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

[sue 8,546]

why are injections in the stomach mentioned so often? Is there a suggestion that illegal substances require that location, or is it just a media beat-up? Diabetics often inject in the stomach after all.

[Tatu 416]

why are injections in the stomach mentioned so often? Is there a suggestion that illegal substances require that location, or is it just a media beat-up? Diabetics often inject in the stomach after all.

i herd somewhere that HGH is administered by injection to the stomach..... I'm no expert, so it could be bullish!t...

[daisycutter 28,709]

i herd somewhere that HGH is administered by injection to the stomach..... I'm no expert, so it could be bullish!t...

maybe because some players have already got too many holes in their arms

[jnrmac 19,421]

Reverse the 2000 flag and Brownlow, sack Hird and Bomber, get on with the game.

We need some easybeats in the comp.

Should have taken the 93 flag off them as they were convicted of salary cap cheating from 1992-1996.

They are scum of the highest order.

[Brian Wilson 331]

Should have taken the 93 flag off them as they were convicted of salary cap cheating from 1992-1996.

They are scum of the highest order.

And give it to Carlton??

Scylla and Charybdis

[titan_uranus 22,923]

The players all signed forms consenting to their being administered these drugs. The HUN today says that those consent forms listed the drugs they were agreeing to take.

The interesting thing now will be to see what was listed on those forms, and what the players actually took. If the players only took what was listed on the forms, and one or more of the drugs turns out to be banned, then the players are in trouble. The fact will be they consented to taking a banned substance, and the form will count as their knowledge of what they were doing. It might sound sad, but short of the club threatening to sack them for not taking it, they agreed.

However, if the players were given something that wasn't on the list, then it's going to raise a lot more issues. For Dank/Robinson/whoever to tell the players 'here's what we're giving you, it's all legal as you can see', and for them to then be given something else, the players, despite still being guilty, might not get punished as much as they otherwise might.

If a banned substance was administered, the punishment will be variously distributed between Dank, Robinson, Hird, the board and the football administrators, and the players. It will be interesting to see who knew what.

[Jesse Christ 2,884]

If they were given something that wasn't on the list, how will it be proven?

Even if one thing on the list of substances- sorry supplements they took is banned, they are toast. Ignorance no excuse and all that

[Whispering_Jack 28,100]

I think you'll find that knowledge and intention (to use a banned substance) are irrelevant when it comes to ASADA, as was proven in the Wade Lees case.

As I understand it, in that case, the player never even received the weight loss supplement he ordered but was banned from sport for 18 months. As a VFL player, he didn't have the benefit of the extensive education programmes that AFL players get. Nor could he afford a legal appeal against his suspension.

Since we don't know yet what substances were involved in Dank's programme, we can't say whether anyone's guilty of anything yet but if something banned turns up in the evidence, the Bombers are stuffed and knowledge and intention won't help the players or the club.

[daisycutter 28,709]

The players all signed forms consenting to their being administered these drugs. The HUN today says that those consent forms listed the drugs they were agreeing to take.

The interesting thing now will be to see what was listed on those forms, and what the players actually took. If the players only took what was listed on the forms, and one or more of the drugs turns out to be banned, then the players are in trouble. The fact will be they consented to taking a banned substance, and the form will count as their knowledge of what they were doing. It might sound sad, but short of the club threatening to sack them for not taking it, they agreed.

However, if the players were given something that wasn't on the list, then it's going to raise a lot more issues. For Dank/Robinson/whoever to tell the players 'here's what we're giving you, it's all legal as you can see', and for them to then be given something else, the players, despite still being guilty, might not get punished as much as they otherwise might.

If a banned substance was administered, the punishment will be variously distributed between Dank, Robinson, Hird, the board and the football administrators, and the players. It will be interesting to see who knew what.

be interesting to see if all consent forms can be found

and whether the player got to keep a copy of all forms they signed

[titan_uranus 22,923]

I think you'll find that knowledge and intention (to use a banned substance) are irrelevant when it comes to ASADA, as was proven in the Wade Lees case.

As I understand it, in that case, the player never even received the weight loss supplement he ordered but was banned from sport for 18 months. As a VFL player, he didn't have the benefit of the extensive education programmes that AFL players get. Nor could he afford a legal appeal against his suspension.

