It's within the Tribunal's powers to accept evidence from whoever they want, and give it the weight they see fit. There's nothing in that that would/should fall over at appeal, or even lead to an appeal.

If they did appeal on an admission of evidence matter, it would go the Administrative Appeals Tribunal, who are pretty clear on this:

"As is the case for many tribunals, the AAT is not bound by the rules of evidence and may inform itself on any matter as it thinks appropriate, subject to the requirements of procedural fairness. (17) While this does not mean the AAT cannot apply the rules of evidence, the AAT does not generally do so. As Justice Hill stated in Casey v Repatriation Commission:

The criterion for admissibility of material in the tribunal is not to be found within the interstices of the rules of evidence but within the limits of relevance. (18)

Material relevant to the matters to be determined will generally be admitted avoiding the need for technical arguments on what should or should not be admitted during the course of the hearing."

... and a further comment, just to get the flavour :

"... because the Tribunal is not bound by the strict rules of evidence, it does not necessarily need to admit evidence in the form of a witness statement, and a letter, for example, may be sufficient."

... and finally:

Section 33(1)© of the AAT Act states; "the Tribunal is not bound by the rules of evidence but may inform itself on any matter in such manner as it thinks appropriate"

Like your work Bing.

Yes, but look at what awaits on appeal at the CAS - According to the article: "Opposing advocates Holmes (QC for ASADA) and Grace (QC for players) usually sit on the CAS." Unbelievable!! Surely they would stand down from CAS for this case as there is a clear conflict of interest.

Both are in the pool of lawyers etc. that sit on CAS cases. There are plenty of others, including plenty of others who don't even know where Essendon is.

Wm, interesting post- how do you know about these texts?

http://m.theaustralian.com.au/sport/afl/tribunal-told-bombers-texted-each-other-about-thymo-injections/story-fnca0u4y-1227157241236

Let's say they miss a few games, while Tippett missed 11 for salary cap cheating and dean Bailey missed half a season of coaching for tanking, a not guilty verdict of tanking, and if the essendon players miss 4 games for drug cheating well that just doesn't sit right with me, but I can see it playing out that way, it all makes sense now the afl meeting with players the other day and now the media coming out with a story of a light penalty the afl are trying to get us used to a light penalty, it's a joke

Not to mention softening us up by telling us that Hird & Co are good to go for the season instead of receiving the substantial ban they should receive for cheating.

http://mobile.abc.net.au/news/2013-05-03/new-evidence-contradicts-danks-claims-of-wada-approval/4667294

This sort of conversation with WADA is what I expect from dank... He thinks he knows better than the drug agency's so wanted to confirm it wasn't on the prohibited list and was happy to run with the line that if a Dr prescribes it and a compound chemist makes it's legal under the code.

It also amazes me that he didn't actually speak to ASADA at all.. Not a first round interview where could state they were twisting the evidence or not applying the code correctly. He has spoken to them at all and knowing he is in this industry that would be pretty standard

Is there a penalty for duping players?

I would presume that if the players are shown leniency for being duped the guilt is transferred to those who did the duping.

I would accept the players rubbed out for six months if the club got 2 years. The players would be free to enter a special draft and be dispersed amongts the other clubs or another club created with no reference, connection or mention of Essendon or the Bombers. The club could not be in Victoria.

Edit: How would the dynamics change if the above outcome was made known? Would the club dump on the players? Which way would the supporters lean, club or players? If guilt exists someone is guilty. Duping does not remove guilt.

Edited March 4, 201510 yr by ManDee

The thought that a player like Tippett could be stopped from playing for many months because a team did something naughty with transfers etc when players could get a small penalty when their team did something much worse than naughty with cheating drugs makes me sick.

Just my opinion

Players who have signed waivers and then accepted injections that weren't lied to about what they were being injected with should be banned for life from the AFL

playing elite level sport is a privilege, any attempted cheats should be removed from the game with no sympathy imo, Hird, Dank and co should also cop the same treatment,

if however the players didn't know, they must have had suspicions, clearly Doc Reid knew, surely someone could have made a phone call to confirm the status of these substances.

Is there a penalty for duping players?

I would presume that if the players are shown leniency for being duped the guilt is transferred to those who did the duping.

I would accept the players rubbed out for six months if the club got 2 years. The players would be free to enter a special draft and be dispersed amongts the other clubs or another club created with no reference, connection or mention of Essendon or the Bombers. The club could not be in Victoria.

Edit: How would the dynamics change if the above outcome was made known? Would the club dump on the players? Which way would the supporters lean, club or players? If guilt exists someone is guilty. Duping does not remove guilt.

There would have to be,

The penalties already handed down to Ess relate to poor governance. Not to using illegal substances. It would be breathtaking in the extreme if the perpetrators of the regime that oversaw and implemented drug taking were not sanctioned further.

