I say it's the AFL's fault for creating an environment where winning is rewarded with premierships. Under a different rule set maybe teams wouldn't be incentivised to win and therefore not resort to performance enhancing drugs.

i wonder if pretty boy will just claim we did it to create a level playing field (Lance Armstrong)

but weight, there's more !!

I reckon there is every possible chance you will break records with your one-liners on this one B59!

It just shows what a criminal genius CS truly is given that he was just a twinkle in his old mans eye when JFK copped it.

Twinkle in his old man's eye as he looked down the scope to the motorcade driving along the Dealey Plaza.

On topic:

Bwahahahahahahahahahahahaha!

James "the Golden Boy' Hird indeed.

Just makes the Dees at 10/1 to make finals a better bet.

I know a club thats coming in for a heavy landing !~!~!

Just makes the Dees at 10/1 to make finals a better bet.

Betting should be suspended, as the odds in a 17 team comp would be different.

Bugger - I hate a fixture with byes.

I know a club thats coming in for a heavy landing !~!~!

Yeah, more like a V-1 Doodle Bug than a Lancaster.

Just makes the Dees at 10/1 to make finals a better bet.

Yep. Great value and have already snapped it up.

I wonder how their sponsors will feel about this? Lots of bad press. Could the bombers be in for a year like the one we just had?

Ha Ha how funny is it thats its essendon. Wonder what Tim Watson will have to say about it tomorrow on radio. The golden boy is in charge of a dodgy club. Hird I mean.

Is it the weapons fault.

Well venom denham speak out about that instead of us.

Happy days.

I

Macbeth (on injections in the vault rumours):
We have no spur
To [censored] the sides of our
intent, but only
Vaulting ambition, which o'erleaps itself,
And falls on
th'other. . . .

Macbeth Act 1, scene 7.
25–28

Some rhetorical questions to consider...

IF the players have all had performance enhancing drugs put into their system, why no positive tests?

AND, could the AFL possibly suspend all those players? How could they NOT?

Would that leave Essendon unable to field a side?

Would the AFL remove the possibility of gaining premiership points, a la Storm penalties?

If so, would the AFL remove their first round pick in the 2013 draft, so that they don't receive pick 1?

IF, as Evans claimed, they aren't "performance enhancing", what is the issue? Why are they being investigated?

Could the substances technically be ILLICIT substances, for the purpose of enhancing performance?

As I was just discussing with some friends just yesterday, a lot of "pre-workout supplements" these days contain synthetic substances very similar to speed. They get you juiced for a big workout, but you'll struggle to sleep that night, and whilst a lot are made illegal, new versions with slightly different synthetic additives are released at such a rapid rate the authorities struggle to keep up.

If the players took supplements and signed documents with the full knowledge that they were sailing close to the wind, they should cop whatever penalties they are given if there are any at all. I'm not saying they are guilty but if they were aware of what they were doing they don't have much of a defence.

This is a bit more serious than fumbling the ball, or not playing a 17 year old, skinny recruit.

I agree. But mighty big IF.

I should have said as much as I dislike Essendon istill would want an improved process to that undertaken against and endured by MFC.

Funny to see the 'land forum homepage advertising "WICKED Supplements"!

Go Injectiondon!

Don't know what the supplement was; obviously more than multivitamin doses. Having players sign waivers is also a worry.

I think if I was an Essendon player I'd be a bit concerned about my long term health.

Go Injectiondon!

Was I the only one who thought IT'S MORPHIN TIME?

No?

Where's YDE when you need him?

IF the players have all had performance enhancing drugs put into their system, why no positive tests?

Could the substances technically be ILLICIT substances, for the purpose of enhancing performance?

Are masking agents still an issue in sport and if so, could that be the cause of the investigation?

So who does drug testing for the AFL the AFL or ASADA? I assume no positive tests occurred so would assume no issue? Or am I completely off base?

Some rhetorical questions to consider...

IF the players have all had performance enhancing drugs put into their system, why no positive tests?

AND, could the AFL possibly suspend all those players? How could they NOT?

Would that leave Essendon unable to field a side?

Would the AFL remove the possibility of gaining premiership points, a la Storm penalties?

If so, would the AFL remove their first round pick in the 2013 draft, so that they don't receive pick 1?

IF, as Evans claimed, they aren't "performance enhancing", what is the issue? Why are they being investigated?

Could the substances technically be ILLICIT substances, for the purpose of enhancing performance?

As I was just discussing with some friends just yesterday, a lot of "pre-workout supplements" these days contain synthetic substances very similar to speed. They get you juiced for a big workout, but you'll struggle to sleep that night, and whilst a lot are made illegal, new versions with slightly different synthetic additives are released at such a rapid rate the authorities struggle to keep up.

it was said these supplements contained "peptides" which is a precursor to human growth hormone. both are banned performance substances.

players made comment about being "close to the limit". this suggests that maybe they were low doses which might fall below the testing minimums

this is just rumour/conjecture

The only thing that will beat this story so far is the total abolition of tanking allegations against the MFC.

Until that happens, today is right up there...

Hird & Thompson must have known this was going on.

They must have had a full run down of what the fitness dept were doing.

Edited February 5, 201312 yr by why you little

I think from legal standpoint, the club may have covered its arse somewhat, but I don't think the AFL would turn a blind eye to the club's part in all of this just because the players signed a waiver for something the club doctors/ sports scientists told them was ok.

However, having to sign a waiver should be so out of place for something that could do no harm, that despite the doctor's assurances, it should have been ringing serious alarm bells for the players.

Hence why it has probably come out now.

And for a waiver to be drawn up, surely the club's legal team and/or administration would have to be involved in some way?

I severely doubt this is something Dank did himself on his dell and then punched it out of his inkjet printer at home.

Finally, Lance Armstrong.

By the reports the AFL got involved at the request of Essendon management (if you believe it)

Mind you they may have just been trying to get in first because it was about to break

Thats good.

If the AFL has created a culture that Clubs are transparent about their dealings then this is a positive.

And you are right about wanting to get in first.

Although the AFL went soft on Adelaide, their effort to come clean first time around was a disaster.

Im not sure if its been mentioned but has not yet banned in AUS, however as it has been banned by the world governing body. Im not sure how that works but will be interesting.