THE ESSENDON 34: ON TRIAL

[dees189227 10,909]

jon ralph tweet. Nice touch from Bombers - putting on buses to Sydney and giving away free tickets to reward fans who have stuck by them for Round 1 game.

How nice of them to suck up to there fans.

I wonder if ASADA are so annoyed they will take it out on the 2 pies players

[bing181 8,200]

Colin, while I admit I was wrong on my prediction, I have learned more today and can, I think, answer your questions pretty simply. ...

Redleg, just to ask, are you using "learned" in the sense of "something I've figured out", or more specifically "something I heard from someone connected with the case/tribunal"?

[beelzebub 22,269]

Absolutely gob smacked.

Circumstantial evidence is overwhelming.

Then an AFL tribunal say they are innocent.

FMD how corrupt are the AFL?

Surely ASADA & WADA will now go for the Jugular?

I had lost a lot of faith with the AFL, now I have no faith.

They have no credibility.

But I guess they get back 2% cred with dropping the price of chips to $3

so they now have ...oooh 2% credibility !! lol

[Fork 'em 6,558]

[beelzebub 22,269]

Winners are grinners . . . . . .

I feel sick

[Hampton 22 519]

Sorry if this question has been answered already, but wouldn't the Essendon players be better off not playing in round 1 etc. if ASADA announces an appeal? Should the appeal then be successful, any suspension starts this year rather than 2014.

[wattsup 470]

Hirds crocodile tears make me sick

[Straight Sets Simon 23,113]

Paul Little makes my skin crawl.

[beelzebub 22,269]

You can't countenance an argument they simply did their job and based on the evidence were unable to conclude, to their comfortable satisfaction, the players were administered a banned drug?

Or perhaps you have seen all the evidence?

Guilty people go free. It happens in courts and tribunals all over the world.

Please....spare me

The 3 particulars have exhibited past sympathies towards outcomes suiting the AFL continuing their preferred endeavors even when obvious transgressions have occurred.

What we have just witnessed is the inverse of a kangaroo court.

Theres enough evidence in the public domain to bury these bastards but the 3 wise men decided against a reasonable judgement in favour of one more comfortable to their lords.

the AFL Tribunal :

[Guest]

Winners are grinners . . . . . .

Certain photos/paintings are often given titles to display what the viewer should feel upon seeing them.

I think this photo should be titled 'Punchable'.

[bing181 8,200]

http://www.heraldsun.com.au/sport/afl/essendon-verdict-asada-case-failure-likely-caused-by-witnesses-not-appearing/story-fni5f22o-1227286648242

THE failure of the ASADA case is likely to have been caused by the 11th-hour decision by key witnesses to opt out of appearing at the tribunal.

Both anti-ageing clinician Shane Charter and pharmacist Nima Alavi declined to swear statements or appear before the tribunal judges.

[Young Dee 1,303]

Is this thread going to go on for anther 100 pages? Lucky I didn't spend hours reading this thread.

The decision isn't even the worst bit - its all the Essendon staff and co now coming out and saying told you we were innocent... we deserve an apology blah blah - ("The Tribunal was not comfortably satisfied").

I will accept the decision however think it would be great if at the start of every Essendon game the opposition boos them as they run on.

Then they will never forget they are a bunch of flogs!

Edited March 31, 2015 by Young Dee

[Whispering_Jack 28,024]

Colin, while I admit I was wrong on my prediction, I have learned more today and can, I think, answer your questions pretty simply.

Essendon ran a supplements program that according to the AFL and their own admitted report, was a shambles. They were dealt with by the AFL for their lack of Governance.

The Players were charged with attempting to, or actually using, banned substances.

The Tribunal had to reach a stage of comfortable satisfaction of guilt. It didn't.

Why not you ask? Answer: because the evidence led by ASADA was unsworn, unsigned, not given before the tribunal orally and therefore not able to be properly scrutinised or tested.

The Players would have given evidence that they didn't intend to take anything illegal, that they were told what they took was legal and that they basically didn't know absolutely what was injected into them.

That then leads to only one conclusion when the ramifications are so serious and that is, that the Prosecution evidence can't be relied on and therefore the Tribunal doesn't get to a Comfortable Satisfaction of guilt.

Were Charters, Alavi, etc got at and told not to comply or just protected their own position, maybe/probably.

I now think that ASADA may consider not even appealling.

It will be interesting if the above forms the basis of the written decision. WADA's position will, I believe, be based on whether it considers the Tribunal's understanding of "comfortable satisfaction" accords with the international precedents.

[Emerald 1,719]

Where's the riot happening so I can head on down?

[sue 8,463]

If ASADA does appeal, to whom do they appeal? Surely not the same tribunal?

[Young Dee 1,303]

Couldn't someone go throw some empty syringes around their new training ground?

Wait till they are spotted then Six6Six can take some pics of Hird picking them up and post them on ASADA's/Bombers Facebook page.

Edited March 31, 2015 by Young Dee

[What 18,810]

If ASADA does appeal, to whom do they appeal? Surely not the same tribunal?

Think it goes to the CAS?

[sue 8,463]

... I am not sure ASADA has additional/new evidence to put to justify an appeal. And if they do have it why wasn't it tabled earlier?

Presumably an appeal is based on the Tribunal having got it wrong in view of the evidence that was already presented. Or perhaps that the process they used was flawed.

[Lucifers Hero 37,227]

The lessons are simply this:

Don't keep records

Don't fail a drug test

Wade Lees must be really farked off.

Another lesson: play a Sgt Schultz game and 'I know nothing'...least of all don't tell the truth, as Lees unfortunately did.

[beelzebub 22,269]

Presumably an appeal is based on the Tribunal having got it wrong in view of the evidence that was already presented. Or perhaps that the process they used was flawed.

or biased

[jazza 1,323]

Please,if you are really concerned{i am}write to WADA and explain the reason.

Also,Gil,they{efc}ran a program that was terrible.

Mcdevitt=They{efc] were a disgrace to their players.

Edited March 31, 2015 by jazza

[beelzebub 22,269]

It will be interesting if the above forms the basis of the written decision. WADA's position will, I believe, be based on whether it considers the Tribunal's understanding of "comfortable satisfaction" accords with the international precedents.

im betting it 'doesn't'

[What 18,810]

Please,if you are really concerned{i am}write to WADA and explain the reason.

Online WADA contact form

https://www.wada-ama.org/en/contact-us

[old dee 22,951]

Please,if you are really concerned{i am}write to WADA and explain the reason.

wasting your ink and paper or Internet time jazza.

It is over the cheats have won.

[beelzebub 22,269]

Please,if you are really concerned{i am}write to WADA and explain the reason.

done and done