http://www.afl.com.au/news/2015-02-27/hird-ends-legal-fight

Shut the Fcuk up James....This was all bought on by YOU....

"Get me the GOOD STUFF we are playing Carlton this week...."

I saw your Text Transcript to Dank James....It came from YOUR phone

You really are one sick unit James...

still playing the victim

and talking on behalf of the players and the club (who didn't want his previous appeal)

Shocker. Breathtaking arrogance. 5 different Federal Court Judges say there wasn't an issue with ASADA's conduct but they are all wrong and he is right. What a narcisist. Please just admit you did the cases for yourself not anyone else.

The argument " WE WAS DUPED' wont wash, do you know why? ManDee raised the point, because 8 players Nearly 20% didn't sign and get injected.

WHY didn't they sign, who didn't sign, those 8 players had reasons not signing, it isn't easy standing up to a raging Hird thundering down on you.

Any arguments over team bonding,teams sticking together to get better for the next season didn't make them sign. WHY?

Did they check? Are they scared of needles? Nearly 20% scared of needles. Team mates talk amongst themselves over a great many topics, this would have been one of them. Did the new players ask Fletcher if in all his years he had signed waivers before.

They didn't sign, if they were duped it would be one in all in, not nearly 20% out.

This is not the biggest worry. If they succeed with this defence it will reduce a 2yr ban to 1yr. They haven't co operated so that is the best they will get.

The biggest problem is whether the evidence ASADA has presented is enough to establish they were given TB4. If it isn't then they get off. That is the real worry.

Wow the arrogance of him still playing the victim, I can't wait for the verdict now bring it on hope he gets banned for life

Wow the arrogance of him still playing the victim, I can't wait for the verdict now bring it on hope he gets banned for life

Not long enough.

I would also like to see his Brownlow taken away.

This is not the biggest worry. If they succeed with this defence it will reduce a 2yr ban to 1yr. They haven't co operated so that is the best they will get.

The biggest problem is whether the evidence ASADA has presented is enough to establish they were given TB4. If it isn't then they get off. That is the real worry.

As I see it ASADA would be suggesting EFC cannot [prove they havent and that all the circumstantial evidence points ( in the absence of anything else substantiated ) to the club having provided the drug and used it according to a protocol which parallels the injection program as described. In essence it goes beyond probability that TB4 WAS used as its beyond probability that anything else was.

Its a bit like a Black hole...theres nothing there...but argue with Stephen Hawkings as to its existence...and understand how we know it does ( exist )

As I see it ASADA would be suggesting EFC cannot [prove they havent and that all the circumstantial evidence points ( in the absence of anything else substantiated ) to the club having provided the drug and used it according to a protocol which parallels the injection program as described. In essence it goes beyond probability that TB4 WAS used as its beyond probability that anything else was.

Its a bit like a Black hole...theres nothing there...but argue with Stephen Hawkings as to its existence...and understand how we know it does ( exist )

Its all mathematics really. EG: Three people have been in the house. There were 6 eggs in the fridge. I had two eggs, you had 2 eggs and now there are no eggs in the fridge. Mathematics tells me the third person is responsible for the missing eggs. No one saw them take the eggs. That is circumstantial evidence.

No one can prove the players took a banned substance. The club ordered and paid for a banned substance. Thousands of injections of substances took place. No records of thousand of vials of approved substances exists. Now I am no mathematical genius but to me it is obvious. I agree with Stephen Hawkins, black holes exist not because I know they exist but because they must exist.

Its all mathematics really. EG: Three people have been in the house. There were 6 eggs in the fridge. I had two eggs, you had 2 eggs and now there are no eggs in the fridge. Mathematics tells me the third person is responsible for the missing eggs. No one saw them take the eggs. That is circumstantial evidence.

No one can prove the players took a banned substance. The club ordered and paid for a banned substance. Thousands of injections of substances took place. No records of thousand of vials of approved substances exists. Now I am no mathematical genius but to me it is obvious. I agree with Stephen Hawkins, black holes exist not because I know they exist but because they must exist.

