A heavy sentence will compromise our national game. The issue is bigger than one undeserving club. Everyone involved knows this. ASADA and WADA may bleat but a deal with the devil will be done. The script writers are already at work to fabricate the illusion of justice being served.

Nonsense! You don't know WADA. They have no understanding of our so called "beloved national game". All they are interested in is the facts, and the facts are truly damning. Their concerns will be to ensure appropriate penalties are handed down to ensure the overall integrity of world sport. The local issues of "our beloved national game" will have zero to do with it.

Pathetic. The Hun should be called out. Or at least not be able to call themselves a news paper.

huh? when was the hun called a newspaper? always been a tabloid rag

A heavy sentence will compromise our national game. The issue is bigger than one undeserving club. Everyone involved knows this. ASADA and WADA may bleat but a deal with the devil will be done. The script writers are already at work to fabricate the illusion of justice being served.

you know what would compromise our national game?

the notion that if you have enough money you can get away with systematic doping.

you know what would compromise our national game?

the notion that if you have enough money you can get away with systematic doping.

Enough money will get you away with anything and everything.

Edited March 13, 201510 yr by america de cali

I think the HUN takes that line for 2 reasons. First it curries favour and gives comfort to Essendon supporters who, if they had half a brain, would be feeling pretty bad. Second if the players and club are clobbered, the expectation that the HUN has created that they should have been let off, or at worst miss a few games, will create just the sort of controversy that the HUN likes.

Edited March 13, 201510 yr by sue

Yes I guess that explains it, and Michael Warner no less...

"The maximum two-year ban will not be imposed because of the unique circumstances surrounding the two year investigation"

3/400 EFC ASADA all out 300. M warner. Say no more

Muppet

Wouldn't it be nice if somebody reputable accidentally released the guilty verdict before the 31st.

Well wouldn't it...

Are Essendon clearing the decks?

Very unusual for a President Chairman of an AFL Club to comment on another. Peter Gordon suggests that Linday Tanner, who has a strong background in occupational health and safety may be being lined up to replace Little. More here: http://www.theage.com.au/afl/afl-news/little-thinking-about-succession-planning-suggests-top-bulldog-20150313-1436kt.html

This makes it easier for Worksafe to hit them with a feather as nearly all the coaching (except a notable one who was just doing what he was told), all the management and most of the Board have already been replaced. EFC will argue that they have fixed their poor governance, replaced the culprits, been punished by the AFL for poor governance, so no need for Worksafe to do anything else.

There is 'sting' happening here folks!!!

Enough money will get you away with anything and everything.

Didn't help Lance Armstrong.

At present there are 44 Australians serving suspensions for using performance enhancing drugs in sport. They either used them or the evidence showed that they intended to use them. Of those 44 39 of them are serving a suspension of 2 years or more. I go back to my previous point. This is 34 individual cases. ASADA/WADA will look at it that way and will not take into account the club, the league or any other aspects.

Very good and well but ASADA are pushing for no more than 12 months.

Where has this been reported?

Nonsense! You don't know WADA. They have no understanding of our so called "beloved national game". All they are interested in is the facts, and the facts are truly damning. Their concerns will be to ensure appropriate penalties are handed down to ensure the overall integrity of world sport. The local issues of "our beloved national game" will have zero to do with it.

Dees2014, I'm interested to know on what grounds players can appeal a guilty decision? As it isn't a court of law the usual bases like 'faulty' evidence, or error in application of the law (presumably) don't apply.

If players appeal a guilty decision does the criteria of 'comfortable satisfaction' change?

Journos keep saying players will appeal a guilty decision but don't say on what grounds...can you help, please

Edited March 13, 201510 yr by Lucifer's Hero

At present there are 44 Australians serving suspensions for using performance enhancing drugs in sport. They either used them or the evidence showed that they intended to use them. Of those 44 39 of them are serving a suspension of 2 years or more. I go back to my previous point. This is 34 individual cases. ASADA/WADA will look at it that way and will not take into account the club, the league or any other aspects.

After they have dealt with the individuals they will deal with the team/club/people responsible.... because they are entitled under the provisions of the code to do so. That...and they need to nip this 'team' instigated cheating in the bud.

After they have dealt with the individuals they will deal with the team/club/people responsible.... because they are entitled under the provisions of the code to do so. That...and they need to nip this 'team' instigated cheating in the bud.

