if someone would be so good...

Its touted that Golden Boy might at some point sue for wrongful dismissal. If he has been brought before his peers and found to have been grossly at fault what leg does he have to stand upon when countering the club ? Im just curious on this

Why did they re-sign him for 2 years and send him off to France?

This whole thing is fishy. Stuff still doesn't seem logical.

Sweets, I think his avatar is anonymous already.

Sweets, I think his avatar is anonymous already.

Don't ruin my joke 3 boomerangs!

Sure. Though i haven't made any grandiose or black and white predictions about outcomes. If i were to make a prediction it would be a guess (as of course yours is) as i don't have sufficient information to determine the likely outcome.

So with that in mind my guess is the players will be found guilty and given a 2 year ban, halved to 12 months (backdated to last competitive match) based on being duped. That will wipe out this season but not the next and they will be able to restart training in September when the 12 months elapses.

The players will accept this penalty (under pressure from EFC who will have to pay all contracts) and sit out the year. Top up players will be brought in. ASADA will also accept this penalty as will WADA. There will be no further appeal. CAS will not be needed.

The decision will be made not to penalise EFC any further as the argument will be the losing 17 players will be penalty enough when added to the penalties received for the governance breaches. There will be uproar about this.

EFC will dismiss Hird, who in turn will sue EEFC for wrongful dismissal.

Not sure if ASADA will go after Hird (or other coaches eg Goodwin?). I don't think they will or else they would have done so already.

As you say we will see who is right (or more right as the case may be)

binman agree with all this 100%. Also think there will have been a fair bit of expediency in this decision as in other circumstances with less to lose for an entire professional competition I could see them getting 2yrs with no discount for duping. Of course I don't have any facts to base this on and it may be the players went to Doc Reid and he cleared them to proceed in which case it would be 12mths but in fairness should be nothing after all you can't expect an athlete to do more than get a clearance from their Doctor. However, in this case I haven't seen any reports that they did get the Doc's clearance.

binman agree with all this 100%. Also think there will have been a fair bit of expediency in this decision as in other circumstances with less to lose for an entire professional competition I could see them getting 2yrs with no discount for duping. Of course I don't have any facts to base this on and it may be the players went to Doc Reid and he cleared them to proceed in which case it would be 12mths but in fairness should be nothing after all you can't expect an athlete to do more than get a clearance from their Doctor. However, in this case I haven't seen any reports that they did get the Doc's clearance.

but asada can, and do. otherwise you could just get a rogue doctor. and they do exist.

in those cases all it entitles you to is a 12 month discount if you convince the tribunal

Edited March 3, 201510 yr by daisycutter

Its time... you simply stated the players indeed have to prove something. Did you not ?

many take the view they dont..which is it

And any burden of proof..whomever whatever is not to the point of a civil/criminal case as this is neither a civil nor criminal court whereby the Rule of Law governs. Its a tribunal assembled to function by its own rules.

BB read my previous post re proof and answer the question instead of posing one.

You are correct about the burden that's why there is a specific burden of comfortable satisfaction for Tribunals established by the High Court after a similarly constituted Tribunal to this one was appealed against.

No matter what the Tribunal and how it is constituted everyone has a right to natural justice and procedural fairness. A Tribunal can't just make a non legal kangaroo court whimsical decision. I believe and could well be wrong that an appeal from this Tribunal to CAS would be an appeal on the decision of guilt or innocence but an appeal for a lack of procedural fairness and natural justice could go to the Court system where normal legal standards apply. Think the Greg Williams appeal in the past against the Tribunal decision. I would imagine that an appeal from the Penalty hearing if there is one, would go to the CAS.

If i were to make a prediction it would be a guess (as of course yours is) as i don't have sufficient information to determine the likely outcome.

So with that in mind my guess is the players will be found guilty and given a 2 year ban, halved to 12 months (backdated to last competitive match) based on being duped. That will wipe out this season but not the next and they will be able to restart training in September when the 12 months elapses. The very best they could expect is accommodations to when the SCN were reissued in Nov. This backdating to last match is a media invention. Im not convinced they can show they were in any way 'duped".. Ignorant and foolish yes

The players will accept this penalty (under pressure from EFC who will have to pay all contracts) and sit out the year. Top up players will be brought in. ASADA will also accept this penalty as will WADA. There will be no further appeal. CAS will not be needed. If the penalty isnt of or about 18 mnths to 2 years i fear WADA will indeed refer to the CAS

The decision will be made not to penalise EFC any further as the argument will be the losing 17 players will be penalty enough when added to the penalties received for the governance breaches. There will be uproar about this.

