On 06/12/2013 at 04:16, PJ_12345 said:

At the same time though why should Essendon care?

The AFL have fined them and that's that, nothing the AFL can do now - should have put it in writing. Also this way Hird, who will most likely end up wearing all this including a shortened career, gets paid and keeps quiet.

I don't particularly agree with this view, and Essendon are hedging their bets because if ASADA/WADA come down tough with player sanctions their sponsors, players and most importantly supporters will go... then they will be back at the AFL HQ asking for aid.

Don't bite the hand that will probably end up feeding you!

Worth remembering on their part - if ASADA issue infractions, it is the AFL (tribunal?) handing out the penalties if I'm not mistaken.

If they keep this up, you couldn't imagine there would too much sympathy at AFL house.

In their position I'd be courting as much support as I could get.

  On 06/12/2013 at 05:17, GM11 said:

Worth remembering on their part - if ASADA issue infractions, it is the AFL (tribunal?) handing out the penalties if I'm not mistaken.

If they keep this up, you couldn't imagine there would too much sympathy at AFL house.

In their position I'd be courting as much support as I could get.

Trouble is Hird is a lose cannon that Essendon cannot control.

However I agree

i presume asada can issue an infraction notice against a coach (Hird)?

yep

  On 06/12/2013 at 04:48, PJ_12345 said:

Already been done for next season.

Not to mention the EFC still makes them more profit than other teams like us and the Bulldogs + imagine the pro-EFC stuff the club will have the media pushing through... "they are deliberately discriminating against us, we've got our penalties, they are trying to run us into the ground blah blah blah".

Would draw unwanted drama to Vlad when he is trying to repair the ALF's and his image.

It's aggressive view which I don't like and a move which the club pre-Little wouldn't have done.

Vlad is doing nothing to repair his or the AFL's image: he is tainting it further the longer he prevaricates on this.

  On 06/12/2013 at 04:10, why you little said:

No.

Let them go toe to toe hammer & tong with each other....

Just plain dumb. It's a disaster for AFL football. People need to take off narrow minded red and blue goggles.

It's alright WYL you're not the only one.

  On 06/12/2013 at 01:20, Fifty-5 said:

It does seems as though the AFL made a mistake not specifically writing in the condition that Hird should not be paid by Essendon while he's suspended - they mistakenly thought that Essendon wouldn't be brazen enough to do that - naive really after all that's happened, but hardly a firing offence. I'm amazed that Essendon would do such a provocative thing and further aggravate their relationship with the leagues governing body. They should be trying to build a bridge.

Exactly.

It's to been seen what Lon term damage Essendon have done to their major stakeholders the AFL and their members.

I trust the ongoing saga will encourage Essendon supporters to challenge their messiah.

  On 06/12/2013 at 07:28, Rhino Richards said:

Just plain dumb. It's a disaster for AFL football. People need to take off narrow minded red and blue goggles.

It's alright WYL you're not the only one.

Like

  On 06/12/2013 at 07:28, Rhino Richards said:

Just plain dumb. It's a disaster for AFL football. People need to take off narrow minded red and blue goggles.

It's alright WYL you're not the only one.

What is done is done. I prefer to air all dirty laundry than shove it under the carpet.

The stories are out.

  On 06/12/2013 at 04:56, Akum said:

Very Lance Armstrong!

Well no … Armstrong, as well as all/any of the cyclists recently prosecuted or "outed", have all taken responsibility for their actions and apologised. The reports from the recent meeting between Armstrong and Emma O'Reilly make sobering reading.

Which is part of the problem here. No-one is really taking responsibility, and in both camps (Essendon and AFL) they see this primarily as an administrative and public relations issue. It's about managing a problem, as opposed to addressing it.

  On 06/12/2013 at 08:05, why you little said:

What is done is done. I prefer to air all dirty laundry than shove it under the carpet.

The stories are out.

Like I said its plain....

The AFL should be seeking to mitigate the damage to the game notwithstanding the recalcitrant and cancerous behaviour of one club.

