I don't think Saad is a reliable precedent because didn't Saad get suspended for importation of a banned substance.

No he didn't. That player was Wade Lees who did unwittingly import a banned supplement.

And I think Demonland is the last place to warn others about reality!

Actually, there's an good amount of comment on this particular thread that's more informed and I suspect closer to the mark than some of the drivel you read in the written media.

Given the form that ASADA have shown in respect of the NRL, I would suspect that they would accept the 12 months backdated.

I don't think Saad is a reliable precedent because didn't Saad get suspended for importation of a banned substance. Whether he took it is neither here nor there. Under the law if you import you are assumed to have consumed.

??Saad consumed the product on game day.

The Ess players didn't import Thymosin. Not sure of your point?

??Saad consumed the product on game day.

The Ess players didn't import Thymosin. Not sure of your point?

Clarify this for me please. Didn't Saad essentially consume "lolly water" but simply did so on the wrong day of the week?

Saad was treated quite unjustly, presumably because he had no powerful defenders, and perhaps in order to set an example. A warning shot across the bows for everyone else thinking of using anything stronger than Weeties. Doesn't seem like Essendon were deterred.

Saad was treated quite unjustly, presumably because he had no powerful defenders, and perhaps in order to set an example. A warning shot across the bows for everyone else thinking of using anything stronger than Weeties. Doesn't seem like Essendon were deterred.

And doesn't seem like the NRL and AFL players involved in this will be given the same type is punishments either.

it is often stated that thymodulin is a "good" version of thymosin (as opposed to thymosin beta4)

a quick google search (by no means thorough) didn't show that thymodulin was a thymosin

so, is thymodulin a "good' flavour of thymosin or is this just another red herring because the names sound alike?

From my research:

It's actually Thymomodulin and belongs to the Thymosin alpha 'family'. Thymosin alpha regulates the immune system. Thymosin alpha is not banned.

Thymomodulin is prescribed for infants to increase their immune system but only if it is deficient.

Thymosin beta 4 (TB4) is banned under the S2 category Growth Factors and Related Substances.

Like Thymomodulin, TB4 regulates the immune system. but it also appears to aid in tissue regeneration, hance it is a PED.

Thymosin (alpha and beta) occurs naturally and there is no test that can detect elevated levels.

Richard Ings reported that no athlete worldwide was banned in 2012-13 for the use of TB4.

Why I reckon Dank injected TB4 and not Thymomodulin as he reportedly told the ACC:

• Dank sourced his PEDs through Charter and the Chinese supplier Vincent Xu said he only ever supplied Charter with TB4
• Charter forwarded a text message to Dank stating "Which peptides do you need (compounded) next?" In his reply Dank requested Thymosin Beta 4.
• Dank told Nick McKenzie that he injected the players with TB4
• When McKenzie told Dank that TB4 was banned Dank said "that's mindblowing"

IMO ASADA would have a watertight case against Dank (and the players).

Edited November 16, 201410 yr by M_9

ASADA may have a water tight cased against the Dons, but its the AFL [censored] that will be calling out the punishment. Findings from the AFL review will be players were tricked, therefore extenuating circumstances, 6 month suspended or back dated sentence. ASADA will be [censored] as hell and complain.

The key question of interest for me is what is the status of "Jab" Watson's Brownlow? Can he retain it if this banned substances ruling is substantiated? Would the second placegetter become the medalist? The AFL would not want to go into this territory.

A good question considering I had money on Trent Cotchin to win it. I would expect him and Mitchell would be jointly awarded the medal. Not biased at all......

ASADA may have a water tight cased against the Dons, but its the AFL [censored] that will be calling out the punishment. Findings from the AFL review will be players were tricked, therefore extenuating circumstances, 6 month suspended or back dated sentence. ASADA will be [censored] as hell and complain.

ASADA will actually be leading this tribunal. The AFL is positioning itself...thats all this is about. It cant keep the nudge nudge winks its given its mates now. It knows the games up and the powers that be will have their pound of flesh.

Yes the AFL will announce the penalty...they will not however construct it.

I don't think Saad is a reliable precedent because didn't Saad get suspended for importation of a banned substance.

No he didn't. That player was Wade Lees who did unwittingly import a banned supplement and received what virtually amounted to a 2 year sanction.

And I think Demonland is the last place to warn others about reality!

Actually, there's an good amount of comment on this particular thread that's more informed and I suspect closer to the mark than some of the drivel you read in the written media.