Whilst the AFL Tribunal may not wish to penalise the Club any further the door opens immediately for WADA to slash away...and it will

EFC will dismiss Hird, who in turn will sue EFC for wrongful dismissal. The first bit I get...im still flumoxed as to how about the latter

Not sure if ASADA will go after Hird (or other coaches eg Goodwin?). I don't think they will or else they would have done so already. The Coaches and support staff are something of the perogative of the Sports overlords. Will be interesting to see who is in their sights

but asada can, and do. otherwise you could just get a rogue doctor. and they do exist.

in those cases all it entitles you to is a 12 month discount if you convince the tribunal

Logically I guess you're right.

I seem to recall the legislation referring to the steps an athlete has to take and getting cleared by your Doctor is the main one but there are plenty of rogue Doctors around, especially in cycling. If the case here was the players went to Dr Reid and he cleared the injections and they are in this s&*t then as far as I'm concerned they deserve our sympathy. They would have mine anyway. I'd be beyond p&ssed if this happened to me.

Having said all of that I haven't read of any evidence that they went to the Doc and got it cleared. If they didn't then they pretty much deserve what they will get.

Logically I guess you're right.

I seem to recall the legislation referring to the steps an athlete has to take and getting cleared by your Doctor is the main one but there are plenty of rogue Doctors around, especially in cycling. If the case here was the players went to Dr Reid and he cleared the injections and they are in this s&*t then as far as I'm concerned they deserve our sympathy. They would have mine anyway. I'd be beyond p&ssed if this happened to me.

Having said all of that I haven't read of any evidence that they went to the Doc and got it cleared. If they didn't then they pretty much deserve what they will get.

I get the impression Doc Reid was almost bypassed, i can't understand any other way he has managed to avoid the blame for alot of this saga.

Logically I guess you're right.

I seem to recall the legislation referring to the steps an athlete has to take and getting cleared by your Doctor is the main one but there are plenty of rogue Doctors around, especially in cycling. If the case here was the players went to Dr Reid and he cleared the injections and they are in this s&*t then as far as I'm concerned they deserve our sympathy. They would have mine anyway. I'd be beyond p&ssed if this happened to me.

Having said all of that I haven't read of any evidence that they went to the Doc and got it cleared. If they didn't then they pretty much deserve what they will get.

in fact there is evidence that doc reid didn't approve and that he claimed he wrote a letter to the club saying so

so far the letter has not turned up and the addressee claimed it wasn't received.........go figure

EFC will dismiss Hird, who in turn will sue EFC for wrongful dismissal. The first bit I get...im still flumoxed as to how about the latter

One name. TANIA!!!

You shouldn't be flumoxed. Don't let logic get in the way of understanding the Hirds. After all the fact that a retired Fed Crt Judge, a trial Fed Crt Judge and 3 Appeals Fed Crt Judges all found there was nothing wrong with ASADA's investigation still wasn't enough for Hird to admit he was wrong.

He would probably argue that his responsibility was to coach the team not to be responsible for what the sports scientists did. He therefore did nothing that would justify being sacked.

BB read my previous post re proof and answer the question instead of posing one.

You are correct about the burden that's why there is a specific burden of comfortable satisfaction for Tribunals established by the High Court after a similarly constituted Tribunal to this one was appealed against.

No matter what the Tribunal and how it is constituted everyone has a right to natural justice and procedural fairness. A Tribunal can't just make a non legal kangaroo court whimsical decision. I believe and could well be wrong that an appeal from this Tribunal to CAS would be an appeal on the decision of guilt or innocence but an appeal for a lack of procedural fairness and natural justice could go to the Court system where normal legal standards apply. Think the Greg Williams appeal in the past against the Tribunal decision. I would imagine that an appeal from the Penalty hearing if there is one, would go to the CAS.

