On the topic of records, has anyone from EFC, or ASDA and/or the AFL for that matter, actually said there is no records? if so when?

I'm wondering if it is a rumour the compliant Hun reporters might have put out but i don't recall any official statement on this issue. It seems as if it has just been accepted as fact the records are missing.

Perhaps there are records but somehow there is a benefit to letting the idea there isn't get traction?

Cowboy or not... Anyone trying to understand the workings and effects of 'anything' will NEED some form of record in order to have date from which to extrapolate.

Its entirely implausible ( to me ) than none existed

Do homoeopaths keep records? If Dank was slack and had enough players in the program, he might not care that one or two missed an injection. The end result would be the focus. What do you think are in these records?

Do homoeopaths keep records? If Dank was slack and had enough players in the program, he might not care that one or two missed an injection. The end result would be the focus. What do you think are in these records?

probably..

keep in mind they take what they do seriously

On the topic of records, has anyone from EFC, or ASDA and/or the AFL for that matter, actually said there is no records? if so when?

I'm wondering if it is a rumour the compliant Hun reporters might have put out but i don't recall any official statement on this issue. It seems as if it has just been accepted as fact the records are missing.

Perhaps there are records but somehow there is a benefit to letting the idea there isn't get traction?

Someone claimed that the fact records were missing was a fiction about 100 pages back in the thread.

But I can't see why compliant HUN reporters would be the source of the myth - the absence of records doesn't necessarily support the EFC.

probably..

keep in mind they take what they do seriously

A few probably do, but if they have any intellectual honesty when they compare results with a proper control group, they'll no longer be homoeopaths.

Dank strikes me as so much of a snake-oil salesman that he might just boast without caring about much evidence.

Even if Dank didn't, the weapon would have records of weight, muscle mass, skin folds etc which could show abnormal growth in that time frame.

Just another piece of the puzzle perhaps

Best post I've seen so far from an Essendon fan on this:

"The Wada code was designed to catch Athletes in Olympic sports so giving an Athlete a 2 year ban won't really destroy them when they only compete once every 4 years."

The extra hour of sun during daylight savings is fading my curtains...

The extra hour of sun during daylight savings is fading my curtains...

My cows won't milk either...

The two main arguments over here in the west for voting against daylight savings.

Not the brightest bunch over here, can drive big trucks and v8 ute's though...

Not sure a direct statement had been made about the rec

My cows won't milk either...

The two main arguments over here in the west for voting against daylight savings.

Not the brightest bunch over here, can drive big trucks and v8 ute's though...

Duffer, change the clock in the dairy, cows are dumb enough to believe the wrong time. Same goes for curtains, set the clocks back, they have no idea. I did it in the chook pen, those roosters are too smart I reckon they can see the town hall clock.

Do homoeopaths keep records? If Dank was slack and had enough players in the program, he might not care that one or two missed an injection. The end result would be the focus. What do you think are in these records?

A person's sexuality should not be an issue.

Someone claimed that the fact records were missing was a fiction about 100 pages back in the thread.

But I can't see why compliant HUN reporters would be the source of the myth - the absence of records doesn't necessarily support the EFC.

List of sanctions.

http://www.afl.com.au/news/2013-08-27/list-of-charges-against-essendon-and-its-officials

Essendon Football Club

Essendon FC breach of AFL Player Rule 1.6

The AFL Commission and the Essendon FC acknowledge that the conduct in its totality relied upon by the AFL and EFC to constitute a breach of Rule 1.6 is as follows, namely, that Essendon FC:

- established a program relating to the administration of supplements to its players in preparation for, and during, the 2012 AFL premiership season (the Program);

- engaged in practices that exposed players to potential risks to their health and safety as well as the potential risk of using substances that were prohibited by the AFL Anti-Doping Code and the World Anti-Doping Code;

- disregarded standard practices involving the human resources department when employing Dean Robinson and Stephen Dank at EFC;

- failed to conduct routine, systematic pre-employment checks in respect of Dean Robinson and Stephen Dank;

- failed to ensure that persons with the necessary integrity, reputation and training were engaged by EFC to implement the Program;

- failed to ensure that those implementing the Program were adequately supervised;

- failed to devise or implement adequate systems or processes to ensure that some substances provided to and used by players were safe and were compliant with the AFL Anti-Doping Code and the World Anti-Doping Code;

failed to have proper regard to player health and safety, including failing to ensure that some substances had no potentially negative effects on players;

- failed to identify and record the source from which some substances used by players were obtained;

- failed to adequately monitor and record the use of some substances;

- failed to audit or monitor some substances held on the premises of EFC;

- failed to implement a system for recording and storing some substances held on the premises of EFC;

- failed to meaningfully inform players of some substances the subject of the Program and obtain their informed consent to the administration of some of the substances;

- failed to take appropriate and adequate action when it became aware of facts that suggested that unsatisfactory and potentially risky practices were occurring in relation to the administration of supplements; and

- permitted a culture at EFC of frequent, uninformed and unregulated use of the injection of supplements.