Saad was treated quite unjustly, presumably because he had no powerful defenders, and perhaps in order to set an example. A warning shot across the bows for everyone else thinking of using anything stronger than Weeties. Doesn't seem like Essendon were deterred.

but de turd think he IS Essendon, and bigger than the AFL or indeed ASADA / WADA

Those watching this as a spectacle of sorts might wish to note this is a unique occurrence in world sport. A whole team hasnt been under the microscope before. Competitors have, within teams, but wholesale skulduggery ?? WADA, let alone ASADA havent had to deal with the scope as presented by Essendon.

If for no other reason than this WADA will want this to go down as they see fit. This is their advertisement to the global sports fraternity to heed, to follow the rules...or else.

Those watching this as a spectacle of sorts might wish to note this is a unique occurrence in world sport. A whole team hasnt been under the microscope before. Competitors have, within teams, but wholesale skulduggery ?? WADA, let alone ASADA havent had to deal with the scope as presented by Essendon.

If for no other reason than this WADA will want this to go down as they see fit. This is their advertisement to the global sports fraternity to heed, to follow the rules...or else.

Agree! The credibility of WADA is on the line here, the Dons had the perfect "cheater template" and it must hammered flat! How many clubs, coaches and players would just love to get on a program with so much upside (drugs that will enhance performance for years) with the risk of only a few months suspension? If the AFL have any foresight at all they should save WADA time and effort and apply the maximum penalties to the players and the club!

Those watching this as a spectacle of sorts might wish to note this is a unique occurrence in world sport. A whole team hasnt been under the microscope before. Competitors have, within teams, but wholesale skulduggery ?? WADA, let alone ASADA havent had to deal with the scope as presented by Essendon.

If for no other reason than this WADA will want this to go down as they see fit. This is their advertisement to the global sports fraternity to heed, to follow the rules...or else.

Actually that's not right. There was a much greater doping scandal in world cycling. The Operacion Puerto scandal which like the Essendon fiasco was caused by one person, Doctor Eufemiano Fuentes. Masses of riders from many different teams and even entire teams were suspended. It was way more massive than this case. Have a look at this from Wikipedia if you are interested http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operaci%C3%B3n_Puerto_doping_case

Edited November 16, 201410 yr by It's Time

The AFL's integrity is very publicly on the line here as well.

They would be well aware of the impact the Soccer season is having right around the country

stand corrected...

edit

with so many getting off and seemingly only 3 getting pinged it looks like one all mighty stuff up. Even if competitors were suspended no actual bannings seemed to have taken place.

This still strikes me as somewhat unique

Edited November 16, 201410 yr by beelzebub

Actually that's not right. There was a much greater doping scandal in world cycling. The Operacion Puerto scandal which like the Essendon fiasco was caused by one person, Doctor Eufemiano Fuentes. Masses of riders from many different teams and even entire teams were suspended.

No teams were suspended.

Nor were there masses of riders suspended, in reality there were very few - Basso, Ulrich, Scarponi, Valverde, plus a few lesser names ...

Lots of riders implicated, but then even more footballers where surprise surprise, none were even investigated. FIFA etc. etc.!!

The biggest part of the scandal isn't that it was so widespread, but that when it came to light, so little was done. But then again, doping wasn't illegal in Spain at the time either, so hands were tied - which explains why the suspended riders were almost exclusively non-Spanish, primarily Italian. Valverde was picked up through the back door, as he was initially banned from racing in Italy, which then led to him being banned internationally.

Also, the point should be made that a cycling team is very different from a football team. Cyclists on the same team often don't even live in the same country, and usually work with individual coaches, trainers and doctors (a bit like tennis players in that regard) - though teams like Sky are starting to change that with a more structured, organised and integrated approach.

Edited November 16, 201410 yr by bing181

Those watching this as a spectacle of sorts might wish to note this is a unique occurrence in world sport. A whole team hasnt been under the microscope before. Competitors have, within teams, but wholesale skulduggery ?? WADA, let alone ASADA havent had to deal with the scope as presented by Essendon.

Correct.

And something the AFL are no doubt aware of.

Richard Ings ‏@ringsau 8h8 hours ago

Jobe Watson & Dustin Fletcher allowed to play in International Rules against Ireland | Fox "no explanation" http://m.foxsports.com.au/afl/afl-premiership/jobe-watson-and-dustin-fletcher-allowed-to-play-in-international-rules-against-ireland/story-e6frf3e3-1227124843082?from=public_rss&utm_source=twitterfeed&utm_medium=twitter …

View summary

Those watching this as a spectacle of sorts might wish to note this is a unique occurrence in world sport. A whole team hasnt been under the microscope before. Competitors have, within teams, but wholesale skulduggery ?? WADA, let alone ASADA havent had to deal with the scope as presented by Essendon.

