guess I should get another job. I have said plenty about the legal process above. If people don't understand that we are not simply "guns for hire" then so be it.

this is above legal process & law

this is in the peoples court. & we have enough knowledge now to see fairly close up,,, enough to gauge that things 'not good' have been done out of selfishness.

[iv'a worn smith 1,979]

this is above legal process & law

this is in the peoples court. & we have enough knowledge now to see fairly close up,,, enough to gauge that things 'not good' have been done out of selfishness

that may well be but footy is the peoples game & we are not fools.

we know when we like the behaviour of some, or NOT, & no court room will say anything about that ability...

..... the game has been treated shabbily by this occurrence legal or not... its not how we want it to be done.

And that may be also true, but the day natural justice is thrown out for the sake of populist twaddle, will be a sad day indeed. As for a "peoples' game", if you wish to live in the last century then yes. Today it is a multi billion dollar business and accordingly, the stakes are very high.

[old dee 23,928]

http://theconversation.com/frankenfooty-essendons-mixed-bag-of-supplements-17323

I just love the following last two lines

"Dr Frankenstein created a beast of horrifying power; Essendon just created a shambles."

[mauriesy 7,378]

I suspect an injunction will be sought and we will not be much the wiser until the courts come back from recess is 2014.

The injunction has to be granted. If it is, it will just stop the AFL commission hearing the charges against Hird until the matter comes before the Supreme Court. It has nothing to do with disproving Essendon's appalling failure of governance.

Delay until the 2013 season is over is just what Hird wants.

[old dee 23,928]

And that may be also true, but the day natural justice is thrown out for the sake of populist twaddle, will be a sad day indeed. As for a "peoples' game", if you wish to live in the last century then yes. Today it is a multi billion dollar business and accordingly, the stakes are very high.

In a football sense iv'a yes I would

[iv'a worn smith 1,979]

The injunction has to be granted. If it is, it will just stop the AFL commission hearing the charges against Hird until the matter comes before the Supreme Court. It has nothing to do with Essendon's appalling failure of governance.

Delay until the 2013 season is over is just what Hird wants.

Yes............. and ................

[iv'a worn smith 1,979]

In a football sense iv'a yes I would

I have some sympathy for that position.

[dees189227 12,441]

How do you reckon Mr little felt walking into the presidents meeting with all the presidents eye balling him?

[dee-luded 2,959]

And that may be also true, but the day natural justice is thrown out for the sake of populist twaddle, will be a sad day indeed. As for a "peoples' game", if you wish to live in the last century then yes. Today it is a multi billion dollar business and accordingly, the stakes are very high.

the way the law works, Re who can afford which lawyer, & team of,,,,, its an ASS.

it just keep s kicking itself in its rear, over & over again... How is it we didn't outlaw asbestos use back in the 1960's ???

law is shallow, honesty is the only thing & deceit is the work of the dark side of life... disillusionment are the results of what your prescribing... health isn't one of them.

Edited August 22, 2013 by dee-luded

[jazza 1,323]

How do you reckon Mr little felt walking into the presidents meeting with all the presidents eye balling him?

well for a start hes only 5"1"

so theres no eyeballing

[dee-luded 2,959]

In a football sense iv'a yes I would

in the late 1900's,,,, in all senses I Would... in a flash

the late 70's early 80's were the best, prior to the passing of Halley's.

[old dee 23,928]

How do you reckon Mr little felt walking into the presidents meeting with all the presidents eye balling him?

Believe me Mr. Little is used to banging heads with people he has the hide of a Rhino, a few AFL presidents will not worry him.

Compare him to the MFC ex.

He eats guys like that for breakfast.

[mauriesy 7,378]

Yes............. and ................

They have to be granted an interim injunction. Then they have to be granted an injunction. Then, if that's successful, the AFL has to determine how the charges will be determined if it isn't by a commission hearing. Then the charges have to be decided. A 'retired Supreme Court judge' might be less favourable to them than the AFL commission.

Essendon's position is not resolved for another twelve months. They may well dig a deeper hole for themselves. The other 17 clubs get more annoyed about the lack of resolution, more and more facts come out in the media (including possibly Dank's records), the parents, the players and the public get more angry. If they lose in the end, they're worse off. It's a huge risk to take.

Is it what they really want? More importantly, is it good for the game?

[old dee 23,928]

in the late 1900's,,,, in all senses I Would... in a flash

the late 70's early 80's were the best, prior to the passing of Halley's.

What about the 50's and 60's?

[iv'a worn smith 1,979]

the way the law works, Re who can afford which lawyer, & team of,,,,, its an ASS.

it just keep s kicking itself in its rear, over & over again... How is it we didn't outlaw asbestos use back in the 1960's ???

law is shallow, honesty is the only thing & deceit is the work of the dark side of life... disillusionment are the results of what your prescribing... health isn't one of them.

