Extension to show cause notices has been granted

  On 19/06/2014 at 05:19, Mike Nolan said:

Extension to show cause notices has been granted

Only until the 11th of July.

So the case will not be heard only the directions hearing. Not sure how much additional information they will gather from that?

It won't help much at all, I am interested to see if infraction notices will be issued despite the bombers legal action, I just can't see this ending well for the bombers

  On 18/06/2014 at 11:42, rumpole said:

Anyone see AFL 360. Robinson was absolutely repulsive complaining about anti Essendon "propaganda" in a segment that was complete pro-Essendon propaganda.

Basically said the Essendon players had everything ticked off by their doctor but where does that leave Doc Reid?

Frankly, I am surprised that AHPRA haven't had a good look at Reid's involvement in this sorry affair.

For him to be still at EssUndone is hard to believe.

He either endorsed to program, or he didn't: in the latter case how in conscience* can he stay?

Maybe he has the old goat photos? :-)

*I guess using the word conscience in the context of EssUndone is oxymoronic

  On 19/06/2014 at 05:40, monoccular said:

Frankly, I am surprised that AHPRA haven't had a good look at Reid's involvement in this sorry affair.

For him to be still at EssUndone is hard to believe.

He either endorsed to program, or he didn't: in the latter case how in conscience* can he stay?

Maybe he has the old goat photos? :-)

*I guess using the word conscience in the context of EssUndone is oxymoronic

So Hird and Reid have the goat photos.

I wonder how much "the weapon" would pay for a copy?

Hirdy has the 3D version complete with Dolby Surround bleating. Bomber Thompson has a Polaroid or 2. Doc Reid has a photo copy.

  On 18/06/2014 at 11:42, rumpole said:

Anyone see AFL 360. Robinson was absolutely repulsive complaining about anti Essendon "propaganda" in a segment that was complete pro-Essendon propaganda.

Basically said the Essendon players had everything ticked off by their doctor but where does that leave Doc Reid?

And here's to you Mr. Robinson ...

ASADA revelations do not dilute Essendon's culpability

  Quote

While it remains unfortunate and to most observers quite staggering that the Essendon players who participated in the drugs program allowed the needles, the secrecy and other pharmaceutical experiments to continue for so long it is worth considering the following.

First is that those players did raise some alarms as early as January 2012. A senior group met their trusted doctor Bruce Reid, coach James Hird, football boss Danny Corcoran, high performance manager Dean Robinson and Stephen Dank.

They were assured by one and all that the program was safe and legal and were then given consent forms to sign demonstrating that all the drugs being administered were not banned nor frowned upon by the AFL nor the World Anti-Doping Authority.

Further assurances that everything they were being given was approved by the clubs doctor of more than three decades Reid. Under AFL rules players are told that every drug they take must be approved by their doctor.

Much later, after the whistle was blown, the players were strongly advised to co-operate due to the so-called "exceptional circumstances". They were assured their careers would not be curtailed nor tarnished.

It is true the joint interview process provided some nasty shocks in terms of their potential long-term health. It is also true that some of the more senior players now feel foolish at not questioning the drug experiment more strongly.

But clearly they remain the victims of deception in this world test case of team anti-doping. Neither the AFL nor Essendon should not be immune to ASADA - for all its mistakes along the journey - nor WADA penalties because those are the authorities to which the game has signed up.

But nothing can excuse the self-serving, shameful and dishonest manner in which those footballers were treated.

ASADA confidence built on heavy hitting legal team

  Quote

While Downes was appointed earlier this year by the federal Sport Minister to review ASADAs work, it is understood he became increasingly hawkish about the case against Essendon and ultimately gave the investigative work a ringing endorsement.

As Mike Moore was wont to say on his brilliant but now defunct news programme:-

"Mmmmmm ..."

  On 18/06/2014 at 00:09, demondame said:

Based on the email revealed in the HS, and Jon faine's interview with journalist Michael Warner:

(This is my understanding, correct me if I'm wrong)

- afl lobbied asada and made agreement, that in the event that essendon players were found to have had banned substances, that if the club and players cooperated fully in the investigation, then no sanctions would be imposed on players.