The Directors should also be fined heavily if not disbarred from being a director by Worksafe Victoria

Mindnumbing rhetoric from Brendan Goodard today in the Hun.

Welcome back James Hird, so glad you are back, our saviour, deliverer of salvation, purger of all evil.

All hail King James!

The brainwashing is now complete!!

I just love this furphy of " but guvna...we was dooped !!"

They cant be duped if they were informed and signed waivers and knowingly went ahead whilst a number of others ...didn't.

Possibly the afl ARE stupid enough to try the good cop bad cop routine and let WADA swing the bat.

Ah dear...all about protecting their back yard and feathering their nests.

Rude awakening ahead

Edited March 4, 201510 yr by beelzebub

Didn't those waivers they signed disappear? Ie. They probably listed an illegal drug and were destroyed by Essendon.

Therefore, how exactly were the players "duped" if they knew it was TB4 and were too braindead to check its legality? That isn't being duped,that's failing your independent duty of care as an athlete who is responsible for everything that enters their body. Period.

I just love this furphy of " but guvna...we was dooped !!"

They cant be duped if they were informed and signed waivers and knowingly went ahead whilst a number of others ...didn't.

Possibly the afl ARE stupid enough to try the good cop bad cop routine and let WADA swing the bat.

Ah dear...all about protecting their back yard and feathering their nests.

Rude awakening ahead

Beeb you know my feelings about the players guilt, but the players could be duped if the club lied to them about the content of the injections and the program.

If that was the case the club should be wiped out for the maximum penalty. They cannot have it both ways. It is either the club or the players or in my opinion both.

Essendon Soap Opera....Exterminate

Beeb you know my feelings about the players guilt, but the players could be duped if the club lied to them about the content of the injections and the program.

If that was the case the club should be wiped out for the maximum penalty. They cannot have it both ways. It is either the club or the players or in my opinion both.

They cant say they were duped , for mine, for this simple reason. Either they checked with ASADA ( which it seems no one did ) or they eyeballed and verify what they were being jabbed with. Thats called intelligence. Now it always befalls the individual to check, irrregardless. They would have had the chance, at a number of stages to do this.

This is all just a mish mash patchwork of an invented excuse. The AFL are buying it...because it suits them. Wouldnt think for a moment ASADA is though.

From the moment Dumbo rang his mate on the hill to give him the heads up til now with the Dill entertaining sweetheart deals to protect the comp the AFL have shown themselves as corrupt as anything in sport.

As 2014 rightly suggests all these things must be removed from the interested parties and adjudicated by impartial peers

Edited March 4, 201510 yr by beelzebub

The AFL (the good guys) don't want to be seen as the bad guys. They could hand down a small penalty, knowing that ASADA/WADA (bad guys) will not accept it. ASADA/WADA will appeal, I presume the penalties continue until the appeal is heard then appropriate penalties (the max) will be handed down.

Essendon will not get away with this evil & and corrupt exercise without much more pain (self inflicted).

Edit: typo

Edited March 4, 201510 yr by ManDee

I feel a bit left out having not contributed to this thread but I probably speak for the vast majority of football supporters who just want this over.

That there are 10 people who have 75 or more posts on this thread since it started less than 3 months ago and BB who has over 250 I'd suggest two things:

• You must be on drugs yourselves to post that much
• You've invested way too much energy into something over which you have no control and impacts another club.

Me, I'm not going to spend my time obsessing over the rules of WADA, ASADA, EFC, AFL or any other relevant body, I'll just look at the result and move on.

But I suspect the major contributors to this thread are like the legal profession itself. They'll be involved and luxuriating in this topic long after the result is handed down and I'm guessing there will be a lot of disappointed people spending a lot of time explaining why experts in the area got it so wrong.

There could also be the sniff of a conspiracy theory.

I'll come back in a week or so time to see if anything has happened!

279 posts in one topic in less than 3 months! FMD.

Oh, and for the record of the very little of the thread I've read it's a credit to those involved. Well researched, well argued and without personal rancour. I just can't believe you care enough or have so much energy!

I feel a bit left out having not contributed to this thread but I probably speak for the vast majority of football supporters who just want this over.

That there are 10 people who have 75 or more posts on this thread since it started less than 3 months ago and BB who has over 250 I'd suggest two things:

• You must be on drugs yourselves to post that much
• You've invested way too much energy into something over which you have no control and impacts another club.

Me, I'm not going to spend my time obsessing over the rules of WADA, ASADA, EFC, AFL or any other relevant body, I'll just look at the result and move on.

But I suspect the major contributors to this thread are like the legal profession itself. They'll be involved and luxuriating in this topic long after the result is handed down and I'm guessing there will be a lot of disappointed people spending a lot of time explaining why experts in the area got it so wrong.

There could also be the sniff of a conspiracy theory.

I'll come back in a week or so time to see if anything has happened!

279 posts in one topic in less than 3 months! FMD.

