Can someone remind me...by what date does WADA have to lodge an appeal, should it wish to do so?

21 days from last tuesday

The point is like anything else. If enough people write to WADA (as I have) emphasizing the death of fair play (let alone justice) in an Australian sport that has a full stadium of near a hundred thousand people

every Grand Final, surely we're worth something.

Thanks for your comment

I have sent my entry on this thread to WADA

HAHAHA, nice one Titus:

Port Adelaide vs. Hawthorn (AO) 7.40pm

Now this is a game.

Are Port Adelaide for real, or are they all smoke, INXS music and mirrors?

Ollie Wines injury will certainly not help and the Power have already identified that the Hawks have ‘bullied’ other teams this season.

It’s a good point. You’d need a team of supermen built in a lab to defeat the Hawks.

Hawthorn will still be carrying a fair bit of that anger from the loss to the Bombers, belting the Bulldogs doesn’t exactly send a message that the loss was a one time thing.

This will have its moments but the Hawks will win.

He's a funny man.

Can someone remind me...by what date does WADA have to lodge an appeal, should it wish to do so?

21 days after ASADA has finished, in this case their choice not to appeal.

That is only the start though. There is a full court case to go through after that if WADA does appeal which I have not doubt they will. it could take several months before they get to a hearing, and that then could take weeks.

CAS is different from the AFL Tribunal. They can suspender witnesses via various processes not available to the AFL Tribunal, and this could take some time. The fact that they are under European law, and can get reluctant witnesses to testify, makes it a very different case.

It staggers me that most of the Press, and the AFL and Essendon appear to think this is over. It is far from over, and the odds are they will be rubbed out for considerable periods when this is through.

Edited April 23, 201510 yr by Dees2014

21 days after ASADA has finished, in this case their choice not to appeal.

That is only the start though. There is a full court case to go through after that if WADA does appeal which I have not doubt they will. it could take several months before they get to a hearing, and that then could take weeks.

CAS is different from the AFL Tribunal. They can suspenda witnesses via various processes not available to the AFL Tribunal, and this could take some time. The fact that they are under European law, and can get reluctant witnesses to testify, makes it a very different case.

It staggers me that most of the Press, and the AFL and Essendon appear to think this is over. It is far from over, and the odds are they will be rubbed out for considerable periods when this is through.

Why do you say this?

Why do you say this?

Which parts of it do you question?

Which parts of it do you question?

The bit he bolded.

It staggers me that most of the Press, and the AFL and Essendon appear to think this is over. It is far from over, and the odds are they will be rubbed out for considerable periods when this is through.

Doesn't surprise me. Does show how parochial and insular most of the above are though.

"It is far from over, and the odds are they will be rubbed out for considerable periods when this is through"

Its well and truely over! WADA do not appeal.40 cases in over 10000 referrals .AFL and Sports Commision just want it to go away and it will!

"It is far from over, and the odds are they will be rubbed out for considerable periods when this is through"

Its well and truely over! WADA do not appeal.40 cases in over 10000 referrals .AFL and Sports Commision just want it to go away and it will!

Can you be more specific? What do you mean by '10000 referrals'? 10000 cases lost by anti-doping agencies?

And where do these figures come from?

Can you be more specific? What do you mean by '10000 referrals'? 10000 cases lost by anti-doping agencies?

And where do these figures come from?

Julian Burnside.

"It is far from over, and the odds are they will be rubbed out for considerable periods when this is through"

Its well and truely over! WADA do not appeal.40 cases in over 10000 referrals .AFL and Sports Commision just want it to go away and it will!

sorry squire but that's leaning towards the preposterous.

WADA will appeal as to not means packing up shop and letting it be open slather.

Possibly one of the most important cases in its history.

On another note I'd be taking anything Burnside utters with a bag of salt. Hardly a more singular viewist exists. Lol

Edited April 23, 201510 yr by beelzebub

"It is far from over, and the odds are they will be rubbed out for considerable periods when this is through"

Its well and truely over! WADA do not appeal.40 cases in over 10000 referrals .

Yes, but you should look at why that is, (though not sure where you got your figures ...) and why, for the most part, the reasons for that don't apply here:

a) the vast majority of sports do NOT have this extra layer that we have in Australia. In nearly all countries, it's the equivalent of ASADA who prosecute, and as they act as WADA enforcers in each country, WADA don't need to step in as their job is effectively already being done for them. Also, it's worth remembering, that it appears that the only reason ASADA aren't appealing themselves in this case is that they would have to go back through the AFL system, they can't go directly to CAS.

b) WADA have done enough of "reading the riot act" and "coming over the top" with the national organisations and regional sports bodies, that they now all toe the line. Mostly.

c) It's not only WADA who can appeal to CAS, it's the international sports organisations. e.g. when Alberto Contador was cleared by the Spanish anti-doping committee, (Clenbuterol), it wasn't WADA who appealed to CAS, it was the international cycling organisation, the UCI. There's no international organisation above the AFL, so it falls to WADA in this case, but that's unusual.