The eggs are a good analogy. The Essendon players may argue that because no-one was watching the fridge at all times, the eggs were taken away by someone else. ASADA may have to satisfy the tribunal that even though the fridge wasn't being watched, there is insufficient evidence to show the eggs were not taken away but in fact eaten by the Essendon players. Double negatives abound - but that's the nature of this with the onus on the players to prove they didn't eat the eggs.

The eggs are a good analogy. The Essendon players may argue that because no-one was watching the fridge at all times, the eggs were taken away by someone else. ASADA may have to satisfy the tribunal that even though the fridge wasn't being watched, there is insufficient evidence to show the eggs were not taken away but in fact eaten by the Essendon players. Double negatives abound - but that's the nature of this with the onus on the players to prove they didn't eat the eggs.

but we know that they were injected "thymosin"

and at doses you would use for tb4 and not for thymomodulin

they need to explain that

i wonder if they found invoices for thymodulin (at the appropriate market value)

Just something as food for thought

Consider who is currently the head of ASADA.. >>> Ben McDevitt

Now Benny boy WAS the Queensland Manager of the Australian Crime Commission and previously the Assistant Commissioner at the AFP and CEO at Crimtrac for 5 years.I

Interesting for me is he was with the ACC at the time Dumbo did his dumb thing. This suggests that Ben will know all the dirt on this especially the peripheral players and be totally up on ifo that the AFL probably DOESNT have.

Whats the chances that when coming on board with ASADA and understanding what they ( ASADA) needed to nail all the naughty ones that ASADA under new bosses tutelage set out to effectively regain all the knowledge that was relevant that Ben ALREADY knew existed but couldnt bring with him officially as it was bound to the ACC. Now Ben is highly unlikely to to have undergone a lobotomy and as such forgotten what he knows but knows he cant use it without rediscovering it in the uniform of a new investigation or at least revisiting the interviews and such that had come to light to date.

As another ( apol cant remember who ) has suggested its also very unlikely that ASADA have ever stopped investigating after SCN were issued Sense suggests if you know where the worms are you keep at it till you get the biggest and the most.

There was a lot of body language in those images of Ben at the recent senate estimates happening. Didnt look like a guy defeated or even hamstrung. He looked like the fox in the henhouse licking his lips!!

Id be very worried if involved at Windy Hill

The eggs are a good analogy. The Essendon players may argue that because no-one was watching the fridge at all times, the eggs were taken away by someone else. ASADA may have to satisfy the tribunal that even though the fridge wasn't being watched, there is insufficient evidence to show the eggs were not taken away but in fact eaten by the Essendon players. Double negatives abound - but that's the nature of this with the onus on the players to prove they didn't eat the eggs.

and if someone had taken the eggs , what was it they did have instead, and where did it come from and show me the receipts

Consider who is currently the head of ASADA.. >>> Ben McDevitt

Now Benny boy WAS the Queensland Manager of the Australian Crime Commission and previously the Assistant Commissioner at the AFP and CEO at Crimtrac for 5 years.I

Interesting for me is he was with the ACC at the time Dumbo did his dumb thing. This suggests that Ben will know all the dirt on this especially the peripheral players and be totally up on ifo that the AFL probably DOESNT have.

Never knew that,.

Now wonder he is spending so much money to try and make sure the evidence never sees the light of day.

No doubt there some real juicy stuff in there that will end him completely.

Never knew that,.

Now wonder he is spending so much money to try and make sure the evidence never sees the light of day.

No doubt there some real juicy stuff in there that will end him completely.

The last person Hird wants as his protagonist is one Ben McDevitt !!! mwmahahahahah

How is six months already served when they have been allowed to participate in pre-season training during that time?

It's the same for all sports - no sport is played 12 months of the year, and any ban will invariably include periods in/out of competition. All athletes can and do continue to train while banned.