Since we don't know yet what substances were involved in Dank's programme, we can't say whether anyone's guilty of anything yet but if something banned turns up in the evidence, the Bombers are stuffed and knowledge and intention won't help the players or the club.

Of course it's not, it's strict liability. But when it comes to punishment, whether they knew what they were doing or not will have a big say. If they were told they were taking X but they in fact took Y, then that is different to a player ordering a banned substance. Do you see what I mean? The Essendon players may have been told they were taking a certain group of drugs, and if they'd gone and researched, they'd have found them to be fine. Whereas if Lees had checked (not saying he should have, but if he had have), he'd have known what he was ordering was banned.

That's a big difference, and if the players were told to sign consent forms to mask what they were actually taking, the relative culpability shifts from the players to the administrators.

If they were given something that wasn't on the list, how will it be proven?

Even if one thing on the list of substances- sorry supplements they took is banned, they are toast. Ignorance no excuse and all that

How is any of it going to be proven?

The investigation is going to have to gather evidence to see if they can precisely work out what was injected. Drug tests now obviously aren't going to help. Whatever they took, banned or otherwise, it's going to be hard for ASADA/ACC/AFL to find out exactly what it was.

If they do work it out, then they'll know if the players signed a form relating to it or not. It won't change their guilt, they'll be guilty if they took it no matter what, but it will have an impact on their punishment, I'd say.

[binman 39,247]

Reverse the 2000 flag and Brownlow, sack Hird and Bomber, get on with the game.

We need some easybeats in the comp.

Woewodin hands back his Charlie? What about Cousins - if he had to hand back his Charlie it would be like that scene from Scarface!

[Sir Why You Little 35,262]

It will be interesting to see if Danks added any ingredients not listed on those signed forms.

They were very close to the edge.

I hope he tells the truth on monday night, because WADA will find out what happened.

I keep seeing the ashen face of James Hird. Will he be charged with that?

[daisycutter 28,709]

It will be interesting to see if Danks added any ingredients not listed on those signed forms.

They were very close to the edge.

I hope he tells the truth on monday night, because WADA will find out what happened.

I keep seeing the ashen face of James Hird. Will he be charged with that?

nobody who been around the "scene" as long as he has is going to list a banned drug on multiple pieces of paper

unless of course he is the only one in possession of the paper and sees it as "insurance"

that's why i wondered previously if the players got to keep a copy

[Bossdog 2,002]

It will be interesting to see if Danks added any ingredients not listed on those signed forms.

They were very close to the edge.

I hope he tells the truth on monday night, because WADA will find out what happened.

I keep seeing the ashen face of James Hird. Will he be charged with that?

Do you think that he will admit to this?????....He would be cutting his own throat......I can't see this going anywhere without proof.....

How do you know that they were very close to the edge??????

How will WADA find out what happened if no body admits guilt????

[Dane 3]

See The Junkies fly up up to cheat their way to the Cup

[Sir Why You Little 35,262]

Do you think that he will admit to this?????....He would be cutting his own throat......I can't see this going anywhere without proof.....

How do you know that they were very close to the edge??????

How will WADA find out what happened if no body admits guilt????

since the Lance Armstrong case which took years to open up, the answers will be found. There is too much at stake to hide now.

Danks reputation may already be in tatters so he would be well advised to tell all.

If he is clean good. If not he is only delaying an inevitable situation.

You forget this investigation has been ongoing for 12 months. It didn't start on tuesday.

Last year Essendon came out of the blocks on fire but by june the players were cooked???

How & Why?

[Macca 16,174]

Someone will spill the beans. Especially to save themselves. We are almost guaranteed to know what was injected. Might take a bit of time but it will come out. Remembering that the various authorities are calling on people to come forward to reduce their (possible) sentence or liability. One person talks and it will have a snowball effect.

All of the people involved will have their own version of the truth. That will most probably create conflict and even contradiction. And that could easily lead to the real truth coming out. There are too many involved for it to all go away.

Of course, if nothing illegal was injected then we may not have a problem. (though you would think some of the 'practice's' would have to come under question)

A positive drug test is not needed (as we've found out with Armstrong and others) There are various ways to find out. WADA. ASADA and the ACC are not to be trifled with. They will find out.