They will get their whack but the AFL does not need to crucify itself to the detriment of the 17 clubs and their supporters.

  On 06/12/2013 at 08:32, bing181 said:

Well no … Armstrong, as well as all/any of the cyclists recently prosecuted or "outed", have all taken responsibility for their actions and apologised. The reports from the recent meeting between Armstrong and Emma O'Reilly make sobering reading.

Which is part of the problem here. No-one is really taking responsibility, and in both camps (Essendon and AFL) they see this primarily as an administrative and public relations issue. It's about managing a problem, as opposed to addressing it.

FWIW Armstrong has never taken full responsibility for the litany of major failings he has been instrumental in.

And its goes far beyond just drug taking.

Armstrong takes the term "odious" "cheat" and "dishonest" to an unparalleled low.

He is beyond redemption from a sporting sense.

  On 06/12/2013 at 08:47, Rhino Richards said:

FWIW Armstrong has never taken full responsibility for the litany of major failings he has been instrumental in.

And its goes far beyond just drug taking.

Armstrong takes the term "odious" "cheat" and "dishonest" to an unparalleled low.

He is beyond redemption from a sporting sense.

Armstrong is the poster boy for a massive problem that has been entrenched in cycling from the year dot. It's nearly 50 years since Tom Simpson died.

But this isn't the the thread for it, and I can see that you've already made up your mind in any case.

If you are taking on the biggest dog in the yard you had better have a big stick. The Bummers are fighting a dirty game. EIther they have some explosive information or they are deluded. Or possibly both.

The revenge game is pretty messy though and as the Chinese say, if you are seeking revenge, best you dig two graves....

Hird and Dimwit.... hmmm come to think of it....nice ring about it

  On 06/12/2013 at 09:36, jnrmac said:

If you are taking on the biggest dog in the yard you had better have a big stick. The Bummers are fighting a dirty game. EIther they have some explosive information or they are deluded. Or possibly both.

The revenge game is pretty messy though and as the CHinese say, if you are seeking revenge, best you dig two graves....

Hird and Dimwit.... hmmm come to think of it....nice ring about it

Love it Jnr

  On 06/12/2013 at 08:44, Rhino Richards said:

Like I said its plain....

The AFL should be seeking to mitigate the damage to the game notwithstanding the recalcitrant and cancerous behaviour of one club.

They will get their whack but the AFL does not need to crucify itself to the detriment of the 17 clubs and their supporters.

Essendrug are doing it to themselves Rhino it has nothing to do with Red and Blue glasses.

This is their doing. The WADA Infractions were always coming.

  On 06/12/2013 at 11:00, why you little said:

The WADA Infractions were always coming.

Except that a) WADA aren't directly involved, and b) the local anti-doping body, ASADA, don't issue infraction notices. In the AFL, infraction notices come from the AFL:

ASADA agrees that the AFL retains all functions and powers relating to this Code, including all functions and powers relating to the issuing of an infraction notice, the convening of hearings, the presentation of allegations of an Anti Doping Rule Violations at a hearing and all matters incidental thereto.

and ...

As soon as possible after the AFL General Manager - Football Operations has received notification from ASADA of an Adverse Analytical Finding or he believes on other grounds that there may have been committed an Anti Doping Rule Violation or a breach of this Code, he will give to the Person an infraction notice, together with a copy of this Code, and refer the matter to the Tribunal for hearing and determination.

http://www.afl.com.au/staticfile/AFL%20Tenant/AFL/Files/Schedule%206%20-%20National%20Anti-Doping%20Code.pdf

  On 06/12/2013 at 11:45, bing181 said:

Except that a) WADA aren't directly involved, and b) the local anti-doping body, ASADA, don't issue infraction notices. In the AFL, infraction notices come from … the AFL:

ASADA agrees that the AFL retains all functions and powers relating to this Code, including all functions and powers relating to the issuing of an infraction notice, the convening of hearings, the presentation of allegations of an Anti Doping Rule Violations at a hearing and all matters incidental thereto.

and ...