Of course, if the ban is only 6 months, which happens to coincide with the off-season, it becomes a bit of a farce, but very (very) hard these days to only cop a 6 month ban. It would be 12 months (minimum), which would cover one season, which is all we could expect.

Also - at the moment, it's only a provisional ban. After all, regardless of what we all feel or expect, technically they're still innocent.

Think they'll get something like 18 months myself, perhaps 12 at a minimum, but just as likely the full 2 years.

It's the same for all sports - no sport is played 12 months of the year, and any ban will invariably include periods in/out of competition. All athletes can and do continue to train while banned.

Of course, if the ban is only 6 months, which happens to coincide with the off-season, it becomes a bit of a farce, but very (very) hard these days to only cop a 6 month ban. It would be 12 months (minimum), which would cover one season, which is all we could expect.

Also - at the moment, it's only a provisional ban. After all, regardless of what we all feel or expect, technically they're still innocent.

Think they'll get something like 18 months myself, perhaps 12 at a minimum, but just as likely the full 2 years.

nothing will be credited further than the final reissuing of the SCN. Watson and Fletcher are likely to be further disadvantaged having played

Its all mathematics really. EG: Three people have been in the house. There were 6 eggs in the fridge. I had two eggs, you had 2 eggs and now there are no eggs in the fridge. Mathematics tells me the third person is responsible for the missing eggs. No one saw them take the eggs. That is circumstantial evidence.

No one can prove the players took a banned substance. The club ordered and paid for a banned substance. Thousands of injections of substances took place. No records of thousand of vials of approved substances exists. Now I am no mathematical genius but to me it is obvious. I agree with Stephen Hawkins, black holes exist not because I know they exist but because they must exist.

It's implausible. The club monitors the number of farts players do.

They paid $500-700k for this supplements regime and you think they weren't going to keep records and monitor it? Bulltish. If there are no records then on the balance of probabilities the club is in deep trouble. So are the players.

I would like to think, the club would have sat all the players down in a room, Doc reid would have explained to them exactly what they were going to be injected with, told them he had assurances that all of the substances were above board and there would be no lingering health issues associated with them, and explain exactly what benefit they see these injections providing.

clearly either none of that has happened or they have lied to the players. either way i'd suggest the club doctor is responsible.

That did happen with hird weapon dank and Reid all in the room when the waivers were issued and signed hence that's the players argument they were Duped

Just in case my last posts made you think I was supporting the duped argument, I believe they are guilty and their arguments are fanciful.

The comments I was making was trying to inform people of what EFC were trying to argue and how they were trying to fool everyone (and if you were a supporter you could see how they could justify the backing of their club with such plausible information that misses the real picture) The arguments won't work in the end but its an interesting exercise as they have used the favourable media to distribute the propaganda into what looks like a plausible explanation if you havent followed the whole thing as the facts that hurt the defence are quickly buried whilst the positive information campaign is repeated continually until it nearly becomes fact

The eggs are a good analogy. The Essendon players may argue that because no-one was watching the fridge at all times, the eggs were taken away by someone else. ASADA may have to satisfy the tribunal that even though the fridge wasn't being watched, there is insufficient evidence to show the eggs were not taken away but in fact eaten by the Essendon players. Double negatives abound - but that's the nature of this with the onus on the players to prove they didn't eat the eggs.

Its all mathematics really. EG: Three people have been in the house. There were 6 eggs in the fridge. I had two eggs, you had 2 eggs and now there are no eggs in the fridge. Mathematics tells me the third person is responsible for the missing eggs. No one saw them take the eggs. That is circumstantial evidence.

No one can prove the players took a banned substance. The club ordered and paid for a banned substance. Thousands of injections of substances took place. No records of thousand of vials of approved substances exists. Now I am no mathematical genius but to me it is obvious. I agree with Stephen Hawkins, black holes exist not because I know they exist but because they must exist.