Whilst I fully understand what your saying IT. A tribunal is of itself. Depending upon what rules and governances the signee has agreed to there may well be elements that might normally transpire in a court room but arent applicable at the tribunal.

Logically I guess you're right.

I seem to recall the legislation referring to the steps an athlete has to take and getting cleared by your Doctor is the main one but there are plenty of rogue Doctors around, especially in cycling.

Every dodgy nation in the world will be trying that one on at the Olympics.

'Oh but we got clearance from a Doctor. Can you please polish those 38 gold medals.'

'We have now disbarred that Doctor (and given him a nice retirement package.)'

FMD IT CAN"T WORK THAT WAY PPLS.

in fact there is evidence that doc reid didn't approve and that he claimed he wrote a letter to the club saying so

so far the letter has not turned up and the addressee claimed it wasn't received.........go figure

Exactly. I have raised this before. So if Jobe Watson who as the Captain of the team is the mouth piece and representative of the players didn't go to Doc Reid to check out if the injections were ok, he and the rest of them deserve what they get. I'm pretty sure from what I've read that all the AFL training they get about supplements and PED's makes it very clear they must get their Doctors approval. If they just relied on Dank or Hird then they are in a whole lot of other trouble. If they did go to Doc Reid and he didn't raise the concerns that he wrote in the letter he relied on to avoid any sanctions himself then he should be in massive trouble and the players should at least get the 12mth discount for being duped. I have no idea whether they went to the good Doc or not. I assume that would be evidence raised in the Tribunal.

but asada can, and do. otherwise you could just get a rogue doctor. and they do exist.

in those cases all it entitles you to is a 12 month discount if you convince the tribunal

Asada hold the athlete personally responsible for this very reason.

When in doubt consult those writing the rules....not main-gamers and end-chancers.

thing is...they're ( players) all told about this upon induction. There's no out here.

Why did they re-sign him for 2 years and send him off to France?

This whole thing is fishy. Stuff still doesn't seem logical.

If he were fired he was going to take down at least 4 big fish with him.

Some not directly associated with the club.

Logically I guess you're right.

I seem to recall the legislation referring to the steps an athlete has to take and getting cleared by your Doctor is the main one but there are plenty of rogue Doctors around, especially in cycling. If the case here was the players went to Dr Reid and he cleared the injections and they are in this s&*t then as far as I'm concerned they deserve our sympathy. They would have mine anyway. I'd be beyond p&ssed if this happened to me.

Having said all of that I haven't read of any evidence that they went to the Doc and got it cleared. If they didn't then they pretty much deserve what they will get.

I agree in the main...and still they are schooled in the idea of always checking with the local arm ( i.e ASADA ) as to ...well anything anything eaten or taken. They didnt it seems. They are their own fools

Don't ruin my joke 3 boomerangs!

Is that anything like 2 dogs?

Whilst I fully understand what your saying IT. A tribunal is of itself. Depending upon what rules and governances the signee has agreed to there may well be elements that might normally transpire in a court room but arent applicable at the tribunal.

Agreed and I don't know what the rules for this Tribunal are so anything else I would say would be guessing other than the fact that within those rules procedural fairness and natural justice still apply. I would be pretty confident that the last thing the Tribunal want to create is an opportunity for the players to go off on a separate legal challenge on procedural failures. I'm sure they will be as legally rigorous to the Tribunal rules etc as they need to be so hopefully this is the end of the matter. If a failure of procedural fairness was upheld they could have to hear the whole thing again. I could be wrong about this and maybe CAS is the only forum for appeal but I don't think so.

If he were fired he was going to take down at least 4 big fish with him.

Some not directly associated with the club.

Care to elaborate?

Agreed and I don't know what the rules for this Tribunal are so anything else I would say would be guessing other than the fact that within those rules procedural fairness and natural justice still apply. I would be pretty confident that the last thing the Tribunal want to create is an opportunity for the players to go off on a separate legal challenge on procedural failures. I'm sure they will be as legally rigorous to the Tribunal rules etc as they need to be so hopefully this is the end of the matter. If a failure of procedural fairness was upheld they could have to hear the whole thing again. I could be wrong about this and maybe CAS is the only forum for appeal but I don't think so.