In brief, WADA are the overlords, and it would be very wrong to assume that they're somehow powerless or reluctant to act. In most cases, WADA don't need to get involved because someone else will do it for them.

Julian Burnside.

Julian Burnside has been taking the Essendon/Little money from the first days of Hird's coup to oust Evans. He is just another acolyte of the Hird propaganda machine.

As far as the 40 cases in 1000 is concerned, that is very simplistic. Most of those referrals to WADA are trivial, single athletes in minor leagues.

The 40 are the high profile, major infractions like Essendon and the AFL.

BURNSIDE's comments are yet another attempt to tame WADA into inaction, as part of the sophisticated PR exercise we have been witnessing for almost two years now. It is interesting that they chose a high profile human rights lawyer. It is a clever choice as he has the reputation for straight shooting honesty. Still I guess it just shows that all barristers are ultimately guns for hire and everyone has their price.

Yes, but you should look at why that is, (though not sure where you got your figures ...) and why, for the most part, the reasons for that don't apply here:

a) the vast majority of sports do NOT have this extra layer that we have in Australia. In nearly all countries, it's the equivalent of ASADA who prosecute, and as they act as WADA enforcers in each country, WADA don't need to step in as their job is effectively already being done for them. Also, it's worth remembering, that it appears that the only reason ASADA aren't appealing themselves in this case is that they would have to go back through the AFL system, they can't go directly to CAS.

b) WADA have done enough of "reading the riot act" and "coming over the top" with the national organisations and regional sports bodies, that they now all toe the line. Mostly.

c) It's not only WADA who can appeal to CAS, it's the international sports organisations. e.g. when Alberto Contador was cleared by the Spanish anti-doping committee, (Clenbuterol), it wasn't WADA who appealed to CAS, it was the international cycling organisation, the UCI. There's no international organisation above the AFL, so it falls to WADA in this case, but that's unusual.

In brief, WADA are the overlords, and it would be very wrong to assume that they're somehow powerless or reluctant to act. In most cases, WADA don't need to get involved because someone else will do it for them.

Your point c) is a very interesting aspect I hadn't thought of previously, although whether it will ultimately make a difference to WADA's decision, I wouldn't know.

Edited April 24, 201510 yr by La Dee-vina Comedia

I just don't think WADA will appeal

When watching John Fahey ( past President WADA ) he was far from optimistic and I suppose he knows intimatley how the process goes

I just don't think WADA will appeal

When watching John Fahey ( past President WADA ) he was far from optimistic and I suppose he knows intimatley how the process goes

Fahey is gaming them. Not that he needs to, Essendon and the crew seem to have fallen in the a false sense of security, without WADA having to sneak up on them, but sneak up on them they will. The court cases will happen all over again. The question is, will they (Essendon and the AFL) be prepared?

Wada have no choice.. Sink or swim. A lot on the line here.

Let's hope if WADA appeals the case it is heard by CAD half way through the season and they are found guilty around August!!! I would love them to be suspended during the season rather than off season to allow the AFL to start deals to keep them afloat.

Gee I really hope you guys are correct about WADA going the whole way.

Me, I'm a little cynical when politics and sport and money mix

I wish them good luck in their endeavours but i really cant believe that they will Appeal.

Jackaub.... Just as a consideration, what would happen if they(WADA) didn't appeal ?

Jackaub.... Just as a consideration, what would happen if they(WADA) didn't appeal ?

Essendon fans would gloat, but in their heart of hearts, they'd know.

This scenerio reminds me of Walsh street

Everyone knows that victor pierce and his goons killed Tynan and Eyre but the police just couldn't get enough evidence mainly because they were relying on crooks Statements for some of there evudence in an attempt to obtain a conviction.

Not guilty at court was the verdict but everyone knew who committed the crime

Edited April 24, 201510 yr by Wolfmother

Essendon fans would gloat, but in their heart of hearts, they'd know.

this is nothing really about Essendon. Theres a principle and associated precedent at stake. Think world not little AFL.

For what it's worth, Richard Ings tweeted this on April 19 after the Dank findings.

"If ASADA cant even prove "administration" by SD how can ASADA expect WADA to prove "use" by players.

A WADA appeal would surprise me."