I can smell a wet lettuce leaf

I can smell a crock of shlt !!

A theme throughout. EFC and fanboys and scaremongers and idiots all push the barrow making out that either the players or their disengenuos 'carers' are the 'innocent " and indeed victims of some AFL ASADA led conspiracy.

The keep tilting at windmills and sprouting "stories' and fabricating stances and each time they are smote and struck down and sent packing.

Nothing different here.

Holidays coming lads !!!

I can smell a crock of shlt !!

Same result

Same result

No..........

Which would you prefer ?? lol

Like most people i am totally over the EFC saga. However i continue to be intrigued by the different takes slants /perspectives key journos have on it. The media response to this will be studied in years to come. In my view few journos can hold thier head high as so many have been unable to write without a clear agenda.

We know the main players: Mick Warner, Slobbo, Chop Le Grand, Caro, John Perik and the bearded grump from Sydney, Patrick Smith. Most will ave their views on who has done a good joob. Mine is Perik, Smith and Caro have been ok but i'm open to the suggestion that perhaps i think that because their views align with mine.

One journo though who i have been really disappointed in is Rohan Connoly. Disappointed because as a rule i think he is one of the better footy journos. But his pieces on this affair have been poor and none more so than his latest. I find his attempt and dismmising thouse on both side of the agnda diingenious as his agenda is so evident 9which he anbnoyingly referncs in this arrttoice, getting ahead of the acccisation by namingt it - give me a break).

But what i find most annoying in this article (and other EFC apologist articles that equate escaping penalties with proving EFC right) is this line:

' There are diatribes on the other side also long discredited. Ongoing references to the once incessantly referenced, now irrelevant AOD-9604.'

A club injecting a drug in large, frequent doses that has not been proven safe for human use is not irrelevant. For me the it is the key point.

He goes on to say they have been punished for this. Bollocks. They were punished for bringing the game into disrepute and poor governance. Compare their punishment ot the one the blues copped many years ago for draft tampering (a much less serious charge in the scheme of things). Carlton has barely recovered from those penalties.

Bring on Workcover.

Roh Roh is a Bombers sycophant.

Connolly and like are falling for the falsehood that the players are entering a court of law. They arent per se. They will be fronting a tribunal whose rules and protocols are somewhat different.

Its not beholding upon ASADA to prove anything as such. They will show what they believe to be the case and their extrapolations as to what they ( ASADA) believe to have occurred. Its then up to the accused to show they are innocent of said transgressions or what mitigation might be taken account of.

This is glossed over at best and dismissed out of hand by many . The media, its fanboys and the various apologists for this atrocious saga are constantly trying to redefine all of this to suit their agendas. The reality will be far simpler. So simple even footballers will soon understand, some more than others.

ASADA's former Chef Executive is quoted as saying about the subpoena's “It is a high risk strategy because even if you could compel potential witnesses to appear you could not guarantee what they would say. It was an absolute last card to play.’’

Almost everything Richard Ings writes is first and foremost about Richard Ings. His opinions re ASADA are not exactly neutral.

Almost everything Richard Ings writes is first and foremost about Richard Ings. His opinions re ASADA are not exactly neutral.

It amazes me he was ever part of ASADA.... seems to have some vendetta going

It amazes me he was ever part of ASADA.... seems to have some vendetta going

Part vendetta, part self-promotion.

The after-dinner circuit can be quite lucrative.

Reading this, just not sure what any of the recent developments will have on the fundamentals of the case. Hours of tapes of interviews that can be played at the Tribunal?

http://www.heraldsun.com.au/news/essendon-doping-key-witness-shane-charter-says-bombers-dudded-by-asada/story-fni0fiyv-1227142664750

come into my parlour said the spider to the fly.

I think whatever ASADA needs from Carter and Danks has already effectively been delivered

EFC will be hoping any absence on behalf of these ne'er do wells will me a door opens to freedom.

The trap was set quite some time ago. Far from door called 'exit' the accused will be walking through one announcing " do not pass go , do not collect......anything !! "

Carter and Danks are theatre. The script was done and dusted some whiles back

Like most people i am totally over the EFC saga. However i continue to be intrigued by the different takes slants /perspectives key journos have on it. The media response to this will be studied in years to come. In my view few journos can hold thier head high as so many have been unable to write without a clear agenda.

We know the main players: Mick Warner, Slobbo, Chop Le Grand, Caro, John Perik and the bearded grump from Sydney, Patrick Smith. Most will ave their views on who has done a good joob. Mine is Perik, Smith and Caro have been ok but i'm open to the suggestion that perhaps i think that because their views align with mine.

.

Different slant indeed. Caro has unfairly maligned Melbourne when we have been at our lowest and kicked the boots in at every opportunity. Forgive me if I don't agree with her assault on Essendon and more so Hird.

