Robbo will struggle to report anything

He'll manage provided he gets a chance to read what other journos have written.

He can then pick pieces out of the various stories and make it look like his own.

I've said before, I'll say it again!! I honestly believe that we are about to get the greatest anticlimax of all time. This shite has gone on too long, I'm not sure any of the major contributors actually know where they stand anymore. Essendon will will compete in 2015 with their best list all available and turd will remain as coach. What a [censored] up this saga has been!!

I've said before, I'll say it again!! I honestly believe that we are about to get the greatest anticlimax of all time. This shite has gone on too long, I'm not sure any of the major contributors actually know where they stand anymore. Essendon will will compete in 2015 with their best list all available and turd will remain as coach. What a [censored] up this saga has been!!

Despite what we read in the "Rags" ASADA never expressed any doubts about it's case against the players! Also, no person has ever been able to provide a realistic scenario in which the players are able to prove that they weren't doped!!

I've said before, I'll say it again!! I honestly believe that we are about to get the greatest anticlimax of all time. This shite has gone on too long, I'm not sure any of the major contributors actually know where they stand anymore. Essendon will will compete in 2015 with their best list all available and turd will remain as coach. What a [censored] up this saga has been!!

and i thought you were more .......aware....dare i say...interpolative..

BBO...this is a game,...

surely you dont judge this by media indications !!! quelle horreur !!!

and i thought you were more .......aware....dare i say...interpolative..

BBO...this is a game,...

surely you dont judge this by media indications !!! quelle horreur !!!

you must understand bb, that bbo views life through the bottom of a gin bottle, somewhat colouring his perspective and dulling his senses

AFL and Essendon hiding behind closed doors

and not one person is surprised

ASADA also wanted it behind closed doors.

As these cases always are/have been.

No surprises.

Essendon and dickhird have played this in public...

now they dont

ASADA have pushed this and it suggests to me that their case is weak.

Whatever happens now one side will say it was a cover up and they were robbed.

The smell of lettuce leaves gets strong by the day

Actually OD, this was at the request of the AFLPA to protect the 34

players who haven't been named (apart from 14 whose names were leaked by Robbo months ago). In a perfect world, cases such as these should be open to the public for a number of reasons but our game doesn't operate in a perfect world. It operates in a world where a football club runs a 12 month long doping programme and injects substances into the bodies of its players which it subsequently can't identify because the records have gone missing. It's a world of Stephen Dank and his confidante Martin Hardie, of Shane Charters and the Weapon, of club doctors who are devoid of courage, of shady chemists and scheming, manipulative coaches and their ambitious wives. Everybody wants to see and hear what's going on. We are all voyeurs.

Best to keep it all under wraps. We don't want the kiddies to know of this.

Oh dear, sorry but it is very relevant.

...................................................................................................................................................................................................

A question you might like to ask yourself is given the interests of EFC and James Hird appear to have diverged and given there have public strains between EFC/Little and Hird, why hasn’t Hird then been terminated? How do you explain the unusual flip flop behavior between the treatment and retention of Bomber and Hird?

I believe the Board are prepared to jettison Hird but Little’s diamond crusted contract with Hird has severely limited their power to do so and that when they have sought to move on him, Hird and his advisers have clearly reminded them of whats at stake.

And the Board would have an impossible case to sack Hird on the basis of the drugs scandal given there was no clear roles and accountabilities for any EFC executive at that time in regard player welfare, they have since endorsed Hird by giving him another more expensive contract.

Quite simply if they (the board) sack him they would need to step down as they extended his contract. As a board they live by their decision and they die by their decision to extend. Little and his board had nailed their colours to Hird's mast from the start.

The move by Little to get the article out saying the board would call for EFC members to decide Hird's fate, is another example of the current Board trying not to make a decision that effectively signs their own marching orders.

From a governance standpoint its seems strange move to call for a members vote on a coach. Members vote for the Board to be their representatives and steer the strategic direction of the club.

It reeks of desperation and stubbornness not to make the call which needed to be made due to misplaced loyalty and passion to Hird.

I thought AFL was a team sport?

Actually OD, this was at the request of the AFLPA to protect the 34

players who haven't been named (apart from 14 whose names were leaked by Robbo months ago). In a perfect world, cases such as these should be open to the public for a number of reasons but our game doesn't operate in a perfect world. It operates in a world where a football club runs a 12 month long doping programme and injects substances into the bodies of its players which it subsequently can't identify because the records have gone missing. It's a world of Stephen Dank and his confidante Martin Hardie, of Shane Charters and the Weapon, of club doctors who are devoid of courage, of shady chemists and scheming, manipulative coaches and their ambitious wives. Everybody wants to see and hear what's going on. We are all voyeurs.

