Skip to content
View in the app

A better way to browse. Learn more.

Demonland

A full-screen app on your home screen with push notifications, badges and more.

To install this app on iOS and iPadOS
  1. Tap the Share icon in Safari
  2. Scroll the menu and tap Add to Home Screen.
  3. Tap Add in the top-right corner.
To install this app on Android
  1. Tap the 3-dot menu (⋮) in the top-right corner of the browser.
  2. Tap Add to Home screen or Install app.
  3. Confirm by tapping Install.

THE ESSENDON 34: ON TRIAL

Featured Replies

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

 

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"?

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

 

11082673_675575599230981_238100784045514

423734-53bc21bc-6652-11e4-8055-994d0fcdd

Winners are grinners . . . . . .

I feel sick


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.

 

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 :

28tfeau.jpg

423734-53bc21bc-6652-11e4-8055-994d0fcdd

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'.


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.

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 by Young Dee

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.

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

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


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 by Young Dee

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

Think it goes to the CAS?

... 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.

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.

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


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 by jazza

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' :rolleyes:

 

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.

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

done and done


Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Featured Content

  • PODCAST: 2026 Season Preview

    The boys previewed the 2026 Season sharing their early impressions of the new coach, the new players, observations from preseason training, and what they've made of the new game style. They also look ahead to the season with their predictions, the players they expect to rise, their expectations for the team, and what they see as a realistic pass mark for Melbourne in 2026.

    • 6 replies
  • PREVIEW: St. Kilda

    When the Demons blew their 46-point lead at Marvel Stadium in Round 20 last year, the fallout was enormous. Like an event straight out of a Shakespearean tragedy, Melbourne’s final-quarter collapse left fans reeling and the club grappling with the aftermath. 

    • 2 replies
  • PREGAME: St. Kilda

    With just over two weeks until their opening match of the 2026 AFL Premiership season, the Demons are already well on the path to redemption and have the Saints firmly in their sights ahead of their mid-March clash at the MCG. What do you think the team will look like when they run out on to the G?

    • 384 replies
  • NON-MFC: 2026 Opening Round

    Finally the 2026 AFL Premiership Season is upon us. While Melbourne sits out Opening Round, there is still plenty of footy to enjoy with five non-MFC clashes to kick off the new season. It all begins on Thursday night with a blockbuster at the SCG as Sydney hosts Carlton in what should be a strong early test for both sides. On Friday night, Gold Coast gets its chance to open the season in front of a home crowd when the Suns and Christian Petracca take on Geelong at People First Stadium. Saturday features a double-header, starting in the afternoon with Greater Western Sydney and Clayton Oliver meeting the Hawks at Engie Stadium. That is followed on Saturday night by Brisbane Lions hosting the Western Bulldogs at the Gabba, with the Lions embarking on their campaign to win the Threepeat. Opening Round wraps up on Sunday night at the MCG, where St Kilda takes on Collingwood in the only game in town in the first week of the season. There is no shortage of storylines across the round, so discuss all the action from the non-MFC games of Opening Round.

      • Haha
      • Like
    • 557 replies
  • REPORT: Richmond

    Mars is not usually a place known for lighting strikes but on Friday evening it happened twice in the vicinity of the stadium in Ballarat that carries the name and is a half completed building site with limited capacity for spectators.

    • 4 replies
  • POSTGAME: Richmond

    The Dees ran another clinic for the second week in a row as they easily accounted for the Tigers in the lightning interrupted shortened match at Mars Stadium in Ballarat.

    • 118 replies

Account

Navigation

Search

Search

Configure browser push notifications

Chrome (Android)
  1. Tap the lock icon next to the address bar.
  2. Tap Permissions → Notifications.
  3. Adjust your preference.
Chrome (Desktop)
  1. Click the padlock icon in the address bar.
  2. Select Site settings.
  3. Find Notifications and adjust your preference.