C'mon WADA....

There's a lot of hope that WADA is the saviour to all these woes.

The lack of records has been central to removing a central plank in the process of proving beyond reasonable suspicion that Essendon players were administered banned substances. Without it ASADAs case is fragile. I don't blame them for going to WADA.

Unless CAS is has a lesser standard of proof than the tribunal then WADA face the same hurdles.

Does anyone know if WADA/CAS have successfully prosecuted a case like this before against a whole team rather than individuals?

And if WADA is unsuccessful then I am wondering if they have themselves to blame for the now giant loophole that has allowed a sporting club in a one country code to clandestinely operate a chemical farm without due records and proper governance and the perpetrators ( coach, FD officials and club doctor) have got off scott free.

I can't believe that with the rich tapestry of illegal systematic drug programs across a number of team sports that WADA have not seen early to put minimum governance requirements in respect of player supplement programs. It beggars belief that they have rested their laurels solely the sportsman being responsible for what has gone into their bodies. The EFC saga like many other sporting bodies drug crimes goes beyond the doped sportsman to the administrators, coaches, quacks and chemical mixers that facilitates the whole disgusting framework.

If WADA aren't successful then the global anti doping body should flogged in the media. They are going to look extremely insipid.

Regardless of whether they are successful or not creeps like Hird and Reid continue to operate. Pathetic

There's a lot of hope that WADA is the saviour to all these woes.

The lack of records has been central to removing a central plank in the process of proving beyond reasonable suspicion that Essendon players were administered banned substances. Without it ASADAs case is fragile. I don't blame them for going to WADA.

Unless CAS is has a lesser standard of proof than the tribunal then WADA face the same hurdles.

Does anyone know if WADA/CAS have successfully prosecuted a case like this before against a whole team rather than individuals?

And if WADA is unsuccessful then I am wondering if they have themselves to blame for the now giant loophole that has allowed a sporting club in a one country code to clandestinely operate a chemical farm without due records and proper governance and the perpetrators ( coach, FD officials and club doctor) have got off scott free.

I can't believe that with the rich tapestry of illegal systematic drug programs across a number of team sports that WADA have not seen early to put minimum governance requirements in respect of player supplement programs. It beggars belief that they have rested their laurels solely the sportsman being responsible for what has gone into their bodies. The EFC saga like many other sporting bodies drug crimes goes beyond the doped sportsman to the administrators, coaches, quacks and chemical mixers that facilitates the whole disgusting framework.

If WADA aren't successful then the global anti doping body should flogged in the media. They are going to look extremely insipid.

Regardless of whether they are successful or not creeps like Hird and Reid continue to operate. Pathetic

It might well be the lack of records that gets the EFC players rubbed out. You can't just have people not keeping, losing or destroying records as an excuse or everyone will be doing it.

The CAS is everything the AFL tribunal won't be. They historically are not only capable but almost passionate about looking at dots, all of them, and joining where applicable. They aren't influenced by any particular agenda.

Bit of an unworthy straw comment regarding any known prosecutions like this against a team as anyone following this would know this is the first such occurrence, hence the importance to be seen through to its conclusion.

It might well be the lack of records that gets the EFC players rubbed out. You can't just have people not keeping, losing or destroying records as an excuse or everyone will be doing it.

Unless CAS has a lower level of proof then the lack of records may cripple WADAs effort.

I agree with your last sentence. Pity WADA hadn't worked that out earlier when they had the chance. The people you speak of are the people who have got off.

It might well be the lack of records that gets the EFC players rubbed out. You can't just have people not keeping, losing or destroying records as an excuse or everyone will be doing it.

I agree CAS will be looking for Essendon to prove they did the right thing, rather than that they did not. The lack of records is foolish, clubs measure everything, so you have to conclude that the destruction or loss of the records is to cover up the truth. CAS has to make an example of Essendon or else the whole drugs in sport becomes an even bigger joke.

Unless CAS has a lower level of proof then the lack of records may cripple WADAs effort.

I agree with your last sentence. Pity WADA hadn't worked that out earlier when they had the chance. The people you speak of are the people who have got off.

They may have a different level of proof rather than lower and lack of records maybe seen as an indication of guilt. Who knows? but it is going to be interesting to see what if anything happens.

