So according to this article this could go on for years. These are the potential steps that could go on. How many of the 18 players left at Essendon now will be around by the end of all of this. Any?

1.Anti-Doping Rule Violation Panel (This is the step that will occur probably before the end of the year)

2. Either party can appeal this decision to the Administrative Appeals Tribunal

3. Either party can appeal the AAT decision to the Federal Court. (If the Federal Court finds in favour of the players that is the end of the matter. If it finds in favour of ASADA it goes to step 4.

4. Anti Doping Tribunal hearing if the players don't accept the maximum penalty or the penalty offered by AFL/ASADA

5. Either party can appeal the Anti Doping Tribunal decision to AFL anti-doping appeals panel

6. Either party can appeal this decision to the Court of Arbitration in Sport

That sounds like enough years for the current players to be drawing on their super before they are penalised. I can understand why some within EFC might like that but surely the AFL doesn't want this to drag on and has the necessary power to pull EFC into line (like swapping EFC's draws with ours).

Lawyers, Drugs & Money.

Still my favourite cash for comment: "James Hird is a martyr!!" . . delivered solemnly and straight to camera . . that must have cost heaps!!

This happened in the doping case against Alberto Contador a couple of years ago. WADA appealed and eventually won getting a 2yr ban from the Court of Arbitration in Sport. Contador was allowed to continue to race for the 18mths after the notice and until the end of the appeal process. When he was found guilty he only had to serve the remaining six months of the two year ban remaining after the appeal but all his results during that 18mths were stripped from him including the 2010 Tour de France win and several other high profile wins.

To add to that: when Contador failed the doping test, he was (immediately) provisionally suspended by his team - which was in September 2010. His doping case was heard by the Spanish doping authorities in January 2011, and he was cleared, and resumed racing. WADA and the UCI (cycling's governing body) appealed in March, and the hearing was eventually held in November, but only announced in February 2012. IOW, he raced one season while the appeal process was ongoing. Also, he served more than 6 months: the provisional suspension was for 5 months, and then he was banned from February till August 2012, so served a total of around 12 months. This covered the end of the 2010 season, but then more tellingly, basically the entire 2012 season.

Sorry ... slightly long-winded (!!), but the point is that he did serve a hefty ban, albeit not a full 2 year one.

On the other hand, if the Essendon players are to be provisionally banned once they go on the register, regardless of matches they might miss, my understanding is that they would be banned from any official AFL- related activity, including training. So, no pre-season.

Interesting little aside to that this weekend, USADA have stepped in to stop Lance Armstrong participating even in a charity ride, as he's banned for life.

To add to that: when Contador failed the doping test, he was (immediately) provisionally suspended by his team - which was in September 2010. His doping case was heard by the Spanish doping authorities in January 2011, and he was cleared, and resumed racing. WADA and the UCI (cycling's governing body) appealed in March, and the hearing was eventually held in November, but only announced in February 2012. IOW, he raced one season while the appeal process was ongoing. Also, he served more than 6 months: the provisional suspension was for 5 months, and then he was banned from February till August 2012, so served a total of around 12 months. This covered the end of the 2010 season, but then more tellingly, basically the entire 2012 season.

Sorry ... slightly long-winded (!!), but the point is that he did serve a hefty ban, albeit not a full 2 year one.

On the other hand, if the Essendon players are to be provisionally banned once they go on the register, regardless of matches they might miss, my understanding is that they would be banned from any official AFL- related activity, including training. So, no pre-season.

Interesting little aside to that this weekend, USADA have stepped in to stop Lance Armstrong participating even in a charity ride, as he's banned for life.

Thanks bing181. I wasn't sure of those details but must be an indicator to what will happen here although he had a positive test result so direct evidence. He tried to argue he tested positive from an illegal substance injested from eating contaminated meat. This defence attempt failed and caused a lot of anger from Spanish farmers who denied they were producing contaminated meat. You might think it was fanciful but as you probably know Michael Rogers the Aussie rider tested positive for the same drug which he also claimed he got from eating contaminated meat in China. In his case the authorities accepted this argument and he was cleared, going on to win his first three Grand Tour stages this year. LEGEND!

Does this knowledge mean you are a fellow rider.

My thoughts on this is that the legal representation the players are getting do not understand the process purposely.

The show cause notice stage is not the "trial". It is effectively the "how do you plead" part.

ASADA will present all evidence at any hearing by the specially convened AFL tribunal.

At the moment, ASADA has presented a summary of the evidence to help the players understand why they have been issued show cause notices.

It's time that ASADA and someone in the media say down and wrote a "how to" guide so everyone understands!

