34 show cause notices.
they could genuinely not field a team this year at some point

As I said in my first post yesterday I don't give a flying fox about the legalities. It may well be that under the rules/laws that exist the players are in breach. That doesn't address my concerns.

I understand you've made a living in law and the principles of law are something you will respect and live by. I'm not burdened with that legacy and I see the law as an ass. So often we get inequitable results because it's not possible for the law to anticipate all situations. This is one such case.

I start from the premise that the players didn't knowingly take banned drugs. If they did then throw the book at them. They are professional footballers and are expected and trained to be professional in the way they play. They rely on professional trainers, coaches, physiotherapists, doctors, administrators and so on and so forth to ply their trade.

They have been given a cocktail of substances which can't or won't be identified. They may or may not have had their lives put at risk. They may suffer minor, major or terminal health problems as a result. Those problems may surface in the short or long term. They will unquestionably suffer the stress of wondering what those health problems may be and they will live with that stress for a very long time (hopefully). They placed their trust in people who were responsible for them. They were duped.

You are welcome to explore the legalities of the situation and follow the intellectual demands of the law. All common sense says these kids have suffered enough.

This is the silliest post I have seen on Demonland (and that IS saying something). Everyone in our society (fortunately) is subject to the rule of law whether you like it or not - unless you are a bikie, the mafia (in all its forms) or the Carlton crew (even then it catches up to you eventually.).

Whether you give a fig about it is irrelevant -.it is there and will be adhered to. Likewise with Essendon, the AFL, Hird and his posse of cronies who surround him and feed off him. They can posture all they like, tap into "the court of public opinion", get tame journalists like Robinson and Whateley as much as they like to peddle sympathetic stories about them,, but the law will get them in the end.

What we think about that makes no difference, unless we choose to change it via the ballot box, and I don't sense a movement for that at all, however much Essendon might wish it.

This gets weirder. So I thought ASADAs investigations were finished? Isn't that what they said recently?

How is it the investigation is finished and now ASADA calls Dank in?

They haven't called him in to give evidence, that part is - it seems - finished. What they've done is issue a "please explain" …

…. issuing the sports scientist with a show-cause letter in relation to his controversial supplements program … It's understood the notice alleges there were 34 anti-doping breaches by Dank during his tenure at the Bombers. Dank's legal team is now expected to respond and ASADA will then determine whether an infraction notice should be issued.

34 Essendon players were reported to have been injected with that Mexican drug and 'amino acids'

Now Dank has been given show cause notice on 34 matters

Coincidence?

A lot more coincidence is yet to come

This gets weirder. So I thought ASADAs investigations were finished? Isn't that what they said recently?

How is it the investigation is finished and now ASADA calls Dank in?

Maybe they investigated everyone else, now they have their evidence they call Dank in and he (as the architect of the program) gets grilled. Any charges will be against him and players will get infraction notices.....

Who knows..

This is not weird at all. It is logical that they would gather all the evidence they can, then call the central figure (Danks) in. This allows them to refute his accusations, and to level some at him with some credibility. It also allows them to demonstrate they have covered all the ground to undermine the likes of Robinson and whateley who continuously accuse them of not doing their job by not talking to Dank. It also shows how little they (Rrobinson & Whateley) understand how investigations work.

Now this is not the end. It is not even the beginning of the end. But it is, perhaps, the end of the beginning.

Winston Churchill said that and he was pretty smart when he wasn't drunk.

Now is the time ..... for all with non-drug-addled brains to stand in line and fess up

(Just kidding ...... just living in an alternative universe )

Here's my take and it's just a hunch and nothing more ...

The show cause notice has been issued first to minimise the potential fallout from the entire saga and to mitigate penalties against players. The mitigation of penalties is only available in limited circumstances and one of these is where the evidence given by players assists in successfully sanctioning others. If Dank (and possibly some others who set up the programme) goes down with a four year ban for his part in the Essendon/Cronulla doping scandals, then it will be open for those whose evidence assisted in achieving the sanction to claim this as a mitigating factor.