Best to keep it all under wraps. We don't want the kiddies to know of this.

All the usual suspects sans Robert De Niro and Joe Pesci! . . any space left for the Clinical Researcher, the Investor, the Venture Capitalist and the "Wannabee" Pharmaceutical Co?

ASADA have pushed this and it suggests to me that their case is weak.

Whatever happens now one side will say it was a cover up and they were robbed.

The smell of lettuce leaves gets strong by the day

Ess have pushed for it to be behind closed doors to protect the players identity I believe...

ASADA have pushed this and it suggests to me that their case is weak.

Whatever happens now one side will say it was a cover up and they were robbed.

The smell of lettuce leaves gets strong by the day

OD, this suggest nothing of the kind. There are some very powerful voices in the media on Hird's side, so it could at least be argued that public hearing might advantage him.

In any case it makes no difference. No amount of grandstanding and "appealing to public opinion" will save him. It is ultimately in the hands of international arbiters, and they will not be swayed in the least by his grandstanding, in fact quite the opposite.

Quite simply if they (the board) sack him they would need to step down as they extended his contract. As a board they live by their decision and they die by their decision to extend. Little and his board had nailed their colours to Hird's mast from the start.

The move by Little to get the article out saying the board would call for EFC members to decide Hird's fate, is another example of the current Board trying not to make a decision that effectively signs their own marching orders.

From a governance standpoint its seems strange move to call for a members vote on a coach. Members vote for the Board to be their representatives and steer the strategic direction of the club.

It reeks of desperation and stubbornness not to make the call which needed to be made due to misplaced loyalty and passion to Hird.

I thought AFL was a team sport?

And I might add in serious dereliction of their directors duties. He has something on them - it is the only logical explanation for experienced directors to operate in such a weak-kneed way.

nahhh they'll be too busy drowning sorrows or cutting wrists to write anything !!

The Tribunal hearings will take place behind closed doors.

This means we can all look forward to selective leaks from Robbo, Rohan Connolly and Chip Le Grand.

HSun's latest beat-up/non story:

http://www.heraldsun.com.au/news/essendon-doping-secret-email-reveals-asadas-job-lure-to-key-witness-shane-charter/story-fni0fiyv-1227149197014?nk=5cf4ae66eaa75cec092cf0a63a3b19a8

"The Herald Sun has also learned ASADA held internal discussions about giving Charter a role; however, he was never formally offered one.

Sources say that ASADA talked about recruiting him to educate athletes about the dangers of doping, but the idea was terminated after checks with Victoria Police."

Essendon supplements saga: Hearings to be held behind closed doors

Last Wednesday, Dank's barrister informed tribunal chairman Jones of Dank's intention to testify at the anti-doping hearing. However that was conditional on the proceedings being public.

Legal academic Martin Hardie, who was involved with Essendon for much of the investigation and is a confidant of Dank, then told Fairfax Media Dank wanted to end the controversy surrounding the peptide program.

"He is quite happy to go before the tribunal. He believes once his evidence is heard, there will be no case that there was doping," Hardie said.

Dank has maintained he has records that will clear the Bombers, their players and coach James Hird of any wrongdoing.

This is shonky on so many levels that it's not funny.

If only the AFL would open up the Tribunal to dare this creep and his "confidant" to have their day in court!

Essendon supplements saga: Hearings to be held behind closed doors

This is shonky on so many levels that it's not funny.

If only the AFL would open up the Tribunal to dare this creep and his "confidant" to have their day in court!

I think there's probably only one certainty in all of this, which is that whatever Dank says he'll do he won't do. An open hearing isn't going to guarantee that any 'evidence' Dank might be able to provide will be truthful anyway, just that he'll finally have a public stage on which to posture without the usual constraints and obligations of the witness box.

But presumably since whatever decisions the tribunal makes are subject to appeal (including by WADA) the evidence they rely on can be opened to more general scrutiny at some stage?

Essendon supplements saga: Hearings to be held behind closed doors

This is shonky on so many levels that it's not funny.

If only the AFL would open up the Tribunal to dare this creep and his "confidant" to have their day in court!