So according to this article this could go on for years. These are the potential steps that could go on. How many of the 18 players left at Essendon now will be around by the end of all of this. Any?

1.Anti-Doping Rule Violation Panel (This is the step that will occur probably before the end of the year)

2. Either party can appeal this decision to the Administrative Appeals Tribunal

3. Either party can appeal the AAT decision to the Federal Court. (If the Federal Court finds in favour of the players that is the end of the matter. If it finds in favour of ASADA it goes to step 4.

4. Anti Doping Tribunal hearing if the players don't accept the maximum penalty or the penalty offered by AFL/ASADA

5. Either party can appeal the Anti Doping Tribunal decision to AFL anti-doping appeals panel

6. Either party can appeal this decision to the Court of Arbitration in Sport

Thanks Its Time.

Although it interesting in the statement from the AFLPA CEO he highlights the differing burden of proof between the ADRVP and the AFL's Anti-Doping Tribunal and also the request to expedite the process so the presumably the Players can argue at the AFL Tribunal.

This would mean any provisional suspensions would come into place prior to to the AFL Tribunal Hearing. I guess they must be confident that they have a strong defence case at the tribunal.

After this you may as well flip a coin as its up to the AFL. I wonder whether they really value their much lauded Integrity of the game or not. If the AFL really wanted to shorten the process they would hope their tribunal hands out bans to players and they put into action Essendon's Team B 2015. Sure it may seem harsh and they may have been duped but there is a warning at the front of the AFL Doping Policy and it states

"It is the responsibility of each Player to ensure that he does not use or administer prohibited substances or prohibited methods, whether or not included as examples."

All the literature and training they receive from the AFL, AFLPA, ASADA and 34 players still think they did not do anything wrong by getting weekly injections at a location away from the club and its officials. Sorry this smacks of stupidity and it should not be rewarded or excused.

LEADERSHIP

Follow me boys!

I reckon the AFLPA needs some better union officials. Not just because they are spouting gibberish but also because they seem to ignore the interests of the majority of their members.

well that actually quite common amongst most Unions

These...AFLPA legal lackeys dont like the tables being turned on them do they !!!

They kept pushing and pushing and pushing and now they find themselves at the edge of the falls its a mad panic to paddle backwards. Well tough titicaca is all I can say !!!

Be a damn shame if judgment day didnt come til after Jan 1..Now that would be funny !!!

Thanks bing181. I wasn't sure of those details but must be an indicator to what will happen here although he had a positive test result so direct evidence. He tried to argue he tested positive from an illegal substance injested from eating contaminated meat. This defence attempt failed and caused a lot of anger from Spanish farmers who denied they were producing contaminated meat. You might think it was fanciful but as you probably know Michael Rogers the Aussie rider tested positive for the same drug which he also claimed he got from eating contaminated meat in China. In his case the authorities accepted this argument and he was cleared, going on to win his first three Grand Tour stages this year. LEGEND!

Does this knowledge mean you are a fellow rider.

OT:

I am indeed. Just heading out for a nice 40 k spin now ... Pinarello (though an entry level one ...)

Mick Rogers. Great to see him achieving some results - as he said, lots of soul-searching during his enforced layoff, and he's come back a more gutsy rider.

/OT

After this you may as well flip a coin as its up to the AFL.

Yes and no. The AFL know here that they're signed up to the WADA charter, and if they don't toe the line, WADA will just come in over the top with appeals to the CAS.

If cases are proved, of course.

OT:

I am indeed. Just heading out for a nice 40 k spin now ... Pinarello (though an entry level one ...)

Mick Rogers. Great to see him achieving some results - as he said, lots of soul-searching during his enforced layoff, and he's come back a more gutsy rider.

/OT

Can't say I head out too often for a 40k spin at 9.30pm. Great way to avoid the traffic. I'm in Sydney. Heading out early Saturday morning 63k's mostly hills. Inspired by Mick Rogers second Giro stage win this year. Hit a tempo and stuck to it. I try to emulate that whenever I'm dying up a hill.

and most Bomber fans still worship this clueless dip-[censored]

Edited October 24, 201411 yr by DemonFrog

The sight of James Turd makes me physically ill.

Like Christopher Pyne....

The sight of James Turd makes me physically ill.

Like Christopher Pyne....

What about this one?

Can't say I head out too often for a 40k spin at 9.30pm.

I live in Europe.

I live in Europe.

Bingo! That'd explain it. Where? I bet I'd love to be on that ride. I'm just heading out here but it's just starting to warm up here. Must get brutal there for the next 5 mths

Bingo! That'd explain it. Where? I bet I'd love to be on that ride. I'm just heading out here but it's just starting to warm up here. Must get brutal there for the next 5 mths

France.