I agree 100%. My point is that this is 34 individual cases and will be looked at as such. Take Watson's case. Through the 2012 season he showed significant improvement in his performance to the point where he won the highest individual honour in the league. if he is found guilty of contravening the drug laws then he should lose that honour and serve a suspension appropriate to the transgression. Each case will need to be assessed. I would not be surprised if some are found not guilty because of lack of sufficient evidence. Others may get long suspensions.

The club and supervisors of the systemic drug program will then have to cop their wack and while the penalties to the individual players will hurt them, the penalties handed out to the club may well have a profound and far reaching impact on the whole league.

There will be/ought to be some variety in penalties. Some will have rolled...some are not bright enough to have done so. Some still believe in Hird...sheep often do !!

There will be/ought to be some variety in penalties. Some will have rolled...some are not bright enough to have done so. Some still believe in Hird...sheep often do !!

hird mentality?

http://www.heraldsun.com.au/sport/afl/essendon-players-could-sue-the-afl-if-found-guilty-of-doping-by-anti-doping-tribunal/story-fni5f6kv-1227261875765

Jess maintains senior AFL figures breached their duty of care to the Essendon players by failing to intervene in the club’s ill-fated 2012 supplements program.

“You’ve got to understand that the AFL is the principle employer — and as the principle employer it has primary responsibility for player welfare and occupational health and safety,” Jess said.

“It is clear there has been a systemic failure by the AFL in this regard.”

What???
Sorry, Did Essendon not exist?

Hird's dilustional PR brigade at it again. They still think they can influence the outcome - or is it they just want the last breath of their very lucrative PR dollar from this exercise.

It is truly a farce, and the stampede of horses are about to descend on the Hirds at last.

Nonsense! You don't know WADA. They have no understanding of our so called "beloved national game". All they are interested in is the facts, and the facts are truly damning. Their concerns will be to ensure appropriate penalties are handed down to ensure the overall integrity of world sport. The local issues of "our beloved national game" will have zero to do with it.

I sure hope you're right son

http://www.heraldsun.com.au/sport/afl/essendon-players-could-sue-the-afl-if-found-guilty-of-doping-by-anti-doping-tribunal/story-fni5f6kv-1227261875765

What???

Sorry, Did Essendon not exist?

I have heard this line run from an Ess fanatic. The AFL are the employer so they should carry the can.....

Its cr*p. The club is the employer. The AFL are co-signatories to the contract but the management of the club run everything and are in the firing line.

I have heard this line run from an Ess fanatic. The AFL are the employer so they should carry the can.....

Its cr*p. The club is the employer. The AFL are co-signatories to the contract but the management of the club run everything and are in the firing line.

Actually wouldnt have thoughtthat the players have any recourse to sue as they are responsible for what goes into their bodies. They cant sue themselves?

My prediction on the outcome:

Players found guilty

ASADA look for a 12 month suspension without backdating as a minimum. If this is not met they will appeal and then take it to CAS if necessary and look for a straight 2 year suspension.

Tribunal will also refer the club and some club employees at the time for penalties. If they do not expect ASADA/WADA to get out the big stick.

Appeals all around and then Work Care and court cases to follow with all sorts of interesting things to come out.

At present there are 44 Australians serving suspensions for using performance enhancing drugs in sport. They either used them or the evidence showed that they intended to use them. Of those 44 39 of them are serving a suspension of 2 years or more. I go back to my previous point. This is 34 individual cases. ASADA/WADA will look at it that way and will not take into account the club, the league or any other aspects.

Note two years or more. I have thought all along there will be some at ESSENDON who will get up to 4 years but many on here howled me down. Such is the seriousness of the EFC transgression, the strong evidence against them, their refusal to admit guilt, and their continuous obstruction of ASADA, I think there is some chance that some of them will get more than two years. Perhaps not from the AFL Tribunal, but possibly from CAS.

Edited March 13, 201510 yr by Dees2014

Actually wouldnt have thoughtthat the players have any recourse to sue as they are responsible for what goes into their bodies. They cant sue themselves?

They can sue on the basis of negligence from Essendon, the AFL, and I would suggest individuals involved especially Hird. And they will!

Two years please. Oh lord it will be glorious.

This has probably already been mentioned but why didn't Zharakis take part in the injection program?