THE DRUG SCANDAL: AFL TRIBUNAL DECIDES

[Chris 2,892]

The doubts revolve around why Dank would give sworn evidence that the EFC players were given legal supplements, what would be in it for him to lie? none of this evidence can be used against him so what's the angle?

Civil action from players could be one angle. Imagine admitting he gave basically a whole team banned drugs. He would be financially ruined for life.

[What 18,810]

I agree whoever said No records = Guilty

I am shocked that isnt WADA law actually

[Lucifers Hero 36,991]

The doubts revolve around why Dank would give sworn evidence that the EFC players were given legal supplements, what would be in it for him to lie? none of this evidence can be used against him so what's the angle?

Its interesting the ACC interview in May 2012, was a month after Dank told The Age reporter (forgotten his name) that he had used TB4, only to be told it was banned and then changed his story. So he went to the ACC interview well prepared.

Why would he lie? Firstly, the point above shows he isn't very clever. Secondly, he could be playing the odds - he had nothing to lose, as he knew it would be difficult to prove it wasn't the good thymo. Thirdly, protect his reputation. Finally, he is simply a liar. Haven't seen much about Dank that is believable TBH.

I wonder if the ACC giving Dank 'indemnity' against prosecution applies to all entities or just the ACC. If the latter, Dank had every reason to be cagey.

In the meantime, The Australian is reporting: "The sports scientist who designed and implemented Essendons ill-fated supplements program will be compelled by WorkSafe to provide information about the substances he administered to footballers as the agencys criminal investi­gation gathers momentum".

[beelzebub 22,225]

Its interesting the ACC interview in May 2012, was a month after Dank told The Age reporter (forgotten his name) that he had used TB4, only to be told it was banned and then changed his story. So he went to the ACC interview well prepared.

Why would he lie? Firstly, the point above shows he isn't very clever. Secondly, he could be playing the odds - he had nothing to lose, as he knew it would be difficult to prove it wasn't the good thymo. Thirdly, protect his reputation. Finally, he is simply a liar. Haven't seen much about Dank that is believable TBH.

I wonder if the ACC giving Dank 'indemnity' against prosecution applies to all entities or just the ACC. If the latter, Dank had every reason to be cagey.

In the meantime, The Australian is reporting: "The sports scientist who designed and implemented Essendon’s ill-fated supplements program will be compelled by WorkSafe to provide information about the substances he administered to footballers as the agency’s criminal investi­gation gathers momentum".

its going to be the pivotal moment when someone finally gets donk into the box....caged

[beelzebub 22,225]

Civil action from players could be one angle. Imagine admitting he gave basically a whole team banned drugs. He would be financially ruined for life.

whats the betting there aren't a myriad of changes in the wind ? Lots of new holes need lids !!

[DemonFrog 1,347]

What I find very disturbing about the AFL Tribunal finds into the DrugLords so called supplement program is that it was stated that the Club via its agents were trying to source banned substances.

It appears to me that the AFL has no penalty for this type of behaviour!

So the only conclusion anyone can take from the AFL Tribunal which appears to be completely supported by the AFL itself is they are soft on illegal drugs.

As long as you keep no records (destroying them is completely acceptable), pay-off witnesses and out source the injections and illegal substances for an entire Club then that is acceptable.

However if you are an individual player who drinks a banned energy drink it a 2 year ban.

How low can this AFL competition get?

[Ethan Tremblay 28,358]

I agree whoever said No records = Guilty

I am shocked that isnt WADA law actually

Apparently you don't need records if you're just "dabbling" in a bit of this and that.

[Chris 2,892]

What I find very disturbing about the AFL Tribunal finds into the DrugLords so called supplement program is that it was stated that the Club via its agents were trying to source banned substances.

It appears to me that the AFL has no penalty for this type of behaviour!

So the only conclusion anyone can take from the AFL Tribunal which appears to be completely supported by the AFL itself is they are soft on illegal drugs.

As long as you keep no records (destroying them is completely acceptable), pay-off witnesses and out source the injections and illegal substances for an entire Club then that is acceptable.

However if you are an individual player who drinks a banned energy drink it a 2 year ban.

How low can this AFL competition get?

According to the tribunal they weren't trying to source banned substances, the tribunal didn't know what they were trying to source, even though Charters, ALAVI, and Dank said it was TB4, the manufacturer said it was TB4, and the tests indicated it could only be TB4 or TB500 (another banned substance), but the tribunal wasn't satisfied it was TB4.

