On 17/03/2015 at 01:05, beelzebub said:

I find it amusing that the AFL have such creatures as "Integrity Officers" !!!

I think their job is to find people with Integrity and expel them from the inner circle of the AFL.

  On 17/03/2015 at 02:48, DemonFrog said:

What Flag?

The Grand Old Flag.

  On 17/03/2015 at 02:47, It said:

If they knew what it was and it wasn't illegal that would be a grounds for being confident they will get off. If they knew what it was and it was illegal you wouldn't think they'd be mouthing off two weeks before the decision saying they are confident they will get off. Then again any sane person would just say nothing pending the decision.

It unfortunately gives us a taste of what we are in for if they get off. Insufferable.

If they knew what it was and it wasn't illegal I think we would have heard about it by now.

If they knew what it was and it was illegal ???

  On 16/03/2015 at 23:01, beelzebub said:

If the League attempts to clear or wet tram ticket them then all powers ( WADA) will turn on the league itself. It will be smacked from pillar to post if thats the case. WADA doesnt care about some little pissant game in middle of nowhere, it does however care about remiinding a sporting power it needs to keep its things in order

Gil probably doesnt realise hes playing with fire.. Dumbo did, hence he scarpered !!

I think the wet tram ticket thing needs rethinking. Have you seen the way those PSOs carry on when they think something is wrong? I wet tram ticket would probably result in a six-man body slam, headlock, being dragged off the tram and the police being called to arrest you for being uncooperative and resisting their pseudo-powers.

  On 17/03/2015 at 03:10, RalphiusMaximus said:

I think the wet tram ticket thing needs rethinking. Have you seen the way those PSOs carry on when they think something is wrong? I wet tram ticket would probably result in a six-man body slam, headlock, being dragged off the tram and the police being called to arrest you for being uncooperative and resisting their pseudo-powers.

That is the whole point RM they are giving the treatment the EFC should get not the "wet Tram Ticket"

  On 17/03/2015 at 03:02, It said:

The Grand Old Flag.

Yeah, its a high-flying flag.

  On 17/03/2015 at 03:36, Red and Bluebeard said:

Yeah, its a high-flying flag.

I count the flags by how many GF victory videos I can buy from my local JB Hifi store. Hint their VFL/AFL GF games start with the 1965 GF. Which was year one of the MFC curse.

  On 17/03/2015 at 01:28, DemonAndrew said:

bruce francis' letter is WOW levels of insane.

hes a psycho

  On 17/03/2015 at 08:39, hogans_heroes said:

hes a psycho

just a 'little' bit delusional perhaps

  On 17/03/2015 at 07:28, DemonFrog said:

I count the flags by how many GF victory videos I can buy from my local JB Hifi store. Hint their VFL/AFL GF games start with the 1965 GF. Which was year one of the MFC curse.

The bastards must be Carlton supporters ...

  On 17/03/2015 at 08:39, hogans_heroes said:

hes a psycho

just a twit

Let's now stick to the main question ???

DID ESSENDON PLAYERS TAKE EITHER KNOWINGLY OR UNKNOWINGLY "BANNED" SUBSTANCES??

YES OR NO! No ifs or buts either it is YES or NO!

IF the answer is unequivocal YES ( As I reckon it will be then

Punishment

PLAYERS "BANNED FOR TWO YEARS"

HIRD SACKED
BOARD STANDS DOWN

ESSENDON OBLITERATED !

Game Over!

PF

They are running very very scared. They're rolling out the last vestages of their propaganda machine.

The AFL buy it. ..hell they're co-authoring it all I reckon.

However once the hammer falls, even if only a tap its then game on for real, in an unbiased, untappable forum.

The AFL and EFC seem to think it finishes 31 march...it only begins.

  On 11/12/2014 at 20:49, Bring-Back-Powell said:

Season 2015 will be ruined if some but not all teams play a depleted Essendon.

Will be the difference between sides finishing top 2, top 4 and top 8.