Oh, and for the record of the very little of the thread I've read it's a credit to those involved. Well researched, well argued and without personal rancour. I just can't believe you care enough or have so much energy!

Good points well made BoB. I'm on drugs but they don't seem to be enhancing my performance.

But surely you of all people could find some passion for one element of this story: the media spin, agendas and use of journos as mouthpieces. Fascinating stuff

I feel a bit left out having not contributed to this thread but I probably speak for the vast majority of football supporters who just want this over.

That there are 10 people who have 75 or more posts on this thread since it started less than 3 months ago and BB who has over 250 I'd suggest two things:

• You must be on drugs yourselves to post that much
• You've invested way too much energy into something over which you have no control and impacts another club.

Me, I'm not going to spend my time obsessing over the rules of WADA, ASADA, EFC, AFL or any other relevant body, I'll just look at the result and move on.

But I suspect the major contributors to this thread are like the legal profession itself. They'll be involved and luxuriating in this topic long after the result is handed down and I'm guessing there will be a lot of disappointed people spending a lot of time explaining why experts in the area got it so wrong.

There could also be the sniff of a conspiracy theory.

I'll come back in a week or so time to see if anything has happened!

279 posts in one topic in less than 3 months! FMD.

Oh, and for the record of the very little of the thread I've read it's a credit to those involved. Well researched, well argued and without personal rancour. I just can't believe you care enough or have so much energy!

People who are posting in here are interested in the biggest AFL story in decades

You just made a spiel about people who post too much in a thread you supposedly don't care about

What is worse I wonder.....

I feel a bit left out having not contributed to this thread but I probably speak for the vast majority of football supporters who just want this over.

That there are 10 people who have 75 or more posts on this thread since it started less than 3 months ago and BB who has over 250 I'd suggest two things:

• You must be on drugs yourselves to post that much
• You've invested way too much energy into something over which you have no control and impacts another club.

Me, I'm not going to spend my time obsessing over the rules of WADA, ASADA, EFC, AFL or any other relevant body, I'll just look at the result and move on.

But I suspect the major contributors to this thread are like the legal profession itself. They'll be involved and luxuriating in this topic long after the result is handed down and I'm guessing there will be a lot of disappointed people spending a lot of time explaining why experts in the area got it so wrong.

There could also be the sniff of a conspiracy theory.

I'll come back in a week or so time to see if anything has happened!

279 posts in one topic in less than 3 months! FMD.

Oh, and for the record of the very little of the thread I've read it's a credit to those involved. Well researched, well argued and without personal rancour. I just can't believe you care enough or have so much energy!

And yet you cannot resist posting on the posters that post on this amazing story.

The biggest story in the history of sport in Australia.

It is possible that,

• You've invested way too much energy into something over which you have no control and impacts another club.

And yet you cannot resist posting on the posters that post on this amazing story.

The biggest story in the history of sport in Australia.

It is possible that,

• You've invested way too much energy into something over which you have no control and impacts another club.

"The biggest story in the history of sport in Australia." Big call. I think the creation of World Series Cricket in 1977 has it covered, though.

I feel a bit left out having not contributed to this thread but I probably speak for the vast majority of football supporters who just want this over.

That there are 10 people who have 75 or more posts on this thread since it started less than 3 months ago and BB who has over 250 I'd suggest two things:

• You must be on drugs yourselves to post that much
• You've invested way too much energy into something over which you have no control and impacts another club.

Me, I'm not going to spend my time obsessing over the rules of WADA, ASADA, EFC, AFL or any other relevant body, I'll just look at the result and move on.

But I suspect the major contributors to this thread are like the legal profession itself. They'll be involved and luxuriating in this topic long after the result is handed down and I'm guessing there will be a lot of disappointed people spending a lot of time explaining why experts in the area got it so wrong.

There could also be the sniff of a conspiracy theory.

I'll come back in a week or so time to see if anything has happened!

279 posts in one topic in less than 3 months! FMD.

Oh, and for the record of the very little of the thread I've read it's a credit to those involved. Well researched, well argued and without personal rancour. I just can't believe you care enough or have so much energy!

mate no one forces you to be here..

do yourself a favour

mate no one forces you to be here..

do yourself a favour

Funny isn't it that Bob actually compliments us,

"Oh, and for the record of the very little of the thread I've read it's a credit to those involved. Well researched, well argued and without personal rancour. I just can't believe you care enough or have so much energy!"

and we jump on him. Bob what do you think of the No T$ no B$ thread? At least this thread is about football and not bananas.

Baghdad Bob where do you get those stats? Surely you didn't count them?

meanwhile......

The notion of shorter 'match based' penalties is really only that...a sort of open 3rd party lobbying attempt to yet again modify the landscape.

ASADA havent taken a backward step yet and nor do I suspect theyre about to embark on such a course.

A lot of people ( in Hilly places ) must be getting very worried. More silliness is bound to come before the decision. Just curious as to what now and from who .