[La Dee-vina Comedia 16,394]

I agree whoever said No records = Guilty

I am shocked that isnt WADA law actually

My first thought was to agree with you that it should be mandatory that records be kept. And then I thought, records of what? Not all supplements are injected. So, do we add tablets to the list? And not all supplements are injected or in tablet form. Many are edible (think of "muesli bars"). Would WADA require every injection, tablet and "muesli bar" to be recorded? And some supplements are in natural foods. So would WADA expect a player to record absolutely everything they ingest?

So, while I initially liked your idea, I suspect it would be impractical.

[rjay 23,888]

Well, I suppose one angle would be that it might persuade people to think the way you're thinking ('Honest Steve Dank'). Somewhere in the dim past of this thread there are references to opinions about the 'Thymomodulin' issue suggesting that it could not have had any therapeutic effect and the claimed reasons for its use were exactly those that TB4 provides. If that's true then Dank's 'swearing' that Thymomodulin was administered would also be an attempt to add to the veracity-effect, which might be another angle. With Dank, I suspect that there would always be more than one, two, three ... angles involved at any one time.

I certainly don't believe what Dank says in public and not inclined to believe his sworn statement but it does bring some level of doubt.

Could his statement be used in civil cases if he said they used TB4? or does it fall under 'not used in criminal or anti doping proceedings'?

[Chris 2,892]

My first thought was to agree with you that it should be mandatory that records be kept. And then I thought, records of what? Not all supplements are injected. So, do we add tablets to the list? And not all supplements are injected or in tablet form. Many are edible (think of "muesli bars"). Would WADA require every injection, tablet and "muesli bar" to be recorded? And some supplements are in natural foods. So would WADA expect a player to record absolutely everything they ingest?

So, while I initially liked your idea, I suspect it would be impractical.

It would be record keeping of any 'medications' ingested. Food is food and any supplements you gain from food will only maintain the natural levels in your body.

Essentially what it should be (and it has been changed to be closer to this) Is that if you have anything that is not considered food, then you need to keep a record.

[beelzebub 22,225]

LDVC I think what some are suggesting is where you have a program involving the whole team ( near as) hundreds, ne,thousands of injections of various and numerous drugs there need be records. If you can't produce them to ASADA ( let alone anyone else ) then the default presumption ought to be they're not allowed, therefore guilt.

Individuals etc are catered to already.

Edited May 5, 2015 by beelzebub

[deefrag 277]

Dank in Worksafe sights . . .

The WorkSafe investigation is focused on two potential offences — supplying substances in a workplace and causing someone serious harm. The latter carries a maximum penalty of five years’ jail.

Dank yesterday declined to comment on whether he had received a notice to provide information to WorkSafe. Anyone who refuses a request can be prosecuted and fined $9000.

Shaun Marcus, a workplace law specialist at Ryan Carlisle Thomas, said WorkSafe would seek to obtain information from Dank. “He can’t be compelled to go to the tribunal, because that’s a civil proceeding. This is a criminal matter and he can be compelled to give information and it is a criminal offence not to do so,’’ Mr Marcus said.

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/sport/afl/worksafe-criminal-probe-takes-aim-at-stephen-dank/story-fnca0u4y-1227335005344

[La Dee-vina Comedia 16,394]

LDVC I think what some are suggesting is where you have a program involving the whole team ( near as) hundreds, ne,thousands of injections of various and numerous drugs there need be records. If you can't produce them to ASADA ( let alone anyone else ) then the default presumption ought to be they're not allowed, therefore guilt.

Individuals etc are catered to already.

Perhaps I wasn't clear. I accept the premise that records should be kept for injections. (I think that should happen for any form of injection by any medical professional ever, whether it's antibiotics, pain relief or anything else). I'm just concerned with the practicalities of record-keeping for everything else. Or, to put it another way, I'm concerned that cheats will find a way to take a banned substance by a method that's not required to be recorded for WADA's purposes.

[Chris 2,892]

Perhaps I wasn't clear. I accept the premise that records should be kept for injections. (I think that should happen for any form of injection by any medical professional ever, whether it's antibiotics, pain relief or anything else). I'm just concerned with the practicalities of record-keeping for everything else. Or, to put it another way, I'm concerned that cheats will find a way to take a banned substance by a method that's not required to be recorded for WADA's purposes.

That will always happen, people will find loopholes. That's why the record keeping rule is only one of the tools in the box. You would hope if people find a way around it then they get caught elsewhere.

[Dees2014 2,377]

That will always happen, people will find loopholes. That's why the record keeping rule is only one of the tools in the box. You would hope if people find a way around it then they get caught elsewhere.