- Under WADA code, ASADA is told or realizes that it can't actually make such agreement, that athletes are responsible for what they take, no matter what the circumstances and that bans can be reduced with cooperation but not eliminated.

-ASADA attempts to alter the agreement with the afl

-AFL sends the email to ASADA, copied to Gillard's office, saying EFC, is cooperating in the investigation based on the ORIGINAL agreement.

-I now understand why the EFC is so angry at demetriou et al, and it seems ASADA stuffed up originally by making an agreement, that they had no authority to make.

- However, nothing really changes. The AFL is a participant in the WADA code, and as such ultimately answers to the rules and condition it imposes.

-to take the court action, EFC if successful will feel vindicated on the amateurish start by ASADA and

This still makes no difference. Even if Essendin wins its case against the Afl, if the sanctions are deemed inadequate byvWADA they can and will step in and take the case to the Court of Arbitration in Sport. I may be wrong in this, but I understand in spite of acting in this way in a number of international cases they are yet to lose such an appeal.

International Sports lawyer friends of mine reckon the Essendon case is one of the clearer cases of abuse in international sport. She has no doubt such an appeal by WADA would be upheld. If this were the case, then the players would not get six months, they would get 4 years, and some club officials (probably including Hird) would get 10 years maybe life, because they would have been deemed to have not cooperated with the investigation.

Essendon continues to put the egos of club officials above that of their players. The whole thing is an utter disgrace. Thankfully we have some powerful voices like nick mckenzie, Caroline Wilson andcPatrick Smith whonhavevthe courage to expose this for what it is. Left to the Murdoch press, the wholevthingvwould have been buried long ago.

  On 17/06/2014 at 22:58, Cards13 said:

Dee have you got some examples/articles quoting other athletes outside of footy raising concerns on how this has been handled compared if it was them?

Yes there are a number. Try these to start with:

http://www.theage.com.au/afl/afl-news/essendon-saga-shows-we-need-to-change-protocol-20130831-2sxoy.html

http://www.heraldsun.com.au/news/opinion/play-it-straight-and-take-the-medicine/story-fni0fhh1-1226703731898

http://www.therunningreview.com/2013/06/19/athlete-qa-tamsyn-lewis-manou/

Trengove cleared. I have officially seen it in print. Good news.

http://www.perthnow.com.au/sport/afl/former-melbourne-skipper-jack-trengove-cleared-by-asada-over-alleged-use-of-aod9604/story-fniv6abm-1226960517161

Just reading Rohan Connolly's piece in the today's age, earlier heard Robbo on SEN which has me thinking, is there any other media commentator at all, who defends Essendon's conduct in any part during this long saga?

I mean these two probably think they are being objective. What a laugh!

Their opinions are so far removed from everyone else's, and the thing they have in common, is coincidentally being Bomber supporters.

Robbo even said that had Matthew Knights been coach, he would have been given the same protection as Hird! My god, this man has lost all sense of reality.

  On 19/06/2014 at 05:40, monoccular said:

Frankly, I am surprised that AHPRA haven't had a good look at Reid's involvement in this sorry affair.

Agree

Astonishing

Maybe they wait for someone to lodge a complaint?

The noose tightens ...

Australian codes warned on WADA breakaway

I still find this hard to believe

"Players association calls for ASADA to show evidence"

Is it so hard to believe that they would not issue show cause notices or pursue sanctions unless they knew they had enough backing it?

Clearly the club has worked that out, hence going straight to the Federal Court and hoping for a technicality rather than answering the show cause notices.

  On 19/06/2014 at 21:25, Mike Nolan said:

I still find this hard to believe

"Players association calls for ASADA to show evidence"

Is it so hard to believe that they would not issue show cause notices or pursue sanctions unless they knew they had enough backing it?

Clearly the club has worked that out, hence going straight to the Federal Court and hoping for a technicality rather than answering the show cause notices.

