That would be his "reward" to the faithful.

it was probably just a poisoned chalice reverend

if the bummers cut hird loose, does that mean james won't be able to deliver his "reward" to the supporters?

To all those here who whinge about Mitch Clark being paid whilst injured putting his body at risk for the team - how would you react were you EssUNdone members paying this megalomaniac for doing no work, swanning around Paris, at $1m a year?

Edited March 21, 201411 yr by monoccular

it was probably just a poisoned chalice reverend

Didn't the chalice from the palace have the brew that is true? I don't think that any chalice from the Hird palace held any any true brew. (I suspect that only Dee fans who remember premierships will be old enough to remember Danny Kaye and "The Court Jetser", which I saw the day bottom team Footscray beat the Dees on the Eve of the finals prior to one of our flags, maybe 57 or 59)

Edited March 21, 201411 yr by monoccular

Without wanting to incur a legal bill I'm interested in the concept of "burden of proof". Could the Essendon players appeal on the basis that the finding was wrong because whilst there might have been circumstantial evidence it wasn't significant to reasonably conclude they were given banned drugs.

BTW, what on earth was Tania doing last night. They deserve each other.

I'll do this one pro bono. There are a group of eminent persons on the panel who have to be comfortably satisfied that an anti doping violation has been committed. They are very knowledgeable, experienced and responsible. They can make mistakes but, as you might see from the Federal Court appeal judgement in the case above (which was lost by the Essendon supporting barrister referred to in some of the other posts above*), it would be difficult to overturn their decision. Circumstantial evidence can often be very compelling. Besides, I think your POV is that the players should be let off because they were misled by professionals upon who they relied and who they trusted. That doesn't work with ADV's unless they were operated on while unconscious.

[*reading between the lines we can now understand why there has been a serious campaign by Essendon and its friends to malign ASADA and its procedures including the delays etc. but that's just a side issue to the main show that's about to come down]

Speaking of side issues, as for Mrs. Hird, I think she is much maligned and it's not her fault. She probably succumbed to the hypnotic forces generated when Sticks Kernahan sang that classic song years ago. How does it go? "Stand by your man".

Caroline Wilson "the Age" today.

If Hird wanted to fight to clear his name - as was his right - he should have held firm last year. But if he still believes the senior coach of a football club is not responsible for the welfare of his players and if he still cannot see it was his responsibility to stop all those needles and mysterious and potentially dangerous drugs, then he does not deserve to be a part of the AFL.

Read more: http://www.theage.com.au/afl/afl-news/bombers-need-to-sever-ties-with-james-hird-20140321-hvl6y.html#ixzz2wYbek4p1

Even our dear friend Caro is calling for Hirds head.

The wife has just finished the career of James.

Why has she spoken?

It is just bizzare!!

Correction. In earlier posts I referred to EFC CEO talking to James Hird. It was in fact EFC Chairman David Evans.

The sentiment remains. Hird must be sacked.

it would not surprise me one bit if old tania is just repeating what james has been telling her.

"no darling i didnt go to the pub last night"

--> "james didnt go to the pub last night, he cant possibly have failed a breath test"

btw they should keep hird. They deserve him.

The Hirds have successfully alienated themselves from all possible support, the EFC, the AFL, other clubs and presidents and the fan base aside from a few rabid morons. In fact his intransigence paints a picture of competition and a club that belives it is above the rules especially when you view it from the context of WADA and the response of other sports similar situations. It wont help ASADA and the AFL convince WADA that lesser penalties for players are appropriate.

Once he gets the chop I cant see Hird going quietly and would not be surprised if he takes all and sundry through the courts especially if he gets an infraction notice. Little has been a fool throughout the whole saga and has already cost his club a significant amount of money that is likely to explode.

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.

Operation Deflection backfires.

The wife has just finished the career of James.

Why has she spoken?

It is just bizzare!!

It was over regardless, just trying to take a few down with them.

I really don't get how this whole investigation went from; did they cheat? what did they inject? who is responsible? to whether or not AD tipped off EFC that ASADA was coming.

this whole thing needs to get back to what where the players injected with and are they going to be any long term health effects? The Hirds are only too worried about their own credibility and seem to forget the fact that this whole thing is about Essendon injecting players with suspect substances in an out of control supplements program orchestrated by one James Hird.

who gives a crap what AD or the AFL knew right before ASADA came down on Essendon. I've said it a dozen times before AD was not the one holding the needle. Essendon and the Hirds need to suck it up and cop exactly what's coming to them!

The wife has just finished the career of James.

Why has she spoken?

It is just bizzare!!

its funny that she did the interview right after he left the country... make me wonder if James even knew she was going to say anything

Haha imagine if he didnt know... He goes off to sleep last in France, Wales up this morning opens the blinds the birds are chirping... Turns on the blower and it just goes berserk with messages haha.

Tania might be in for a quiet ride from the airport when she lands.

Besides, I think your POV is that the players should be let off because they were misled by professionals upon who they relied and who they trusted. That doesn't work with ADV's unless they were operated on while unconscious.

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).

There's more and more interesting stuff coming out on a daily basis - NRL and AFL given permission to name clubs identified in ACC report into drug and crime links to sport

Also of interest is the fact that Stephen Dank has launched a $10m defamation suit. After all, a man of his stature has his reputation and standing in the community to protect.

its funny that she did the interview right after he left the country... make me wonder if James even knew she was going to say anything

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].

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.

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.

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.

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, 201411 yr by why you little

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.

The wife has just finished the career of James.

Why has she spoken?

It is just bizzare!!

Forest and trees wyl

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