The CAS is everything the AFL tribunal won't be. They historically are not only capable but almost passionate about looking at dots, all of them, and joining where applicable. They aren't influenced by any particular agenda.

Bit of an unworthy straw comment regarding any known prosecutions like this against a team as anyone following this would know this is the first such occurrence, hence the importance to be seen through to its conclusion.

It wasn't a comment but a question.

Great so there is no precedent for how CAS will operate.

And how would you know how CAS actually operates? (Note: this is a question with a squiggly line on top of a dot at the end to dignify that)

Unless CAS has a lower level of proof then the lack of records may cripple WADAs effort.

I agree with your last sentence. Pity WADA hadn't worked that out earlier when they had the chance. The people you speak of are the people who have got off.

Qwerty qwerty qwerty

could you desist with this bogus ruse about "lower level of proof" you were wrong the first 100 times.

The evidence isn't the issue. It's how the adjudicators view and weight it, indeed even adjoin other where it feels warranted (cas)

I agree CAS will be looking for Essendon to prove they did the right thing, rather than that they did not. The lack of records is foolish, clubs measure everything, so you have to conclude that the destruction or loss of the records is to cover up the truth. CAS has to make an example of Essendon or else the whole drugs in sport becomes an even bigger joke.

So you have proof of the destruction of the records?

Qwerty qwerty qwerty

could you desist with this bogus ruse about "lower level of proof" you were wrong the first 100 times.

The evidence isn't the issue. It's how the adjudicators view and weight it, indeed even adjoin other where it feels warranted (cas)

In other words, you don't actually know but you hope.

It wasn't a comment but a question.

Great so there is no precedent for how CAS will operate.

And how would you know how CAS actually operates? (Note: this is a question with a squiggly line on top of a dot at the end to dignify that)

You can probably use google ?

Try your own research.

Can you do that ???

You can probably use google ?

Try your own research.

Can you do that ???

Well. Thank God we have you Bub to be a source of light.

Here I was thinking you had legal background and experience in CAD but you googled it! Well done.

Mark Thompson on 'Open Mike' in response to the question of whether we'll know the truth?

"No"

Hmmmm why would that be?

Mark Thompson on 'Open Mike' in response to the question of whether we'll know the truth?

"No"

Hmmmm why would that be?

Guilty.

Why do people have to be on both sides of the fence and introduce red herrings all the time.

It is not fair and it wastes my time....

Is the fact that we were involved in some program now swept under the carpet?

After wada let the 3 match suspendion for the nrl stand nothing will surprise me. People say the afl was more systematic than the nrl but I thought if you used PEDs you got two years!

Saying this WADA will be hugely interested in the case regardless of the local game line as everytime drug cheats beat the system it sets a precedent and then all further cheats caught try to use the same excuse as it has worked before.

Look at the clenbutarol in the steak line always used when someone is caught with it. This was due to a u17 soccer tournament in Mexico where there was 100 positive readings. This was obvious a contaminated meat issue but everyone uses it as an excuse.

The same will happen with the Essendon decision if it stands l.

From my reading (would be happy to hear another parts that are an issue) The main concern for the judges was they couldn't be certain it was tb4 in the supply chain. They found the intent was to order tb4 and it was compounded if it was tb4 and handed to dank but because no external test of the product occurred (there was a weight measure of particulars which doesn't show the tb4 but did show it was the same or similar composition weight to tb4). This resulted in the tribunal stating that they aren't satisfied that the Chinese company did provide tb4 although I doubt they have just outed the evidence rather than follow throw with the line of thinking and explain what the substance was.

this evidentiary standard would require either a positive test or a located vial to be tested only if it could be confirmed if that vial was the one that was injected

It shows to me the lawyers/tribunal didn't join the dots but rather searched for something that would enable them to say not guilty. This level of proof means that if a cyclists buys a vial of EPO from a doctor or chemist and even though it states EPO looks like EPO the Efc precedent means if it hasn't Been tested it can't be confirmed as EPO regardless what the wholesaler states. The Evidence require to meet the tribunals concerns is nearly impossible

People trying to cheat don't use normal supply chains, they use cash, don't write anything down and the people has some shady history. I think WADA is aware of this and understands how the game is played when sportsperson try to cheat hence they won't need to see anything like what the tribunal wanted and are happy to join the dots as any other scernerio is not possible especially as injections are admitted.

