How can anybody even remotely familiar with the WADA code be happy with that explanation!

Why the hell is there the SO category??? Does a substance have to appear by name on the banned list? What was the status of AOD before April 2013 . . LEGAL??

Where is the confusion, what were the "WADA" inconsistancies? Where were the learned media in all this?

I'm begining to think this whole ASADA/WADA drug in sport thing is a total crock!!

I'm remotely familiar with the WADA code and I'm happy with that explanation.

It wasn't obviously banned prior to April 2013. Until that point it wasn't clear that it was a banned substance. WADA and ASADA weren't on the same page and there was differing information out there. It would be grossly unfair for someone to be charged and prosecuted for using a substance that wasn't banned at the time.

It was far simpler for ASADA to go after TB-4.

Someone's leaked to The Age again: http://www.theage.com.au/afl/afl-news/secret-report-finds-essendons-drugs-recordkeeping-was-deplorable-20150331-1mc8hi.html

so how is it that the two people most likely to be able to clear the bombers refused to testify? and the judges did not think that was odd. I suspect the AFL has done their homework and got a stickler of a judge to do their dirty work and find the evidence is not sufficient for a court of law, though it probably is way over for a sports tribunal.

Secondly how can the AFL punish Danks when there is evidence or wrong doing. I am surprised that there is no way to have compelled danks to provide evidence. This is the first time I have heard of anyone running clinical trials, etc and not keeping any records, how do they know who they gave what to and how often, and the side effects? really no records......

Lastly I wonder if this hurts the essendon players chances for compensation later on if something should kick in later, regardless of whether it is natural or as a result of their trials. The afl has already proven? nothing harmful was used?

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.

I think you might be right 'Redleg', McDevitt had a shot at the EFC today and will probably have one last swing tomorrow.

It will then be up to WADA to either take this further or not.

so how is it that the two people most likely to be able to clear the bombers refused to testify? and the judges did not think that was odd. I suspect the AFL has done their homework and got a stickler of a judge to do their dirty work and find the evidence is not sufficient for a court of law, though it probably is way over for a sports tribunal.

Secondly how can the AFL punish Danks when there is evidence or wrong doing. I am surprised that there is no way to have compelled danks to provide evidence. This is the first time I have heard of anyone running clinical trials, etc and not keeping any records, how do they know who they gave what to and how often, and the side effects? really no records......

Lastly I wonder if this hurts the essendon players chances for compensation later on if something should kick in later, regardless of whether it is natural or as a result of their trials. The afl has already proven? nothing harmful was used?

Seriously?

Hating on Essendon is one thing, but conspiracies like this are ridiculous.

Guilty people get off all the time if evidence is not conclusive or processes or practice is not sound.

Every club in AFL and any Australian athletic association can now undertake similar program of cutting edge experimentation using whatever drug they can obtain as long as they destroy the records and have players sign a waiver .

All Australian sports people can form their own internal tribunals to absolve them of use on the ground that not comfortably satisfied.

We should finally be able to dominate at international level

Thank god foe Essendon and James Hird

AFL is now more administratively competent than International Cycling and athletic bodies. We have another export industry

I believe WADA will come down hard and show the AFL to be the lightweight authority that it is.

Based on solid info Moon or just guy feel?

answer . . . anyone?

AFL: Essendon Bombers captain Jobe Watson admits using banned substance

Updated

25 Jun 2013, 8:04pm

Essendon captain Jobe Watson has made the stunning admission he took the banned substance AOD-9604, but the AFL's reigning Brownlow Medallist remains adamant he did nothing wrong. The star onballer said on Monday night he took the anti-obesity drug after signing a consent form.

"I signed that consent form and my understanding, after it being given through (club doctor) Bruce Reid and the club, that I was receiving AOD," he told Fox Sports program On The Couch.

Great post deefrag. Had to bump it.

There is evidence from a player he was injected with a substance from a brown vial that Mr Dank always told him was thymosin."

But Jones said that was of "no significant probative value".

Que?????

Seriously?

Hating on Essendon is one thing, but conspiracies like this are ridiculous.

How can you call that a conspiracy? It is just the way the AFL works. We've seen it all before.

The tribunal was comfortably satisfied that biochemist Shane Charter had bought thymosin beta-4 in his first shipment of peptides from GL Biochem in China and that those peptides were passed on to compounding pharmacist Nima Alavi. There was some inference in correspondence from Alavi that he had compounded the drug.