The AFL Commission further determines, and the Essendon FC further acknowledges, that by reason of the above matters:

- EFC failed to ensure it adequately protected the health, welfare and safety of the players;

there was a risk that Essendon players could have been administered substances prohibited by the AFL Anti-Doping Code and the World Anti-Doping Code and any such risk is an unacceptable risk; and

- EFC is unable now to determine whether players were administered some substances prohibited by the AFL Anti-Doping Code and the World Anti-Doping Code,

Not sure a direct statement had been made about the rec

No, nor am i. Which is strange on a number of levels.

One, as i said it is almost an accepted fact that there is no records (though from memory Ziggy did say record keeping was poor - though telling not non existent).

Two - if there were clear records then if EFC are adamant they are not guilty then such records would prove this.

Three - if there were records would not have ASADA made this clear? (though to be fair there is no reason they would need to)

sorta dispels any doubt....not that there was any

edit... love this

"In the early days when we first started ... any player who could not say what we were giving them, what they were taking it for, what the benefit was, they weren't allowed to take it or have it until they sat down and I went through that again," he said. Dank said he and then high performance manager Dean Robinson enforced this until players were "coherent with that information".

They could and probably were told what they were taking was legal. Perhaps the legal Thymosin. Without records of what they were actually given it no one knows. The players wouldn't have been checking individual vials before they were injected.

He doesn't say what they were records of. All clubs have day to day records on spreadsheets on club intranets that record a whole lot of information about the players. The players have an app that they fill in everyday when they wake up. It has stuff like how many hours sleep, how fatigued their bodies feel, etc etc. Dank might be talking about this for all we know. It might have had no record of the drug regime at all.

This guy shows characteristics of a classic fraud. Everything is double speak. He doesn't say all the drugs were legal he says they were approved somewhere in the world. But for what. EPO was originally developed and approved as a blood thickener for cancer patients. It was later discovered that it was a very useful Performance Enhancer. On his logic Dank would be saying it is ok because it was approved. Who's he trying to fool.

this

They could and probably were told what they were taking was legal. Perhaps the legal Thymosin. Without records of what they were actually given it no one knows. The players wouldn't have been checking individual vials before they were injected.

Thye didn't have colds. They were trying to bolster performance. and there is only one Thymosin being discussed that does that. The 'legal' Thymosin as you put it doesn't require compunding nor the frequency of injections etc etc

There was only one Thymosin being used. The "good stuff" as Hirdy said in a text and that Dank confirmed to the Age journalist (the only decent thing thee AGE has ever written).

They are cooked.

Even if Dank didn't, the weapon would have records of weight, muscle mass, skin folds etc which could show abnormal growth in that time frame.

Just another piece of the puzzle perhaps

Of course he would have them. You don't spend $500-$700k on a drug regime and not scrutinise every single change in behaviour, performance and physiology. Defies logic, accountability and believability.

And I can't wait for the fraud trial where Dank is defending his didgy blood tests that he allegedly tried to claim on medicare

List of sanctions.

http://www.afl.com.au/news/2013-08-27/list-of-charges-against-essendon-and-its-officials

Essendon Football Club

Essendon FC breach of AFL Player Rule 1.6

The AFL Commission and the Essendon FC acknowledge that the conduct in its totality relied upon by the AFL and EFC to constitute a breach of Rule 1.6 is as follows, namely, that Essendon FC:

- established a program relating to the administration of supplements to its players in preparation for, and during, the 2012 AFL premiership season (the Program);

- engaged in practices that exposed players to potential risks to their health and safety as well as the potential risk of using substances that were prohibited by the AFL Anti-Doping Code and the World Anti-Doping Code;

- disregarded standard practices involving the human resources department when employing Dean Robinson and Stephen Dank at EFC;

- failed to conduct routine, systematic pre-employment checks in respect of Dean Robinson and Stephen Dank;

- failed to ensure that persons with the necessary integrity, reputation and training were engaged by EFC to implement the Program;

- failed to ensure that those implementing the Program were adequately supervised;

- failed to devise or implement adequate systems or processes to ensure that some substances provided to and used by players were safe and were compliant with the AFL Anti-Doping Code and the World Anti-Doping Code;

failed to have proper regard to player health and safety, including failing to ensure that some substances had no potentially negative effects on players;

- failed to identify and record the source from which some substances used by players were obtained;

- failed to adequately monitor and record the use of some substances;

- failed to audit or monitor some substances held on the premises of EFC;

- failed to implement a system for recording and storing some substances held on the premises of EFC;

- failed to meaningfully inform players of some substances the subject of the Program and obtain their informed consent to the administration of some of the substances;

- failed to take appropriate and adequate action when it became aware of facts that suggested that unsatisfactory and potentially risky practices were occurring in relation to the administration of supplements; and

- permitted a culture at EFC of frequent, uninformed and unregulated use of the injection of supplements.