Why does Dank wait for an appearance at the Tribunal (formerly he wanted a regular court)?

Dank can give his evidence to the HUN and avoid cross-examination. The fact that he hasn't even done that suggests he is full of hot air.

Why does Dank wait for an appearance at the Tribunal (formerly he wanted a regular court)?

Dank can give his evidence to the HUN and avoid cross-examination. The fact that he hasn't even done that suggests he is full of hot air.

He's already given evidence to The AGE and stuffed up. Oops Thymosin 4 is banned?

Why does Dank wait for an appearance at the Tribunal (formerly he wanted a regular court)?

Dank can give his evidence to the HUN and avoid cross-examination. The fact that he hasn't even done that suggests he is full of hot air.

"full of hot air" . . such a wonderful phrase!

In context I can't help but ponder what the chemical composition of this hot air might be and what would be it's odour if it were to be in some way or another expelled!

Why does Dank wait for an appearance at the Tribunal (formerly he wanted a regular court)?

Dank can give his evidence to the HUN and avoid cross-examination. The fact that he hasn't even done that suggests he is full of hot air.

I ask myself the question why, if the evidence existed to exonerate a club, its staff and its players, would anyone who had such evidence withhold it from the relevant authorities and the parties for so long?

None of the answers that I can come up with would lead me to hold such person in a favourable light.

I ask myself the question why, if the evidence existed to exonerate a club, its staff and its players, would anyone who had such evidence withhold it from the relevant authorities and the parties for so long?

None of the answers that I can come up with would lead me to hold such person in a favourable light.

Exactly - particularly given whilst he might have an axe to grind with EFC on more than one occasion he has sympathized with the players. But leaving that aside what about the moral duty? it was his program (and the players blind faith) after all that has exposed the players to these charges.

Beggars belief.

As does his pathetic threats to sue all and sundry (where are all those defamation cases at?) and fatuous claims he would only appear in the safety of a court - hold that the AFL tribunal is ok, but only if it open to the public. Because of course no one can be trusted and this all an ASADA/AFL conspiracy.

Pathetic. As is Hardie. A legal academic my arse.

And you can throw Chip Le Grand in for good measure. I heard him on SEN the other day ('breaking'the story ASADA had considered offering Charter a job - which the article actually noted after checking with Vic pol they dd not proceed with - some scoop) and that numskull Mark Allen said something along the lines of thank god for Chip who cuts through all the rubbish and makes sense. Are people for real? Chop again reiterated that the case will get thrown out next week because the players lawyers will successfully argue ASADA do not have sufficient evidence.

If it doesn't will he admit his error? Of course not. Just as Mick Warner made no comment about spectacularly wrong he got the outcome EFC appeal. How he could return to journalism after his ridiculous and 100% wrong cricket score analogies is anyone's guess.

I ask myself the question why, if the evidence existed to exonerate a club, its staff and its players, would anyone who had such evidence withhold it from the relevant authorities and the parties for so long?

None of the answers that I can come up with would lead me to hold such person in a favourable light.

You are not Robinson Crusoe WJ

Exactly - particularly given whilst he might have an axe to grind with EFC on more than one occasion he has sympathized with the players. But leaving that aside what about the moral duty? it was his program (and the players blind faith) after all that has exposed the players to these charges.

Beggars belief.

As does his pathetic threats to sue all and sundry (where are all those defamation cases at?) and fatuous claims he would only appear in the safety of a court - hold that the AFL tribunal is ok, but only if it open to the public. Because of course no one can be trusted and this all an ASADA/AFL conspiracy.

Pathetic. As is Hardie. A legal academic my arse.

And you can throw Chip Le Grand in for good measure. I heard him on SEN the other day ('breaking'the story ASADA had considered offering Charter a job - which the article actually noted after checking with Vic pol they dd not proceed with - some scoop) and that numskull Mark Allen said something along the lines of thank god for Chip who cuts through all the rubbish and makes sense. Are people for real? Chop again reiterated that the case will get thrown out next week because the players lawyers will successfully argue ASADA do not have sufficient evidence.

If it doesn't will he admit his error? Of course not. Just as Mick Warner made no comment about spectacularly wrong he got the outcome EFC appeal. How he could return to journalism after his ridiculous and 100% wrong cricket score analogies is anyone's guess.

These amused me greatly at the time. Just a quick reading of that Social Litigator blog showed these analogies to be completely off the mark.

Hard to believe that some of these guys still have a job.