As soon as possible after the AFL General Manager - Football Operations has received notification from ASADA of an Adverse Analytical Finding or he believes on other grounds that there may have been committed an Anti Doping Rule Violation or a breach of this Code, he will give to the Person an infraction notice, together with a copy of this Code, and refer the matter to the Tribunal for hearing and determination.

http://www.afl.com.au/staticfile/AFL%20Tenant/AFL/Files/Schedule%206%20-%20National%20Anti-Doping%20Code.pdf

Yes, but WADA have shown they will appeal at the drop of a hat if they consider that the AFL is letting the guilty parties off too lightly. And they usually seem to get their way in the end.

Maybe this seemingly petty appeal against the Saad penalty is more of a shot across the AFL's bows in relation to EFC, rather than a desire to do more harm to Saad.

The Saad appeal is by ASADA, as was the Matthew Clark appeal, and basically for the same reasons: the penalty is set at two years.

WADA would only get involved in an appeal process if there's no local anti-doping organisation, or if there had been a failure by the local body to see that WADA rules were implemented. The latter is rare, and AFAIK, there has never been a WADA appeal in Australia.

I agree with you in regards to "shot across the bows". The AFL are learning that in least in some aspects of governance of the game, there are higher powers at play.

  On 06/12/2013 at 11:00, why you little said:

Essendrug are doing it to themselves Rhino it has nothing to do with Red and Blue glasses.

This is their doing. The WADA Infractions were always coming.

yep, theyre contempt for the rule of their masters and arrogance in the face of penalty is amazing.

Cant wait tor the infractions their egos will explode

Staggered that some are suggesting that its somehow inappropriate to be critical of the CEO of the organisation that runs the game when he's been found to be inept over so many aspects of this doping scandal.

Completely staggered.

The Essendon board seems determined to support Hird and get Demetriou on this issue - Bombers ready to defy AFL and keep coach on the payroll.

It's high risk, costly and likely to explode in their faces. Surely, many of their fans would be mortified because among other things it will, in all likelihood, do nothing to help those players who are ultimately served with infraction notices.

  On 06/12/2013 at 19:26, Sydney Pennski said:

Staggered that some are suggesting that its somehow inappropriate to be critical of the CEO of the organisation that runs the game when he's been found to be inept over so many aspects of this doping scandal.

Completely staggered.

I am not sure anyone has said that at all but stay staggered none the less.

  On 06/12/2013 at 11:45, bing181 said:

Except that a) WADA aren't directly involved, and b) the local anti-doping body, ASADA, don't issue infraction notices. In the AFL, infraction notices come from the AFL:

ASADA agrees that the AFL retains all functions and powers relating to this Code, including all functions and powers relating to the issuing of an infraction notice, the convening of hearings, the presentation of allegations of an Anti Doping Rule Violations at a hearing and all matters incidental thereto.

and ...

As soon as possible after the AFL General Manager - Football Operations has received notification from ASADA of an Adverse Analytical Finding or he believes on other grounds that there may have been committed an Anti Doping Rule Violation or a breach of this Code, he will give to the Person an infraction notice, together with a copy of this Code, and refer the matter to the Tribunal for hearing and determination.

http://www.afl.com.au/staticfile/AFL%20Tenant/AFL/Files/Schedule%206%20-%20National%20Anti-Doping%20Code.pdf

OK, so instead of saying asada might issue an Infraction Notice technically we should say asada might issue an Adverse Analytical Finding

common practice then would be that one follows the other n'est ce pas?

  On 06/12/2013 at 20:19, Whispering_Jack said:

The Essendon board seems determined to support Hird and get Demetriou on this issue - Bombers ready to defy AFL and keep coach on the payroll.

It's high risk, costly and likely to explode in their faces. Surely, many of their fans would be mortified because among other things it will, in all likelihood, do nothing to help those players who are ultimately served with infraction notices.

Agree. I wonder if any of the supporters amongst the James Hird messiah crowd are starting to question the damage he has brought the players, the club and the game.

I am not sure there is any wins here for Essendon just a range of loss scenarios.