The premier will forever have an asterix next to its name due the compromised season.

The same could be said for when Essendon were on the Peptides that other clubs were unfailry unadvantaged to play the Bombers....... Really it's just like sides playing the MFC for the past 7 years

When hasn't the competition been compromised..... no offence but Rubbish argument... Essendon should be punnished if found guilty

  On 17/03/2015 at 08:39, hogans_heroes said:

hes a psycho

Assuming he actually sent it to the minister, politicians get this sort of rubbish all the time (plenty of it crazier, more incoherent or pointless). Ley won't even see it. Some poor *#%%@^ in her office or the department will have to waste days researching and composing a polite and inconsequential reply.

I presume it's mainly just for propaganda purposes. A bit late for that probably.

  On 17/03/2015 at 09:43, beelzebub said:

PF

They are running very very scared. They're rolling out the last vestages of their propaganda machine.

The AFL buy it. ..hell they're co-authoring it all I reckon.

However once the hammer falls, even if only a tap its then game on for real, in an unbiased, untappable forum.

The AFL and EFC seem to think it finishes 31 march...it only begins.

If the players cop a suspension of say 2-4 games and ASADA appeals it am I right that the players remain provisionally suspended until the appeal is heard?

  On 17/03/2015 at 09:43, beelzebub said:

PF

They are running very very scared. They're rolling out the last vestages of their propaganda machine.

The AFL buy it. ..hell they're co-authoring it all I reckon.

However once the hammer falls, even if only a tap its then game on for real, in an unbiased, untappable forum.

The AFL and EFC seem to think it finishes 31 march...it only begins.

oh beezle I love your work and am enlivened by your positivity but why do I feel depressed thinking about the outcome?

  On 17/03/2015 at 10:59, Dr. Gonzo said:

If the players cop a suspension of say 2-4 games and ASADA appeals it am I right that the players remain provisionally suspended until the appeal is heard?

Good question.

Anyone know?

  On 17/03/2015 at 10:59, Dr. Gonzo said:

If the players cop a suspension of say 2-4 games and ASADA appeals it am I right that the players remain provisionally suspended until the appeal is heard?

Only for the duration of the penalty. If it's 4 games, they'd be able to resume playing after that, even if ASADA is appealing. An appeal doesn't change the status or duration of a sanction.

On the other hand, if they start playing again, and are subsequently penalised additional/further games, this would only start from the date of the hearing/ruling ... unless the players took voluntary provisional suspension, e.g. from when the 4 game penalty is up.

FWIW though, I can't see how this scenario could become a reality, as I can't see how the players - if found guilty - could get less than 12 months. They wouldn't be able to satisfy enough of the conditions (no significant fault PLUS provide substantial assistance). Perhaps, as has been rumoured, a couple of the players have confessed and provided info on the program, in which case they might just be able to get it down to 6 months. Might. But for the bulk of them with their "stick it up your ASADA" approach, that's not going to work.

  On 17/03/2015 at 11:07, hemingway said:

oh beezle I love your work and am enlivened by your positivity but why do I feel depressed thinking about the outcome?

I think the outcome, initially at least , will be as much a shemozzle as the whole sordid affair..

Many are just wanting this 'over' in a fashion; so 'we' can all just on with it ( and things) but I cant see the AFL having the kohunas to even come close to delivering the correct findings other than I cant see how they escape a guilty verdict. It'll then get mired once more ( still ) under the weight of ASADA/WADA seeking a more suitable penalty.

Given the penalties as delivered to Saad and Lees as any reference anything under 18 mnths will seem inadequate....and the fun and games will go on.

  On 17/03/2015 at 20:41, beelzebub said:

I think the outcome, initially at least , will be as much a shemozzle as the whole sordid affair..

Many are just wanting this 'over' in a fashion; so 'we' can all just on with it ( and things) but I cant see the AFL having the kohunas to even come close to delivering the correct findings other than I cant see how they escape a guilty verdict. It'll then get mired once more ( still ) under the weight of ASADA/WADA seeking a more suitable penalty.