Of course, that is precisely what I studied at Law School God give me strength.

[sue 9,151]

They have to be granted an interim injunction. Then they have to be granted an injunction. Then, if that's successful, the AFL has to determine how the charges will be determined if it isn't by a commission hearing. Then the charges have to be decided. A 'retired Supreme Court judge' might be less favourable to them than the AFL commission.

Essendon's position is not resolved for another twelve months. They may well dig a deeper hole for themselves. The other 17 clubs get more annoyed about the lack of resolution, more and more facts come out in the media (including possibly Dank's records), the parents, the players and the public get more angry. If they lose in the end, they're worse off. It's a huge risk to take.

Is it what they really want? More importantly, is it good for the game?

Spot on. At some point the club may just have to decide to jettison Hird.

The amazing thing in his injunction is him saying the AFL is biased when at the same time saying the AFL tipped them off to go public before ASADA did. That is the action of a body trying to help Essendon. Of course the real reason to bring it up is to put AD et al in the poo. Which is fine by me if they did breach confidentiality - though clearly their motivation was trying to preserve the reputation of the AFL.

[biggestred 5,195]

the AFL have released the allegations against Essendon and the Hird Reich. AD clearly stated they were allegations.

they have given Essendon time to prepare a response to the commission. AD was also very clear on this.

I see no denial of justice here, it seems to me that the AFL are following the process correctly every step of the way.

The spin and deflections coming from the Four Aminos are disgraceful.

Greg Williams went to court to overturn a ban the tribunal had placed. HE DID THIS AFTER THE HEARING.

How can the Hird Reich claim a denial of natural justice before they have responded to the commission?

[old dee 23,928]

Spot on. At some point the club may just have to decide to jettison Hird.

The amazing thing in his injunction is him saying the AFL is biased when at the same time saying the AFL tipped them off to go public before ASADA did. That is the action of a body trying to help Essendon. Of course the real reason to bring it up is to put AD et al in the poo. Which is fine by me if they did breach confidentiality - though clearly their motivation was trying to preserve the reputation of the AFL.

The thing that still amazes me is the essendon mob seem to completely miss ie. choice to

Is that it was not the AFL that went down their supplements path.

It was not the AFL that ran it in a shambolic way.

It was not the AFL that hired people of doubtful quality with no checks.

It was not the AFL that had to admit in February 2013 months after the program finished that they had no idea what there players were given.

It is not the AFL that said in that same meeting that as the Coach I accept full responsibility for what went on in 2012.

It is not the AFL that is under investigation by ASADA and the ACC.

Give me a break essendon you screwed up in a major way.

Now stand up and take what is due.

[Pennant St Dee 13,327]

17 team comp very shortly with 2 byes

all the presidents men will get the job done

Essendon will be left to sort out there court dates with players and their QCs

Are you in the real world or just naive, Dees, Dogs, Power, North, Blues, GWS, Lions, Saints & Suns are going to jeopardise their AFL funding which is bankrolled by the television rights.

If there is not 9 games a week the contract is null & void.

It is not that simple hence the need for negotiation and a protracted process

[Bossdog 2,002]

What do you want? Seems many on here know the legal process better than me. I guess I should get another job. I have said plenty about the legal process above. If people don't understand that we are not simply "guns for hire" then so be it.

No disrespect iva.........But there are people who do not have the money to engage high profile QC's.......There have been many a shady character that has been wealthy enough to hire the best QC's in the land.....The QC will then argue the merits of his clients case to the best of his ability Wether they truly believe their client is right or wrong is immaterial

They are paid to put the best case before the court are they not??????

[PJ_12345 1,098]

No disrespect iva.........But there are people who do not have the money to engage high profile QC's.......There have been many a shady character that has been wealthy enough to hire the best QC's in the land.....The QC will then argue the merits of his clients case to the best of his ability Wether they truly believe their client is right or wrong is immaterial

They are paid to put the best case before the court are they not??????

You're right - very shady

$450 for jousting sticks AOD? Tell him he's dreamin!

Edited August 22, 2013 by PJ_12345

[dee-luded 2,959]

They have to be granted an interim injunction. Then they have to be granted an injunction. Then, if that's successful, the AFL has to determine how the charges will be determined if it isn't by a commission hearing. Then the charges have to be decided. A 'retired Supreme Court judge' might be less favourable to them than the AFL commission.

Essendon's position is not resolved for another twelve months. They may well dig a deeper hole for themselves. The other 17 clubs get more annoyed about the lack of resolution, more and more facts come out in the media (including possibly Dank's records), the parents, the players and the public get more angry. If they lose in the end, they're worse off. It's a huge risk to take.

Is it what they really want? More importantly, is it good for the game?

agree, I sense their possible penalties will get bigger by the second.

hird is going to hurt his own club, again.

[Sir Why You Little 37,242]

Can someone show me where Vlad has a conflict of interest?

That is a Hird Lie surely