If that happens, it could allow the players involved to get their sanctions reduced from 2 years to 6 months (it might even be argued that, in a seasonal team sport, the 6 month penalty should read ½ a season, therefore say, 11 matches). If it works out that way, the players involved would have to grab it, particularly if a court settlement with Dank somehow lets out those players who took AOD9604 leaving a smaller number to take the rap for TB4.

Such an outcome could only come about by the parties reverse engineering the result - not dissimilar to the Melbourne "tanking" result involving a negotiated consensus between all of the parties involved and, let's face it, all of them including the AFL, Essendon, the players and Dank himself (probably ASADA too) have an interest in damage control. And if ASADA's involved and the arrangement is approved by Judge Downes who was appointed to sort this all out, WADA might accept a result if it sees the main perpetrator and players from the two codes (note the reports about 4 Cronulla players about to get infraction notices) being penalised.

What's in it for Dank? The heavy cost of litigation including a possible Federal Court appeal could see him end up one day in the bankruptcy court. I think he might be a lot better off if most of that money ended up in his pocket rather than in those of his lawyers and it might give him the opportunity to slink off into the night never to be seen or heard of again, an act which would do the football world and himself a big favour.

As I said, only a guess and not the outcome that does much good for the health of the players or that you would want in a perfect world (if such a world existed you wouldn't have drug cheats in the first place) but it could be good news for most of the players involved.

The problem with the players getting off is that that means Essendon gets off. The only thing that can really hurt Essendon is relating to success on the field. Everything else is just money which they have a lot of. Rubbing out a dozen players hurts them seriously, fining them $10m is merely a question of mobilization of heir supporter base, and the tapping intron their considerable corporate and political networks.

Thats not correct. Firstly the other poster has said that Little, Hird and others involved should never be be allowed in a sporting body. If there was a way to ban the real perpetrators (the officials).

And its not just about punishing the Club. Its identifying those that were responsible for the programs and banning them from the sport.

This is the silliest post I have seen on Demonland (and that IS saying something). Everyone in our society (fortunately) is subject to the rule of law whether you like it or not - unless you are a bikie, the mafia (in all its forms) or the Carlton crew (even then it catches up to you eventually.).

Whether you give a fig about it is irrelevant -.it is there and will be adhered to. Likewise with Essendon, the AFL, Hird and his posse of cronies who surround him and feed off him. They can posture all they like, tap into "the court of public opinion", get tame journalists like Robinson and Whateley as much as they like to peddle sympathetic stories about them,, but the law will get them in the end.

What we think about that makes no difference, unless we choose to change it via the ballot box, and I don't sense a movement for that at all, however much Essendon might wish it.

What irony! Especially from someone who naively stated that ASADA and WADA were free of political interference while the ACCC (your words and it should have been the ACC) and Workcover were not. Brilliant stuff.

You have tried to play yourself as some sought of oracle with inside information and insight and come out as blowhard without a clue.

So how under the rule of law will Hird and his cronies ever be brought to account in this saga? So far they still have their positions, their fat paychecks and their innonence.

If that the case then rule of law has failed and its an ass as the other poster said.

This is not weird at all. It is logical that they would gather all the evidence they can, then call the central figure (Danks) in. This allows them to refute his accusations, and to level some at him with some credibility. It also allows them to demonstrate they have covered all the ground to undermine the likes of Robinson and whateley who continuously accuse them of not doing their job by not talking to Dank. It also shows how little they (Rrobinson & Whateley) understand how investigations work.

Good grief. You clearly know less than Robbo and Whateley

ASADA outgoing CEO has said the investigative period has been completed. This isnt an interview or an investigation, its a show cause notice. He has an opportunity to respond (if he chooses) to the statements made in the notice. It wont stop him in due course at making allegations in the future and I cant see ASADA addressing Danks allegations in the public forum.

If ASADA are unable or fail to make a case against either Dank or the players (I hope so), they should be rightly scrutinised for not interviewing Dank in 2013.

The Show cause letter received by Dank is just part of the required Investigative process under the legislation. Once ASADA have finalised the investigation (this is now obviously done they are required to put the allegations to the accused person prior to it beng considered by the authority (Show cause letter). Dank now a couple of weeks to respond and show cause why this should not considered by the authority.