The AFL Commission further determines, and the Essendon FC further acknowledges, that by reason of the above matters:

- EFC failed to ensure it adequately protected the health, welfare and safety of the players;

there was a risk that Essendon players could have been administered substances prohibited by the AFL Anti-Doping Code and the World Anti-Doping Code and any such risk is an unacceptable risk; and

- EFC is unable now to determine whether players were administered some substances prohibited by the AFL Anti-Doping Code and the World Anti-Doping Code,

ManDee I'm disappointed in you. You are lowering the standard of this topic. Please stop posting FACTS. They really get in the way of a good debate.

I like your work.

Interesting though. I spoke to someone (unreliable source) who has a connection to someone on the inside and he claimed that there were records in evidence. I guess we'll know the answer in the published reasons in approximately two weeks.

We know that ASADA called two different medical experts during the trail, i believe they would have focused on two points during this.

point 1, the EFC are claiming they used thymomodulin, rather than Thymosin Beta 4 to boost their immune systems. I believe ASADA would argue that earlier EFC have claimed they knew they didn't take anything illegal but didn't know what they took, now all of a sudden they know what they took presumable because of the effects of Thymomodulin,

ASADA would argue that you don't run a program to boost the immune system without extensive testing and results and records of these dating back over multiple seasons that suggest that a supplements program of this scale is needed, and ask Essendon to present those to back up their claims.

the second point i think they would have made is related to the soft tissues injuries, the club suffered a mass of soft tissue injuries over the course of a couple of years there which is believed to be consistent with TB4, also the players grew noticeably in size during the period, something that Thymomodulin wouldn't cause.

we know Essendon and Hird were willing to go to court to prevent something within the interviews reaching the trial because they fought so hard to have the investigation but more specifically that part of the investigation thrown out, i think there is every chance at least one of the players has decided to simply look out for his own best interests.

The extra hour of sun during daylight savings is fading my curtains...

aah yes the curtains.

My Grandmother staunchly believed that to her grave. No matter what the explanation was

ManDee I'm disappointed in you. You are lowering the standard of this topic. Please stop posting FACTS. They really get in the way of a good debate.

I like your work.

Interesting though. I spoke to someone (unreliable source) who has a connection to someone on the inside and he claimed that there were records in evidence. I guess we'll know the answer in the published reasons in approximately two weeks.

Of course there were records . The stance is nothing more than a take ( inversely ) on the classic; "The dog ate my homework !!" except he we have records disappearing when they did exist as opposed an excuse for something that didnt !!

ManDee I'm disappointed in you. You are lowering the standard of this topic. Please stop posting FACTS. They really get in the way of a good debate.

I like your work.

Interesting though. I spoke to someone (unreliable source) who has a connection to someone on the inside and he claimed that there were records in evidence. I guess we'll know the answer in the published reasons in approximately two weeks.

Stevie Wonder and Jose Feliciano.

From Titus O'Reilly

Stephen Dank produces evidence that clears everyone

In a stunning and surprising move, Stephen Dank has produced unequivocal evidence that clears Essendon and every single player involved in the supplements scandal.

“I really should have done this years ago but I’ve been pretty busy not doing anything,” said the former sport scientist.

“It’s not like delaying the release of these documents has hurt anybody and I’ve enjoyed the attention actually.”

AFL CEO Gillon McLachlan said the release of the evidence was ‘super awkward’ for the AFL, ASADA and the media.

“We should have just taken Stephen at face value from the moment he said he had proof. Shame on us for wanting to see some actual evidence.”

“Sometimes having faith is better than having proof. This is the brightest day in Australian sport.”

Essendon chairman Paul Little said the records proved this was all a ‘crazy misunderstanding.’

“You have to laugh. This all could have been sorted out two years ago if Stephen had come forward then.”

“For reasons unknown, he didn’t but we can all have a good laugh about it now. What a madcap adventure!”

A spokesperson for the 34 players involved said they were glad this was all finally cleared up.

“The downside for a few of the players is they will now have to go to Morwell.”

James Hird released a brief statement saying he would be suing Stephen Dank.

Of course there were records . The stance is nothing more than a take ( inversely ) on the classic; "The dog ate my homework !!" except he we have records disappearing when they did exist as opposed an excuse for something that didnt !!

For me, the intriguing part is why Dank has come out and said this now. It seems like he is just dropping Essendon in it, but there is presumably more to it than that. Nothing in the article says that he doesn't have a copy of the records kept, only that they were left at Essendon. It seems too far-fetched for me that someone like Dank would leave all that behind and not keep a copy himself. But why weigh in now? Has someone come after him asking for records?

Of course there were records . The stance is nothing more than a take ( inversely ) on the classic; "The dog ate my homework !!" except he we have records disappearing when they did exist as opposed an excuse for something that didnt !!

What stance? Who's stance? I ask again when has anyone connected to this saga categorically said there are no records?