The AFLPA clearly doesn't understand the rules which ASADA has to apply in these circumstances. I think McDevitt has bent over backwards to be fair to the players and no doubt he is obtaining legal advice as to whether he can accommodate the request. However, it seems to me the players are suggesting that they might consider co-operating if they see the case against them is very strong. I just wonder about that as a strategy.

  On 19/06/2014 at 21:34, Whispering_Jack said:

The AFLPA clearly doesn't understand the rules which ASADA has to apply in these circumstances. I think McDevitt has bent over backwards to be fair to the players and no doubt he is obtaining legal advice as to whether he can accommodate the request. However, it seems to me the players are suggesting that they might consider co-operating if they see the case against them is very strong. I just wonder about that as a strategy.

I also find the AFLPA's position to be a bit "cute". They have agreed to the AFL's drug code for all of the players. The AFL's code is based on, and integrated with ASADA and WADA codes.

The AFLPA are now complaining about the process they have agreed to and want it changed.

Either they have changed their mind, or they never read, or understood, it in the first place.

Those deck chairs down at EFC are almost worn out.

James Hird played by Kate Winslet. I can see him/her now standing on the bow as the SS Essendon sinks slowly into the murky depths. He is the only survivor. Typical.

  On 19/06/2014 at 13:19, demondame said:

Robbo even said that had Matthew Knights been coach, he would have been given the same protection as Hird! My god, this man has lost all sense of reality.

That is the funniest thing I have heard in months.

Western Bulldogs President Peter Gordon says ASADA should withdraw its investigation against Essendon players

  Quote

"In my view, the appropriate cause of action is for ASADA to withdraw those show cause notices," Gordon told ABC radio on Friday. "Did the players volunteer information subject to that reassurance which they may have been a lot more guarded about?"

"The other element in this, which is important, is what's the standard of proof? Does ASADA need to prove that they possibly took an illegal substance or that they definitely did?"

Gordon said he believed that the delays in the process and the joint nature of the AFL-ASADA investigation all hinted to a flawed process.

Gordon emphasised though that the view was coming from his professional opinion as a lawyer, and not as the leader of an AFL club.

Honestly, if you don't understand the standards of proof required, why would you comment publicly at all?

  On 20/06/2014 at 03:13, deanox said:

Western Bulldogs President Peter Gordon says ASADA should withdraw its investigation against Essendon players

Honestly, if you don't understand the standards of proof required, why would you comment publicly at all?

Prepare yourself for all sorts of interested parties putting in their two bob's worth to save the 18 team competition so that the competition's financial resources can be shored up.

Anything to avoid a hearing into whether anybody was given banned drugs. The AFL is in trouble.

Gil reckons there never was an agreement.

another thing supporting essendon shot to bits

  On 20/06/2014 at 04:10, biggestred said:

Gil reckons there never was an agreement.

another thing supporting essendon shot to bits

Where you see that?

Reading the Herald Sun story "Email trail traces history of talks over Bombers supplements program", it states:

"The original agreement between the AFL and ASADA — finalised on February 20 — stated that “to provide an immediate level of comfort ... it will be explained to players that under a no fault or negligence defence a player can receive a complete elimination of sanction”."

The crucial part of this correspondence is "... player can receive a complete elimination of sanction." if this is the case then there seems to be a lot of noise around nothing. Players might have been duped by the selling of the agreement, but the agreement itself doesn't guarantee them 'getting off'.

There was never a deal with ASADA, McLachlan insists

  On 20/06/2014 at 04:31, Ungarie boy said:

Reading the Herald Sun story "Email trail traces history of talks over Bombers supplements program", it states:

"The original agreement between the AFL and ASADA — finalised on February 20 — stated that “to provide an immediate level of comfort ... it will be explained to players that under a no fault or negligence defence a player can receive a complete elimination of sanction”."

The crucial part of this correspondence is "... player can receive a complete elimination of sanction." if this is the case then there seems to be a lot of noise around nothing. Players might have been duped by the selling of the agreement, but the agreement itself doesn't guarantee them 'getting off'.

this would refer to a player in surgery receiving a drug, not a player being duped into taking something they thought was something else