"Those with knowledge of the case" is a pretty standard term when a journalist has spoken to someone who not only wants to remain anonymous but also doesn't want to be traced to any particular organisation or to one side or another in a legal dispute. On balance, when a journo claims they have information from "those with knowledge of the case" I would not only believe they have spoken to someone but that someone probably is in the know. What it doesn't tell you, though, is whether the person with the "knowledge of the case" is spinning a line.

it probably means the journo spoke to a london cabbie (the knowledge) - lol

All that has to happen in my opinion is for the "players " to be found guilty of taking drugs.

The Public will do the rest as in the Armstrong case.

The libs couldn't even save themselves....

Disagree. I think the players will come out Ok. They were naive and are ultimately responsible but they were duped. No intent on their parts.

Hird however will go down in flames.

That's a very deep question 'La Dee', maybe too deep for this forum.

I tincidunt Demonland, ergo sum. ("I post on Demonland, therefore I am")

With thanks to Rene Descartes and Google Translate

Disagree. I think the players will come out Ok. They were naive and are ultimately responsible but they were duped. No intent on their parts.

Hird however will go down in flames.

You are certainly in the minority group with that one deanox

You are certainly in the minority group with that one deanox

I'm not so sure. I think they should all get very serious punishments and so do most people I speak with. But that doesn't equate to "Intentional cheating".

I think history will remember them as "the players caught up in the Essendon supplements scandal" target than put them in the Justin Charles drug cheat category.

I'm not so sure. I think they should all get very serious punishments and so do most people I speak with. But that doesn't equate to "Intentional cheating".

I think history will remember them as "the players caught up in the Essendon supplements scandal" target than put them in the Justin Charles drug cheat category.

Does it equate to intentional ignorance?

I'm not so sure. I think they should all get very serious punishments and so do most people I speak with. But that doesn't equate to "Intentional cheating".

I think history will remember them as "the players caught up in the Essendon supplements scandal" target than put them in the Justin Charles drug cheat category.

I agree. Though i would say that they are more likely to be remembered as

"the naive, possibly stupid players caught up in the Essendon supplements scandal who seemed to have disregarded or not understood the clear message that under the WADA code athletes are fully responsible for what goes into their body and that being part of a cult like football environment where independent thought is aggressively discouraged is not an excuse for taking a banned substance"

The idea that the main driver for the EFC to so vigorously fight the process in their appeal (and Tirds) is their concern for the player's reputation is the classic furphy. They should - and probably are - be more concerned with their own reputation and dragging things out to minimise the numbers of EFC players who are suspended

Here's a thought: if found guilty, do you think the players could argue that the football club was so insular that it constituted a cult and therefore they decision-making ability was greatly impaired?

I remember one of the features of a cult being the members' passionate defence of a charismatic leader despite objectively adverse consequences to those members.

So maybe a clever lawyer could use this argument to make a civil case against the club?

Extremely unlikely hypothetical, but I like "what-if" scenarios.

Disagree. I think the players will come out Ok. They were naive and are ultimately responsible but they were duped. No intent on their parts.

Hird however will go down in flames.

Nah The bought into the Kool aid story. 'Everyone's doing it but we are going to do it better' They signed waivers and apparently NOT ONE player checked with anyone outside the club including ASADA etc. Not believeable. Fails the sniff test.

Guilty. Goodbye.

Nah The bought into the Kool aid story. 'Everyone's doing it but we are going to do it better' They signed waivers and apparently NOT ONE player checked with anyone outside the club including ASADA etc. Not believeable. Fails the sniff test.

Guilty. Goodbye.

As a general rule I agree, but I do not believe this will be the prevailing historical view.

Note my words were "how I think they will be remembered" not what I think of them.

Edited January 20, 201510 yr by deanox

Deanox.

If it was one player you would say he is a Richard cranium and guilty.

But with 34 that don't communicate you have to say they are all effin dick heads and are all guilty as sin.

I can't believe that none of the 34 spoke to each other.

"Ignorance is no excuse"

First rule of law

If and when found Guilty The Essendon Football Club and the 34 players will be remembered as Drug Cheats

They knew what was going on. All of them

Don't let bias media and fatigue of the story change your mind

Remember the Physical size of the essendon list in early 2012

They all knew....