The only way players will get off is if there is no evidence that each player received an injection especially with no records. Players that had text messages about there thymo shot might go and any admission might get some but others could avoid it.

Unless there is a charge relating to attempted use or acquisition with the consent form listing them to receive a thyomin injection providing enough evidence I can't see all the players going down. it wouldn't be that simple as a few other docs would need to confirm the overall programs aim and tb4 inclusion in all persons program thus this might not happen.

Sadly the trial should be this simple with EFC poor records

Do you agree the players received injections... Yes

What were in those injections... We don't know

Was there banned drugs at EFC.... Yes a few different ones

Do they have a legitimate reason for being on site

Well with illegal drugs at the venue,

players receiving injections with unknown substances

It's hard to say those illegal substances whereby thrown out so went into the players

If there is an issue about which player then the club can be suspended for 2 years

obviously and records would help sort this problem out but sorry EFC you need to cough up

the players got off because there was no absolute proof of what they had taken.

The club must not get off because of these inarguable facts: they ran a longterm injection programme but deny there are any written records: GONE. The paper trail behind that injection programme has illegal drugs in it, without satisfactory explanations as to intent or eventual disposal, while there is no evidence of legal drugs in sufficient quantities being bought: GONE. The club claims there are not even any memory records of their longterm injection programme: GONE. In the early days of that injection programme the club got the players to sign waivers for injections (the nature of which injections they claim nobody can identify - which is absurd: at least one person among the players or the administration saw the need for the waivers, and somebody if not everybody would have asked what exactly were the injected substances that the waiver was referring to): GONE. The club had the injections administered away from the club and without the club doctor overseeing the process or the records of it: GONE. And since being asked about all of this the club have made multiple legal efforts to prevent the scrutiny of their injection programme: GONE.

That is unquestionably a rogue club.

Players who have refused to speak up are complicit, so that if the club goes down the players will then have to go down with it.

Otherwise, as numerous posters have said, Essendon has established the blueprint and drugs are going to go through sport like wildfire. There may be legal issues and power issues and money issues, but sport is as good as dead in 3 weeks if WADA lets this go.

In WADA we trust

HH I suggest you look at the record of WADA. Of more than 10000 referrals they have acted on about 40.

As I said previously EFC have got away with it,as the powers that run the AFL and the Sports Commission just wanted to spin it away, control the damage and move on.

They are not fair dickum and only want to "seem" to be doing anything about drugs in footy.

I feel sorry for the next Footy person to be so charged with drug use.The AFL will Knee jerk into making an example or the poor sod.All this while the EFC bask in the sun.

Well. Thank God we have you Bub to be a source of light.

Here I was thinking you had legal background and experience in CAD but you googled it! Well done.

What arrant rubbish. You asked a series of questions (not with any particular interest in the pursuit of knowledge it has to be said) that required no more than factual research to answer. Bub, who has never made any pretense to legal training or knowledge, replied in the only appropriate fashion to anyone too lazy to do his own research.

We all know you're looking for every opportunity to pick a fight with anyone on this thread, but attempting to mock Bub's Google reference only makes you look the fool.

Well done on keeping up the adult standards of debate, by the way.

HH I suggest you look at the record of WADA. Of more than 10000 referrals they have acted on about 40.

As I said previously EFC have got away with it,as the powers that run the AFL and the Sports Commission just wanted to spin it away, control the damage and move on.

They are not fair dickum and only want to "seem" to be doing anything about drugs in footy.

I feel sorry for the next Footy person to be so charged with drug use.The AFL will Knee jerk into making an example or the poor sod.All this while the EFC bask in the sun.

True. Whatever your view of the probabilities of WADA acting and succeeding, do any of us not believe that the AFL won't act tough on some poor sod just to show that they aren't a bunch of commercially driven cover-up merchants? Some double negatives there for you....

Then there is this little gem ... James Hird willing to to appear at Senate inquiry into ASADA

If he is so willing to talk, then he should spill the beans now. Don't wait for something that will probably never happen!

"I cant wait to tell our story when this is over"

Really James you lying stinking turd....