Yep, pretty rugged. Indoor trainer, watching replays of Dees matches. And just when I can't take it any more, NAB Cup starts up, which usually gets me through the last month or so.

The sight of James Turd makes me physically ill.

Like Christopher Pyne....

haha, Pyne can make blood boil at 100 yards.

This happened in the doping case against Alberto Contador a couple of years ago. WADA appealed and eventually won getting a 2yr ban from the Court of Arbitration in Sport. Contador was allowed to continue to race for the 18mths after the notice and until the end of the appeal process. When he was found guilty he only had to serve the remaining six months of the two year ban remaining after the appeal but all his results during that 18mths were stripped from him including the 2010 Tour de France win and several other high profile wins. The stripping of results would not be relevant to Essendon.

I suspect this mess has a long way to run. Because the stakes are so high for both parties I am very confident that whichever party loses in the hearing will appeal to the Court of Arbitration in Sport. That process can take a long time. In Contador's case as an example it was something like 6-12mths before the appeal was heard. They would be allowed to play during this period so would probably get through most of next year. By the end of next season another bunch of players will leave the Club so the damage will be less and less. It is already down to 18 from 34.

From memory the players get a 6mth reduction if they prove they didn't intentionally or knowingly take the illegal substance which is likely to be the case here and a further 12mths if they co operate. As I understand it by insisting on going to the Tribunal hearing they are foregoing the 12 mth co operation discount and so on that basis they would end up with minimum 18 mth bans. I'm not sure if they will run from the time of these current notices, after the Tribunal hearing or possibly after an Appeal which could be middle or late next year.

The AFL will also have to sanction Essendon for drug cheating and I would think those sanctions will have to be far more significant than the sanctions given out last year just for failures of governance. I would think at least a $1mill to $2mill fine possibly with some suspended, loss of draft picks, if the decisions are finalised before the end of next season then forced to play for no points (a la the Melbourne Storm sanctions for salary cap rorting).

If they had co operated and taken the deal in July they would have been free to play by Christmas this year after serving 6mth bans and missing maybe 4-6 games. They are playing a lethal game gambling on the Tribunal and possibly the Court of Arbitration in Sport letting them off. Their legal team must be very very confident. Their head legal Counsel David Grace has had many wins against the AFL Tribunal in the past. Talk about conflicted, he is also the current President of Athletics Australia and a staunch anti doping campaigner.

I don't know why people speculate that either Essendon, or their players would get a reduced sentence for cooperation. They have been the opposite of cooperative. If anything, if they get as far as WADA and the COAIS, they will be severely further punished because of their obfuscation and delaying tactics while blaming others, especially ASADA, for the delays.

In my view, this has been no more than I piggy bank for the legal profession, with advice being supplied more in the interests of keeping the gravy train alive than coming to an advantageous settlement. Their legal and PR advice has been appalling. Little should know better. Hird is the captive of Tania, and their respective sociopathic personalities.

The upshot though, is they have positioned themselves to receive optimum penalties, not minimal penalties. WADA in particular do not take kindly to being manipulated like this. Their fate is sealed, and IMHO the penalties will be a lot higher than many are expecting.

Edited October 24, 201411 yr by Dees2014

Let them keep poking the bear !!!

EFC is filibustering till they won't care if their by-then ex-players are suspended - just as they have not cared about the welfare of their players throughout.

If the AFL and ASADA or WADA don't utterly destroy the EFC for their flagrant, uncaringly arrogant and unrepentant lawlessness, then I sincerely hope that over the next few years, once it finally sinks in what's been done to them, the 34 sue the EFC out of existence.

Clean sport cannot stretch to include the EFC. All your own work, Hird, Little and we-have-yet-to-find-out whoever else it has been - you most loathed people in all the history of Aussie rules football. For your own gain, you cheated and now hack open all the loopholes you can, letting out into the league what absolutely has to be hunted and eradicated lest its temptation seeps into other weak-moralled and pragmatic officials' thinking. The journos and lawyers try to fluff this up, but what EFC have done is and has been throughout a strike at the very heart of sport.

EFC must be seen to have been totally deleted, and quickly for preference. The greater disaster still to come is if EFC are seen to have benefitted at all.

Edited October 24, 201411 yr by robbiefrom13

Essendons is counting on the AFL blinking....and they might.

WADA wont.

Essendons is counting on the AFL blinking....and they might.

WADA wont.

then if that is the case ....

" In WADA We Trust "