"Ignorance is no excuse"

First rule of law

If and when found Guilty The Essendon Football Club and the 34 players will be remembered as Drug Cheats

They knew what was going on. All of them

Don't let bias media and fatigue of the story change your mind

Remember the Physical size of the essendon list in early 2012

They all knew....

Not only remembered as drug cheats, are drug cheats.

Not only remembered as drug cheats, are drug cheats.

yep, like pregnancy, can be a little bit

Or like being pulled over for a breath test.

Officer I hav only had 6 stubbies.

So driver being a little bit [censored] is really [censored].

yep, like pregnancy, can be a little bit

Amazing how a small typo can change meaning

Amazing how a small typo can change meaning

wasn't a typo, was rhetorical where the obvious answer was no

I'm interested if anyone know if the players that aren't caught up in this, ie Zaharakis etc; were they interviewed by ASADA also? Were questions asked along the lines of for what reasons did you say no to being injected? Would that not help the case at all?

Let me pose this for consideration.

Players of clubs talk to each other and several have mates and relatives at other clubs. Did not one Essendon player mention he was being asked to have 52 injections in his stomach to a player from another club? If not why not? Did not one player mention it to a parent/wife/girlfriend etc? If not why not?

Is the reason that they were told not to by the club? Wouldn't that raise suspicions of wrong doing?

Did the players ask Dr. Reid if it was ok to take these injections? If not why not? If yes, then it can only be assumed that Dr. Reid would have said they were safe and legal. If he said that, on what basis would he have done so?

It is probably fair to assume that Dr. Reid was never asked by the players if the injections were safe and legal.

If the players didn't ask the Doctor about the injections, given what the AFL does in respect of drug education to AFL players, these players cannot blame others for taking drugs, on the say so of a Coach or a Sports Scientist.

I'm not so sure. I think they should all get very serious punishments and so do most people I speak with. But that doesn't equate to "Intentional cheating".

I think history will remember them as "the players caught up in the Essendon supplements scandal" target than put them in the Justin Charles drug cheat category.

We have moved a long way from that.

The players are condemned by the actions of their club and their refusal to takes responsibility and their determination to maintain "a united front" ie not admit guilt of any description, while maintaining a relentless propaganda campaign again ASADA/WADA. I can tell you the guys in Switzerland are very much aware of the mischief making of Hird and Little. It will not be forgotten when they make their case to CAS and the sentences are handed out. Unfortunately, the players have been appallingly badly advised on this, and will pay a very very heavy price, duped by the sociopathic personalities of the Hirds and Little.

They will have nowhere to hide when we do eventually get a resolution.

We have moved a long way from that.

The players are condemned by the actions of their club and their refusal to takes responsibility and their determination to maintain "a united front" ie not admit guilt of any description, while maintaining a relentless propaganda campaign again ASADA/WADA. I can tell you the guys in Switzerland are very much aware of the mischief making of Hird and Little. It will not be forgotten when they make their case to CAS and the sentences are handed out. Unfortunately, the players have been appallingly badly advised on this, and will pay a very very heavy price, duped by the sociopathic personalities of the Hirds and Little.

They will have nowhere to hide when we do eventually get a resolution.

If you are correct on this I will enjoy pointing and laughing at a number of Dons nutters I know.

You are certainly in the minority group with that one deanox

I was wondering how the players were duped.

It will not be forgotten when they make their case to CAS and the sentences are handed out.

FWIW, CAS can sit in Sydney. Same rules though.

Guys. I agree with you. We as a group have discussed this to death. The intricacies, the details.

I am saying that the football public, and the media who directs a lot of the convo, will be more lenient in their take. Even now the media is looking after the players and lots of public sympathy is directed to them.

Doesn't make it right.

Guys. I agree with you. We as a group have discussed this to death. The intricacies, the details.

I am saying that the football public, and the media who directs a lot of the convo, will be more lenient in their take. Even now the media is looking after the players and lots of public sympathy is directed to them.

Doesn't make it right.

If WADA give the players all 2 years as they should, what the local media say won't mean a dam thing.