These days athletes are so finely tuned that everything, including food and drink intake, and any drugs whether it is banned or not, are recorded and analysed. Except if you are Essendon under James Hird circa 2012. It defies belief that some kind of records were not kept. Apart from anything else no-one employed to run a medical "enhancement" program would go about it without records. Otherwise how do they measure how effective it has been and what works and what doesn't, and therefore performance manage the program. It is just not possible there were no records. Much more likely they were destroyed or hidden when it became controversial. Would comfortably pass the probability test for mine, once measured against the known ordering of performance enhancing drugs, their importation and manufacture, and delivery to Essendon.

[What 18,810]

Dank in Worksafe sights . . .

The WorkSafe investigation is focused on two potential offences — supplying substances in a workplace and causing someone serious harm. The latter carries a maximum penalty of five years’ jail.

Dank yesterday declined to comment on whether he had received a notice to provide information to WorkSafe. Anyone who refuses a request can be prosecuted and fined $9000.

Shaun Marcus, a workplace law specialist at Ryan Carlisle Thomas, said WorkSafe would seek to obtain information from Dank. “He can’t be compelled to go to the tribunal, because that’s a civil proceeding. This is a criminal matter and he can be compelled to give information and it is a criminal offence not to do so,’’ Mr Marcus said.

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/sport/afl/worksafe-criminal-probe-takes-aim-at-stephen-dank/story-fnca0u4y-1227335005344

FInally

I am shocked nobody is in jail yet from this sage. Injecting human beings without telling them what it is or no documentation

That is as bad as it gets

[hemingway 7,589]

These days athletes are so finely tuned that everything, including food and drink intake, and any drugs whether it is banned or not, are recorded and analysed. Except if you are Essendon under James Hird circa 2012. It defies belief that some kind of records were not kept. Apart from anything else no-one employed to run a medical "enhancement" program would go about it without records. Otherwise how do they measure how effective it has been and what works and what doesn't, and therefore performance manage the program. It is just not possible there were no records. Much more likely they were destroyed or hidden when it became controversial. Would comfortably pass the probability test for mine, once measured against the known ordering of performance enhancing drugs, their importation and manufacture, and delivery to Essendon.

Yep I agree Dees however it has always surprised me how so called professional clubs can be so unprofessional at times in their management of player issues and health.

[Dr John Dee 1,057]

I certainly don't believe what Dank says in public and not inclined to believe his sworn statement but it does bring some level of doubt.

Could his statement be used in civil cases if he said they used TB4? or does it fall under 'not used in criminal or anti doping proceedings'?

I'd be interested to hear what the lawyers say, but since it was only the one body (the ACC) that gave him immunity I'd assume that it's only immunity from prosecution by them.

(My 'Honest Steve Dank', by the way, was meant suggest something about his posturing at credibility, not my belief that you believed him.)

[Chris 2,892]

FInally

I am shocked nobody is in jail yet from this sage. Injecting human beings without telling them what it is or no documentation

That is as bad as it gets

The EFC are in a bit of trouble here. It seems they paid off Charters to keep him quiet about what the substances were, had the records vanish, kept everyone they needed to hushed all in order to avoid ASADA, now that exact action may well get them in all sort of trouble, including potential criminal proceedings, as the exact records they have had hidden are what they need now.

Does make me a laugh a little.

[beelzebub 22,225]

The EFC are in a bit of trouble here. It seems they paid off Charters to keep him quiet about what the substances were, had the records vanish, kept everyone they needed to hushed all in order to avoid ASADA, now that exact action may well get them in all sort of trouble, including potential criminal proceedings, as the exact records they have had hidden are what they need now.

Does make me a laugh a little.

commonly called, painting oneself into a corner !!

[Sir Why You Little 34,430]

1 week to go WADA

This week has 7 days....

[ManDee 7,076]

commonly called, painting oneself into a corner !!

Or hoist on one's own petard.

[Dwight Schrute 16,749]

The EFC are in a bit of trouble here. It seems they paid off Charters to keep him quiet about what the substances were, had the records vanish, kept everyone they needed to hushed all in order to avoid ASADA, now that exact action may well get them in all sort of trouble, including potential criminal proceedings, as the exact records they have had hidden are what they need now.

Does make me a laugh a little.

They were never fooling anyone besides their own supporters, i still firmly believe they will be hit hard by both WADA and Worksafe over this and following that the players would have to seriously consider legal action against the club.

if they walk away from this it would be close to the greatest failure in Australian sports history.

[sanityprevails 0]

Thank you for your input sanityprevails, see you next Tuesday.

We all await with baited breath...well, some of us more-so than others, wink wink.

Look guys, the reason for my appearance here is that certain information being posted in this thread is patently false. Now whether that is intentional or not, I have no idea but these posts have become the source of amusement on other forums, which led me to your fine site. So I will leave you all to it with a suggestion that once WADA pass on any appeal at some point during the next week, then move on as threads like this do a disservice to otherwise good forums.