Remembering that through this process they are still provisionally suspended, draw it out for as long as you like.

Agreed and I don't know what the rules for this Tribunal are so anything else I would say would be guessing other than the fact that within those rules procedural fairness and natural justice still apply. I would be pretty confident that the last thing the Tribunal want to create is an opportunity for the players to go off on a separate legal challenge on procedural failures. I'm sure they will be as legally rigorous to the Tribunal rules etc as they need to be so hopefully this is the end of the matter. If a failure of procedural fairness was upheld they could have to hear the whole thing again. I could be wrong about this and maybe CAS is the only forum for appeal but I don't think so.

As you rightly suggest all avenues of fairness would be given , lest it fly back nastily to bite them. As you allude we're but interpreting what we can . Other than the details of the machinations that happened at Windy Hill it is all said and done quite a simple picture when you dig down to the nitty gritty theres really only one dispute.

No ones really arguing as to a supplement program...so theres a tick.

Theres more than a bunch of evidentiary anecdotes regarding how often and where....another tick.

Seemingly no ones even really arguing over who was part of all these shenanigans ....tick

just one fly in the ointment so to speak.....what kind of Thymosin..As I see it its all about this...the kind...not that it was Thymosin ( even )

ASADA say its X ( or rather TB4) and heres our evidence to back that up

Players ( and all other bad boys ) say its Y ( or Thomodulin maybe or anything but the bad stuff ) and heres our....ummmm... well..... just gotta take out word for it....ummmm

Im sure those Shown Notices have been given every opportunity to provide something "tangible" and "substantiable" as to what they took.

Who'd have really thought something so simple could drag on for so long !!

I still say that the key to all this days of our lives stuff is, why did 8 players not sign and get dosed?

I have posted this twice before but as we seem to be going around in circles rerepeating the same stuff by the same people, my question still hangs there.

Those eight players decided to stay outside the program, an official club program either legal or illegal. Did they check with somebody, ASADA, manager or players ass. or read the tea leaves in their cups. They choses to go it alone, a very big move in a team culture. Or is it as simple as they LISTENED at their drug lectures that they have to attend and decided that they didn't like what they were being told.

To say that the other 34 players may have been duped is an insult to the 8 who stood up to the HIRD rushing down on them in the name of team culture. I don't know jack sh t about ASADA rules, legal ifs and buts, but I would love to know why those 8 didn't go along with the HIRD.

I still say that the key to all this days of our lives stuff is, why did 8 players not sign and get dosed?

I have posted this twice before but as we seem to be going around in circles rerepeating the same stuff by the same people, my question still hangs there.

Those eight players decided to stay outside the program, an official club program either legal or illegal. Did they check with somebody, ASADA, manager or players ass. or read the tea leaves in their cups. They choses to go it alone, a very big move in a team culture. Or is it as simple as they LISTENED at their drug lectures that they have to attend and decided that they didn't like what they were being told.

To say that the other 34 players may have been duped is an insult to the 8 who stood up to the HIRD rushing down on them in the name of team culture. I don't know jack sh t about ASADA rules, legal ifs and buts, but I would love to know why those 8 didn't go along with the HIRD.

it makes for a very good point....a damning point as regards the standpoint of the accused.

I still say that the key to all this days of our lives stuff is, why did 8 players not sign and get dosed?

I have posted this twice before but as we seem to be going around in circles rerepeating the same stuff by the same people, my question still hangs there.

Those eight players decided to stay outside the program, an official club program either legal or illegal. Did they check with somebody, ASADA, manager or players ass. or read the tea leaves in their cups. They choses to go it alone, a very big move in a team culture. Or is it as simple as they LISTENED at their drug lectures that they have to attend and decided that they didn't like what they were being told.

To say that the other 34 players may have been duped is an insult to the 8 who stood up to the HIRD rushing down on them in the name of team culture. I don't know jack sh t about ASADA rules, legal ifs and buts, but I would love to know why those 8 didn't go along with the HIRD.

An excellent question. I'd also love to know what they said about their decision to the other players and coaches and doc and what the reactions were.

Is that anything like 2 dogs?

you tell us.....after all it is your avatar - lol