This is not about ASADA trying the gather evidence that is all done. The reason Dank was not interviewed was because its voluntary and he refused requests. The coersive powers were enacted after the dates of the activity being investiated and cannot be applied retrospectively.

My take is that other charges for Essendon players and officials are being sat on until they see what Dank presents in response to his show cause. It would insane for him to be sitting on evidence that proves his innocence and that of Essendon and not provide it.

In my experience people are generally keen to talk when they are falsely accused. The only caviete I would put on that in this case is it could be that as Dank has stated he has no confidence in ASADA or the AFL to do the right thing. I think this is just a furphy. There is no way given the coverage of this and the media connections to this that every i would not be dotted and t's crossed. The QC was appointed to ASADA to review the ASADA legal departments opinions to give another layer of confidence in the outcomes of the investgation.

If I was a Essendon or some flying to Paris on an all expenses paid holiday coutesy of Essendon I would be very very very worries right now.

That is pretty much my take on this BD. Dank has a chance to speak now or else the legal system will roll on regardless.

This was always going to happen.

It was actually funny listening to Rohan Conolly on radio last night trying to discredit ASADA for taking so long.

34 violations. That is a lot of investigating.

Sleep well Essendon. Not long now.

This is not about ASADA trying the gather evidence that is all done. The reason Dank was not interviewed was because its voluntary and he refused requests. The coersive powers were enacted after the dates of the activity being investiated and cannot be applied retrospectively.

Thanks for explaining that, if what you're saying is correct then it makes a bit more sense that they haven't interviewed him.

The Hun today they are saying Dank has said he will not respond to them and has instructed his legal team to take court action to stop them interviewing him.

Hmm I think this has still a long way to go.

I still think most of the players will have retired before there is a result.

BB has said he knows one of the Bombers player's family and has heard of the distress this saga has caused them all. I was thinking of that and I just can't help but feel utter disgust for the behaviour of the club Doctor during and after this saga.

Additionally the fact that he is back there, is a disgusting reflection on this club's administration.

Imagine being a player involved and having as your club Doctor, a bloke, who let you be injected regularly in the stomach, with substances that may be harmful and illegal. You would feel like dropping him.

I'm not certain of this so please correct me if i'm wrong but does a certain amount of infraction notices within one team result in a years de-registration, i believe someone told me at one point if there was 10 or more the club would be de-registered for 12 months

The Hun today they are saying Dank has said he will not respond to them and has instructed his legal team to take court action to stop them interviewing him.

Hmm I think this has still a long way to go.

I still think most of the players will have retired before there is a result.

He dosnt need court action he just doesnt respond to the allegations.

The next step will be for the independent Anti Doping Rule Violation Panel (not ASADA but appointed by th Minister for Sport) to consider the evidence and any responses and determine if the person has possibly committed an ADRV, Dank can then appeal the ADRVP decision to the AAT if he chooses. I doubt he will get much joy at the AAT if he has refused all opportunities to put his side of the matter. I suspect any legal action by Dank would be to attack the process through the courts and have an injunction issued preventing the ADRVP from considering the matter until his issues with the legality of the process are heard in court.

Once the ADRVP has made a decision an infraction may be issued and in the case of the AFL the matter heard in accordance with the AFL's antidoping rules to determine the guilt and and any penalties that may apply.

I dont have a legal background and may be wrong but in my head it goes like this:

ASADA investigate and present the evidence, the ADRVP establish if there is a case to answer and the AFL issue the infraction notice and decide innocence or guilt and penalties. WADA can come over the top if the are not satisfied that the punishment is sufficient. In this case the QC has been appointed to do a QA role on the evidence between ASADA and the ADRVP.

I think its very similar to criminal matters where the Police investigate and present the evidence, DPP or police prosecutors review, a committal hearing determines if there is a case to answer and the trial dtermines guilt and applies the penalty.

BB has said he knows one of the Bombers player's family and has heard of the distress this saga has caused them all. I was thinking of that and I just can't help but feel utter disgust for the behaviour of the club Doctor during and after this saga.

This also shows you how insidious the spin is that's coming from the Bombers who until recently were claiming the players weren't affected at all by the media hype and the controversy in general. Suddenly, there's been a 180 degree turn and they're telling us the players are mental wrecks because of the delays caused in finalising the ASADA report.