Originally she was being leaked information by the AFL and Demetriou both of which were at the same time manipulating another investigation to find Melbourne not guilty of tanking but penalise us anyway,

Once Caro lost her leak Demetriou and her other Adrian Anderson was long gone she became more shrill and declared Hird had been sacked. How does a Cheif writer of a major publication get away with this blatant rubbish? Essendon is in shambles but they will recover from this Caro wont.

So many say one thing ....do another

Hird.. I take ful responsibility.....takes none.....obfuscates and every turn

Danks. I can clear everyone. Give me the chance to tell all in sanctioned forum......runs at every chance. Talks at footy nights...clams up when given opportunity to tell the 'truth'

Fireworks soon

Had too much time on my hands, came across this, perhaps the legals here might like to comment. It's from the WADA code, and covers the "right to silence" and/or refusing to answer questions:

3.2.4 The hearing panel in a hearing on an anti-doping rule violation may draw an inference adverse to the Athlete or other Person who is asserted to have committed an anti-doping rule violation based on the Athlete’s or other Person’s refusal, after a request made in a reasonable time in advance of the hearing, to appear at the hearing (either in person or telephonically as directed by the hearing panel) and to answer questions from the hearing panel or the Anti-Doping Organization asserting the anti-doping rule violation.

[Comment to Article 3.2.4: Drawing an adverse inference under these circumstances has been recognized in numerous CAS decisions.]

Had too much time on my hands, came across this, perhaps the legals here might like to comment. It's from the WADA code, and covers the "right to silence" and/or refusing to answer questions:

3.2.4 The hearing panel in a hearing on an anti-doping rule violation may draw an inference adverse to the Athlete or other Person who is asserted to have committed an anti-doping rule violation based on the Athlete’s or other Person’s refusal, after a request made in a reasonable time in advance of the hearing, to appear at the hearing (either in person or telephonically as directed by the hearing panel) and to answer questions from the hearing panel or the Anti-Doping Organization asserting the anti-doping rule violation.

[Comment to Article 3.2.4: Drawing an adverse inference under these circumstances has been recognized in numerous CAS decisions.]

Thats the trap.

Here's your chance to clear yourself and everyone else....Hearing date and time is.......

No show...well then, maybe you were telling a pack of fibs as you wont tell us what you supposedly say is the truth, we'll draw our own.......trap snaps shut

By the way players your 'get out of jail" card hasnt shown up !!!!

Had too much time on my hands, came across this, perhaps the legals here might like to comment. It's from the WADA code, and covers the "right to silence" and/or refusing to answer questions:

3.2.4 The hearing panel in a hearing on an anti-doping rule violation may draw an inference adverse to the Athlete or other Person who is asserted to have committed an anti-doping rule violation based on the Athlete’s or other Person’s refusal, after a request made in a reasonable time in advance of the hearing, to appear at the hearing (either in person or telephonically as directed by the hearing panel) and to answer questions from the hearing panel or the Anti-Doping Organization asserting the anti-doping rule violation.

[Comment to Article 3.2.4: Drawing an adverse inference under these circumstances has been recognized in numerous CAS decisions.]

Read this again carefully.

Redleg if charter and alvi are asked under oath if what they said to asada in their interviews is true and they answer it is, is this the equivalent of an affidavit?

Redleg if charter and alvi are asked under oath if what they said to asada in their interviews is true and they answer it is, is this the equivalent of an affidavit?

Surely no one will be under any oath in front of an AFL tribunal.

Had too much time on my hands, came across this, perhaps the legals here might like to comment. It's from the WADA code, and covers the "right to silence" and/or refusing to answer questions:

3.2.4 The hearing panel in a hearing on an anti-doping rule violation may draw an inference adverse to the Athlete or other Person who is asserted to have committed an anti-doping rule violation based on the Athlete’s or other Person’s refusal, after a request made in a reasonable time in advance of the hearing, to appear at the hearing (either in person or telephonically as directed by the hearing panel) and to answer questions from the hearing panel or the Anti-Doping Organization asserting the anti-doping rule violation.

[Comment to Article 3.2.4: Drawing an adverse inference under these circumstances has been recognized in numerous CAS decisions.]

My reading of that is it only applies if the person being accused chooses not to answer questions.

Charter is not the one being accused of the violation, the players are.

Surely no one will be under any oath in front of an AFL tribunal.

I meant at today's supreme Court hearing. But perhaps they're not appearing?

I have had a feeling last few weeks that they will get off and that feeling is only growing stronger by the day, and I hate it the smug look on hirds face and the told you so from bombers supporters will be too much to bare

An irony if they get off because Charter and Alvi don't testify or sign affidavits is the choice to drag the case on by EFC will have been an even more of a monumental [censored] up costing, time energy and money

if they get off at the afl tribunal ASADA will just appeal to the CAS - where charter and alavi will be subpoenaed to appear.

I have had a feeling last few weeks that they will get off and that feeling is only growing stronger by the day, and I hate it the smug look on hirds face and the told you so from bombers supporters will be too much to bare

I'm glad you trust your feelings. I've been sifting through chicken entrails for weeks now and still can't get a fix on what's going to happen.