Given the penalties as delivered to Saad and Lees as any reference anything under 18 mnths will seem inadequate....and the fun and games will go on.

Bb one of the things I find frustrating with both your and dees2014s commentary on this issue is the repeated line that the fix is in and the afl will in fact determine the penalty not the independent tribunal. Essentially what you are suggesting is 3 much respected members of the legal fraternity are corrupt. Also you seem to suggest it is fact not a fantasy of yours.

And don't get me started on the doomsday scenarios involving mutiple appeals, the big bad wada wolf and the all powerful cas

  On 17/03/2015 at 21:01, binman said:

Bb one of the things I find frustrating with both your and dees2014s commentary on this issue is the repeated line that the fix is in and the afl will in fact determine the penalty not the independent tribunal. Essentially what you are suggesting is 3 much respected members of the legal fraternity are corrupt. Also you seem to suggest it is fact not a fantasy of yours.

And don't get me started on the doomsday scenarios involving mutiple appeals, the big bad wada wolf and the all powerful cas

not sure what the fantasy is..

This all said and done the AFL deliberating. It is an AFL tribunal. To think that no lobbying or ideas to persuasion or seeking to put forth their ( AFL ) position wont come to bear is I believe naive .

Yes.. 2 learned folk and someone possibly also but they are dealing in an environment which is firstly not of the courts so not bound by the normal constraints and secondly the AFL set the context. The determinations are made WITHIN this. Depending on what scope or largesse the AFL gives those hearing it as to what comes out the other end. ASADA are there to see its done properly but this isnt that different to me as a judge instructing a jury . I.e You dont always get free agency to total and free thought.

This has to be a seriously compromised dealing as the body with a great vested interest is running the thing hardly a recipe for unfettered deliberations.

In a nutshell. I dont trust ANYTHING about the AFL.. Its been participant in this from the outset and hardly the one to sit in judgement now. Even recently it 'entertained' a players 'group'. I mean, really, thats appropriate in the light of things ?

You would think on the surface that it will all be above board, but again it will be determined I feel by the AFL by the construct of the brief given the judges. What real incentive does the AFL have in nobbling one of its own especially one with influence even within the organisation itself.

From my seat I cant see why its even taking this much effort. Even with that which is is the public domain regarding the circumstantial evidence and some little anecdotal you would think a decision against the players a foregone conclusion.Irregardless of the outcome there will be no content parties and it will then start to get serious when the true 'hearer' of such things will step in. I say will, because they have shown in the past they have the appetite and motive, neither of which has the AFL. The AFL dont actually want to find out anything....about anything. it doesnt suit their business and this IS business and strange things happen in.....business.

  On 17/03/2015 at 21:01, binman said:

Bb one of the things I find frustrating with both your and dees2014s commentary on this issue is the repeated line that the fix is in and the afl will in fact determine the penalty not the independent tribunal. Essentially what you are suggesting is 3 much respected members of the legal fraternity are corrupt. Also you seem to suggest it is fact not a fantasy of yours.

And don't get me started on the doomsday scenarios involving mutiple appeals, the big bad wada wolf and the all powerful cas

Dees2014 (unfortunately) seems to have banned himself from posting on DL. His response to a similar question is on Post #678 on page 28 of this thread. Extract from the post: "That is exactly what I am saying, and Hird's relentless and expensive public campaign has been designed to position him as the innocent party supported by constant articles from tame journalists saying the players will get off. Judges will be highly influenced by this, as will be their existing prejudices about AFL football."

We will know in two weeks. In the meantime I hope Dees2014 starts posting again.

Why did dees2014 stop posting?

  On 17/03/2015 at 23:47, sweet and sour dee said:

Why did dees2014 stop posting?

He either stopped posting until the MFC wins their next Premiership or can play four quarters of football, whichever comes first.