Now they're complaining that the show cause was issued on the eve of the season.

Perhaps they should have waited another month or so?

i think we should all pause and reflect on the EFC for a moment in their hour of need.

hahahahahahahahahahahahahahhahahahahaahahahahahahahahahhahsuffer in your jocks

i think we should all pause and reflect on the EFC for a moment in their hour of need.

does one pico-second count as a pause?

I'm not certain of this so please correct me if i'm wrong but does a certain amount of infraction notices within one team result in a years de-registration, i believe someone told me at one point if there was 10 or more the club would be de-registered for 12 months

i dont know about deregistered but the team faces penalties after a total of 2 members are found guilty of doping.

This also shows you how insidious the spin is that's coming from the Bombers who until recently were claiming the players weren't affected at all by the media hype and the controversy in general. Suddenly, there's been a 180 degree turn and they're telling us the players are mental wrecks because of the delays caused in finalising the ASADA report.

Now they're complaining that the show cause was issued on the eve of the season.

Perhaps they should have waited another month or so?

its not essendons fault they are mental wrecks, its ASADA's, Duuurrrrrrrrrr

"One Cross each please....over the left shoulder"

"Crucifixtion?"....

As I said in my first post yesterday I don't give a flying fox about the legalities. It may well be that under the rules/laws that exist the players are in breach. That doesn't address my concerns.

I understand you've made a living in law and the principles of law are something you will respect and live by. I'm not burdened with that legacy and I see the law as an ass. So often we get inequitable results because it's not possible for the law to anticipate all situations. This is one such case.

I start from the premise that the players didn't knowingly take banned drugs. If they did then throw the book at them. They are professional footballers and are expected and trained to be professional in the way they play. They rely on professional trainers, coaches, physiotherapists, doctors, administrators and so on and so forth to ply their trade.

They have been given a cocktail of substances which can't or won't be identified. They may or may not have had their lives put at risk. They may suffer minor, major or terminal health problems as a result. Those problems may surface in the short or long term. They will unquestionably suffer the stress of wondering what those health problems may be and they will live with that stress for a very long time (hopefully). They placed their trust in people who were responsible for them. They were duped.

You are welcome to explore the legalities of the situation and follow the intellectual demands of the law. All common sense says these kids have suffered enough.

And if they haven't suffered? If they knew what they were taking and accepted that an official or officials would take the blame. If the club told them what they had been given then destroyed the records?

All these crocodile tears for professional athletes, please.

My son's, similar ages to the EFC's younger brigade, check the ingredients on a new can of soft drink. If they don't recognise an ingredient they google it. They are not pro athletes just concerned at what goes into their bodies.

Ignorance of the law is no excuse. Well the last time I looked it wasn't. Ignorance or turning a blind eye to whatever some quack wants to inject into you is stupid and that alone deserves some punishment.

If they had an advantage, perceived or otherwise or sought advantage through a discredited program, they should throw the book at them. EFC should be financially responsible to all players for the natural term of their careers plus all health costs into the future. A fund should be put aside by the EFC to cover potential future issues, child defects etc. This fund should never have proceeds return to the EFC.

But the players must be penalised or in reality the EFC got away with it.

The only alternative is to disband the EFC permanently and spread the players around. This would mitigate any ongoing advantage and dissipate the pain. And that my friends will never happen. Put that to the members of the EFC , disband or penalise players, I think the players would be thrown to the sharks.

My son's, similar ages to the EFC's younger brigade, check the ingredients on a new can of soft drink. If they don't recognise an ingredient they google it. They are not pro athletes just concerned at what goes into their bodies.

funny you say that.my son over 30,stood in the supermarket one day and was reading the ingredients of the back of something.

me being old fashioned said "hurry up gonza"lets get out of here,and what are you reading anyway.

was so surprised to meet his woman and their friends who ALL were concious of everything they ate and made big steps to ensure all was good.

AFL players have dieticians.health food nuts,pinko lesso greenies and all sorts of doctors to help them.

not one of them asked the major question.

"you want me to have 50 injections in the gutz"

amazing.

"One Cross each please....over the left shoulder"

"Crucifixtion?"....