[Guest José Mourinho]

The players all signed forms consenting to their being administered these drugs. The HUN today says that those consent forms listed the drugs they were agreeing to take.

The interesting thing now will be to see what was listed on those forms, and what the players actually took. If the players only took what was listed on the forms, and one or more of the drugs turns out to be banned, then the players are in trouble. The fact will be they consented to taking a banned substance, and the form will count as their knowledge of what they were doing. It might sound sad, but short of the club threatening to sack them for not taking it, they agreed.

However, if the players were given something that wasn't on the list, then it's going to raise a lot more issues. For Dank/Robinson/whoever to tell the players 'here's what we're giving you, it's all legal as you can see', and for them to then be given something else, the players, despite still being guilty, might not get punished as much as they otherwise might.

If a banned substance was administered, the punishment will be variously distributed between Dank, Robinson, Hird, the board and the football administrators, and the players. It will be interesting to see who knew what.

Whether the players consented and knowingly took PEDs or not is largely irrelevant in my view -- if they have them in their system it creates an uneven playing field, and other players at other clubs cannot be expected to have to compete against players with an unfair advantage.

Ipso facto, if the players have been administered PEDs, knowingly or not, they must be suspended, and if the minimum is 2 years, so be it.

[Soidee 1,496]

Today the MFC have been accused of using DEPS

Otherwise known as De-Enhancing Performance Substances.

Sorry folks had to lighten the mood.

[jnrmac 19,421]

Heard this morning from an official at Ess that they are expecting this thing will not be resolved before the end of the year.

Interesting. But I suspect its out of their and the AFLs hands......

[jnrmac 19,421]

Someone will spill the beans. Especially to save themselves. We are almost guaranteed to know what was injected. Might take a bit of time but it will come out. Remembering that the various authorities are calling on people to come forward to reduce their (possible) sentence or liability. One person talks and it will have a snowball effect.

All of the people involved will have their own version of the truth. That will most probably create conflict and even contradiction. And that could easily lead to the real truth coming out. There are too many involved for it to all go away.

Of course, if nothing illegal was injected then we may not have a problem. (though you would think some of the 'practice's' would have to come under question)

A positive drug test is not needed (as we've found out with Armstrong and others) There are various ways to find out. WADA. ASADA and the ACC are not to be trifled with. They will find out.

Maybe Danks has prepared a concoction of 'vitamins'. Given his involvement with a business that imports and sells all sorts of chemical substances it could well be that the players signed on for something and they got something else. Just sayin....

Unless they have stored some of it which they can use for testing it is going to be hard to prove I'd imagine.

[cowboy_from_hell 2,390]

Someone will spill the beans. Especially to save themselves. We are almost guaranteed to know what was injected. Might take a bit of time but it will come out. Remembering that the various authorities are calling on people to come forward to reduce their (possible) sentence or liability. One person talks and it will have a snowball effect.

All of the people involved will have their own version of the truth. That will most probably create conflict and even contradiction. And that could easily lead to the real truth coming out. There are too many involved for it to all go away.

Of course, if nothing illegal was injected then we may not have a problem. (though you would think some of the 'practice's' would have to come under question)

A positive drug test is not needed (as we've found out with Armstrong and others) There are various ways to find out. WADA. ASADA and the ACC are not to be trifled with. They will find out.

If WADA and ASADA can follow the timeline of dosgy sports scientists work places all should be revealed. Much like Bonds and Clemens in baseball the testimony of these scientists could damn them all to hell.

[jnrmac 19,421]

And give it to Carlton??

Scylla and Charybdis

Geez I had to look that up....learned something today!

[Sir Why You Little 35,262]

Heard this morning from an official at Ess that they are expecting this thing will not be resolved before the end of the year.

Interesting. But I suspect its out of their and the AFLs hands......

this is an ACC & WADA case now.

Make no mistake. This is way beyond an AFL Commission.

The AFL had their chance in 2005-6 with Meth Coke but chose to ignore.

It is exactly why i have always viewed the 3 strike system a sham.

[Whispering_Jack 28,100]

And used them very effectively for more than ½ a decade.

Problem is their use is definitively evidence of tanking (if indeed the labs can find traces of DEPS in the system). The good news is that DEPS don't leave any traces anywhere except perhaps in the imagination.