But the tribunal was not sure that Dank had received the drug in his capacity as an Essendon representative. The tribunal rejected the notion that he had used the legal variant, thymosin alpha.

Are they serious?

Based on solid info Moon or just guy feel?

Like all of us, of course I'm not privy to insider information, and as this is an internet footy forum, of course I'm just speculating. Given today's results, I'll call 'gut feel' another name: perception, because that's what this decision appears to be based upon.

Just read the Age article

http://www.theage.com.au/afl/afl-news/secret-report-finds-essendons-drugs-recordkeeping-was-deplorable-20150331-1mc8hi.html

So all you have to do is not keep records and ship the stuff in on a dark night. How can any rational person believe they didn't keep records. No AFL club is that amateurish.

AFL has just issued a guidebook on how to cheat.

Just read the Age article

http://www.theage.com.au/afl/afl-news/secret-report-finds-essendons-drugs-recordkeeping-was-deplorable-20150331-1mc8hi.html

So all you have to do is not keep records and ship the stuff in on a dark night. How can any rational person believe they didn't keep records. No AFL club is that amateurish.

AFL has just issued a guidebook on how to cheat.

No. You just have to pick it up from the chemist in your anti ageing clinic shirt instead of your essendon one.

I hope ASADA has the ability to keep getting phone taps and political interference does not get any further than what it already has. Integrity is on the line here.

We have all heard of the word "boycott". That time might now be appropriate.

The last point is too many people know too much. Some of these people are or were from Essendon administration and are honourable.

Something will give sooner or later.

Just read the Age article

http://www.theage.com.au/afl/afl-news/secret-report-finds-essendons-drugs-recordkeeping-was-deplorable-20150331-1mc8hi.html

So all you have to do is not keep records and ship the stuff in on a dark night. How can any rational person believe they didn't keep records. No AFL club is that amateurish.

AFL has just issued a guidebook on how to cheat.

The AFL did get them on governance issues though. Essendon received a heavy fine, lost draft picks, and had their coach suspended for a year.

The tribunal said they conclusively did not take the 'good' Thymosin but could not prove they took the bad Thymosin. Hardly a ringing endorsement of the EFC position

They are the scum of the earth.

Listened to Little and Hird at their presser on SEN on the way home. They both thanked a cavalcade of people who were involved in this sorry saga but both failed to mention Bomber, (as I heard it anyway). Looks like Thommo is on the outer at Bomberland big time. He was the guy who tried to warn them off their mad scheme I thought.

The AFL did get them on governance issues though. Essendon received a heavy fine, lost draft picks, and had their coach suspended for a year.

OK, so to cheat without any team penalty as well as no player's penalty just don't self-report.

You should have employed me to correct your grammar and spelling Jizza.

Part of my persona to mispeill things.

Easy fishing here BBO

1. Tribunal agrees it was tb4.

2. Came from china via charter to dank. Tribunal agrees.

3. Alavi compounds it. Tribunal agrees.

4. Dank gets it but "not in his capacity as an essendon representative".

5. Player is injected with what dank tells him is thymosin. Tribunal says thats "of no significant probative value"

Anyone else see the holes here?

Seriously?

Hating on Essendon is one thing, but conspiracies like this are ridiculous.

you seriously think they don't consider which judges they use, who they are, what their history is, or do you think they pick them out of the yellow pages,

you seriously think they don't consider which judges they use, who they are, what their history is, or do you think they pick them out of the yellow pages,

Have you considered the possibility that ASADA didn't have the evidence? Or is the only rational explanation in your mind that the judge was corrupt?

Just read the Age articlehttp://www.theage.com.au/afl/afl-news/secret-report-finds-essendons-drugs-recordkeeping-was-deplorable-20150331-1mc8hi.html

So all you have to do is not keep records and ship the stuff in on a dark night. How can any rational person believe they didn't keep records. No AFL club is that amateurish.

AFL has just issued a guidebook on how to cheat.

Why blame the AFL?

Three wise men on the Tribunal made the decision.

Have you considered the possibility that ASADA didn't have the evidence? Or is the only rational explanation in your mind that the judge was corrupt?

Corrupt may be too strong a word. But I repeat: would you trust the judgment and biases of anyone who let Barry Hall off so he could play in that grand final? I don't.