If for no other reason than this WADA will want this to go down as they see fit. This is their advertisement to the global sports fraternity to heed, to follow the rules...or else.

The AFL's integrity is very publicly on the line here as well.

They would be well aware of the impact the Soccer season is having right around the country

The difference between WADA and the AFL here is that WADA's integrity is not on the line - not unless they make it so. The AFL are just about discredited now, no matter what they do, in many people's eyes. WADA remains WADA, unless they chicken out and tell the world that they are actually toothless in the face of a big player. (Smiling with false teeth?)

AFL - integrity in tatters. WADA - the watchdog, though with credibility there to be destroyed, if they so choose. I'm waiting and watching.

C'mon, self-respect, fellers, please!

(According to Kierkegaard, if you dare, you may lose your footing for a time, but if you don't dare you lose yourself.)

The difference between WADA and the AFL here is that WADA's integrity is not on the line - not unless they make it so. The AFL are just about discredited now, no matter what they do, in many people's eyes. WADA remains WADA, unless they chicken out and tell the world that they are actually toothless in the face of a big player. (Smiling with false teeth?)

AFL - integrity in tatters. WADA - the watchdog, though with credibility there to be destroyed, if they so choose. I'm waiting and watching.

C'mon, self-respect, fellers, please!

(According to Kierkegaard, if you dare, you may lose your footing for a time, but if you don't dare you lose yourself.)

Would that be the man they called Kierkegaard, who just sat there biting the heads off whippets?

No he didn't. That player was Wade Lees who did unwittingly import a banned supplement and received what virtually amounted to a 2 year sanction.

Stand corrected on the Saad/Lees matter. Thanks for the correction.

Actually, there's an good amount of comment on this particular thread that's more informed and I suspect closer to the mark than some of the drivel you read in the written media.

I haven't read the whole 380+ pages of the thread (and I don't intend to either) but I have followed it for the past couple of months. There may have been a kernel of informed comment but it's been drown out by the sanctimonious ambulance chasing that's better suited with Russell Crowe in a Colosseum.

The difference between WADA and the AFL here is that WADA's integrity is not on the line - not unless they make it so. The AFL are just about discredited now, no matter what they do, in many people's eyes. WADA remains WADA, unless they chicken out and tell the world that they are actually toothless in the face of a big player. (Smiling with false teeth?)

AFL - integrity in tatters. WADA - the watchdog, though with credibility there to be destroyed, if they so choose.

I am not sure anyone comes out of this with their integrity intact. WADA won't escape the shortcomings of its representation in Australia via ASADA. They can't escape that they are joined at the hip in the publics eyes.

There is already questions about the leniency of the backdated penalties dealt out to the NRL players.

No matter whatever the AFL/ASADA and WADA do they will be subject to hostility from sections of the general public. There are not any protected species in this matter.

Richard Ings ‏@ringsau 8h8 hours ago

Jobe Watson & Dustin Fletcher allowed to play in International Rules against Ireland | Fox "no explanation" http://m.foxsports.com.au/afl/afl-premiership/jobe-watson-and-dustin-fletcher-allowed-to-play-in-international-rules-against-ireland/story-e6frf3e3-1227124843082?from=public_rss&utm_source=twitterfeed&utm_medium=twitter …

View summary

Bizarre, certainly in comparison to this:

http://www.smh.com.au/sport/cycling/lance-armstrong-banned-from-charity-ride-20141024-11ay5s.html

"Lance Armstrong, who has been banned for life from cycling after admitting to doping violations, can't participate in a South Carolina charity ride this weekend that would have reunited him with former US Postal Service teammates, USA Cycling ruled.

While the third annual Gran Fondo Hincapie in Greenville, South Carolina, on October 26 is not an official race, it constitutes a cycling "activity" that is "authorised" by USA Cycling. As a result, Armstrong can't participate, the organisation said.

The World Anti-Doping Agency's code says a banned athlete can't compete in an authorised competition or activity in "any capacity" during a period of ineligibility."

Sometimes I ponder if Jobe Watson or Lance Franklin for example were as individuals in exactly the same trouble as Ahmed Saad. I find it improbable that they would have received the same punitive action if any at all. Pub and forum rumour would have been the worst they would have to deal with.