Nobody ate the eggs! They were outside having a bit of a "domestic"!

The long term effects of this is that young stars will no longer be attracted to Essendon and there will be a spiral of losing.

The protracted nature of Hird's legal approach has made it worse for the club he loves.

Timmy Watson sold Musachi Peptides/aminos years ago didn't he?

The cleanout there has not even started but the AFL will need to do it.

nothing will be credited further than the final reissuing of the SCN. Watson and Fletcher are likely to be further disadvantaged having played

I think you mean infraction notices.

But otherwise I agree completely. November 14 is the maximum "backdating" they can hope for. Cronulla was a very special case.

but we know that they were injected "thymosin"

and at doses you would use for tb4 and not for thymomodulin

they need to explain that

i wonder if they found invoices for thymodulin (at the appropriate market value)

This is where they will fail as they won't be able to show purchasing of the good thymosin even though this was a coached response. Who orders and pays for an illegal injection (about 10k worth) and then (as alleged by dank was destroyed by UV) doesn't reorder more for your program. EFC would need to show dank might of ordered the illegal drugs and picked the up but he actually took them to his private clinic and had EFC paid his invoice.

Even the coached response from the players that we were explained there is good and bad thymosin by dank and we were given the good one. Sounds like a great story but if in may 13 dank believed tb4 was not on the banned list (the age interview) why would he be explaining good and bad thymidine when he didn't even know that.

Again essendon has had a favourable media who has repeated the good and buried the bad but the holes are so big in their story that it can't matter

Its all mathematics really. EG: Three people have been in the house. There were 6 eggs in the fridge. I had two eggs, you had 2 eggs and now there are no eggs in the fridge. Mathematics tells me the third person is responsible for the missing eggs. No one saw them take the eggs. That is circumstantial evidence.

No one can prove the players took a banned substance. The club ordered and paid for a banned substance. Thousands of injections of substances took place. No records of thousand of vials of approved substances exists. Now I am no mathematical genius but to me it is obvious. I agree with Stephen Hawkins, black holes exist not because I know they exist but because they must exist.

I wonder if the strategy is a little better than the egg story as their is only person who it could be. The issue is the players can admit they received injections but mine were all the normal ones.

An example: So if their is a thousand vials with 100 illegal substances and 10 players have 100 injections each. It's easy to say each player took ten illegal injections amongst their 100. It's easy for each player to claim I had 100 of the 900 good ones and I don't know who had the bad ones thus you prove I had the bad ones as we are all denying it.

I assume ASADA has the evidence against this but it is really the only way EFC can argue. There is texts from players regarding their thymo injections so some are gone and I would assume they have the evidence to show each players injection include a course of thymo

"It's been very disappointing what's happened the last two years and the way our football club has been treated.

Is he kidding? Your club brought this on itself you moron. No one else did this program. My god take the blinkers off and accept some responsibility.

Its all mathematics really. EG: Three people have been in the house. There were 6 eggs in the fridge. I had two eggs, you had 2 eggs and now there are no eggs in the fridge. Mathematics tells me the third person is responsible for the missing eggs. No one saw them take the eggs. That is circumstantial evidence.

No one can prove the players took a banned substance. The club ordered and paid for a banned substance. Thousands of injections of substances took place. No records of thousand of vials of approved substances exists. Now I am no mathematical genius but to me it is obvious. I agree with Stephen Hawkins, black holes exist not because I know they exist but because they must exist.

If we can go back to the 8 players who weren't duped, I'd say there must be solid evidence that proves they didn't take a banned substance. Why can't the other players prove this? By extension; they took something and if they cannot prove what, then they are guilty.

Three people have been in the house. There were 6 eggs in the fridge. I had two eggs, you had 2 eggs and now there are no eggs in the fridge.

If the three people are athletes, and the eggs are something a little stronger (and illegal), just being in the house is already going to be problematic.