The tribunal may well have been very hard on the entire EFC if Dank & Co had been made to give evidence

It was the AFL who tipped the EFC off early so yes the web is murky

Jobe Watson Quote:

"We have gone through something that we'll hold with each other for the rest of our lives," Watson said.

"The way in which the players have shown integrity, I couldn't be more proud of the way that we have conducted ourselves as a playing group, given the situation that we've been in.

"I think the bond this group have, means for the rest of their lives that we'll be able to draw on this experience."

Unquote

I'd wake up every morning worrying about the rest of my life if was in this group.

Glad that you usually agree with me.

Remember that this Tribunal was composed of 2 former County court Judges and a Barrister. The normal Tribunal is usually 3 ex players and is only guided by Jones, who does not make the decision. So this Tribunal is different to the match day Tribunal.

Being ex footballers doesn't necessarily mean bias, it may just mean understanding of the environment in which this shambles occurred.

The pressure to comply bit can be safely ignored then.

I appreciate what you are saying and I respect you personally vouching for them and their expertise, however, it is clear that their finding leaked well ahead of time (at least early enough for T Watson to be sprouting it hours prior) so in that sense it is behaving according to the usual dodgy AFL custom.

I think we need to stop slamming the Tribunal.

I know all three personally and they are honourable and learned men.

They decided on the evidence before them and it was as they said not persuasive enough to find guilt.

That is not their fault.

I could imagine their private feelings on the matter may not be in line with their decision which was based on the law.

Incidentally 2 of them are former footballers and would have an idea how football clubs work and the pressure for footballers to comply with directions, from their Coaches/Administration.

Agree that there's no need to slam the tribunal. They were entitled to come up with the decision as much as they could easily have decided another way.

Let's see what happens next.

Interesting comment from Fahey:

"To me, the tragedy for me in all of this is that the Worksafe Victoria department didn't look at what this meant from an employer-employee relationship. "

Past tense Sue? So Worksafe have cleared them???

Agree that there's no need to slam the tribunal. They were entitled to come up with the decision as much as they could easily have decided another way.

Let's see what happens next.

nonsense.

The wrong outcome is the wrong outcome. More was riding on this than just "a decision", and they cannot have been ignorant of that fact, nor should they have felt free to ignore it. This judgement had far greater ramifications than just the 34 players, and those ramifications follow inevitably from this wrong decision.

The practice of law should not be reduced to a clever intellectual game - it has to be more than just contextless fine definitions of law, or it serves no useful purpose in society. Here was a case where law stood in a position to push back the barbarians, and chose not to. Those 34 cheats run out to compete in a few days, and they should not.

In the movie Belle the Lord Chief Justice gives his finding under law (weighing it the way he chooses to, in its wider context), then removes his glasses and addresses the courtroom on the moral reality behind the case. Leadership, and fulfilling the noble function of law in society, not Pontius Pilating under the bureaucrat's Nuremberg defence. Poor effort, to be now cleaned up by someone else if they can.

But, yes, let's see what happens next.

(Apologies for sounding disrespectful to you, WJ. It's not my attitude to your posts. Seriously disappointed with what seem to me to be excuses exonerating a Tribunal that failed the need of the hour - in other words, failed their function when we looked to them.)

I agree Robbiefrae13. They had a burden of proof subject to interpretation between the usual civil & criminal ones and chose to be legalistic at the wrong end of that spectrum in my learned Demonland opinion (ie not having seen all the relevant docs....).

Surely WorkCare will now their their turn. Mandatory. Poor record keeping is never ever a defence.

Surely WorkCare will now their their turn. Mandatory. Poor record keeping is never ever a defence.

...as I've said elsewhere, this is where the politics will really come in to play.

Now, who does the Premier support???

The Tribunal had to make a decision which did have greater societal impact than the fate of the 34 AFL players

Ie Drugs in sport

However this issue will have to judged in a process which is transparent ie for which there is fact and evidence.

This is important for every case as the need to prove guilt is the cornerstone of our legal system.

The tribunal for whatever reason was not convinced by the evidence presented and have an obligation to make that finding.

WADA has different processes and this may be still the problem for players

Enough they will go on win the premiership, the Dees won't make finals, hawthorn steal everyone best players and pay way under, Sydney will have right's to best players from nsw. Gold coast and GWS will both be in the top 4 for the next 8to10 years, with the nrl no teams get any favours no one gets extra money, no extra salary cap for any team, every team is on a level playing field, no lying everyone knows if a player is going or staying, the AFL is rotten to the core.

Enough they will go on win the premiership, the Dees won't make finals, hawthorn steal everyone best players and pay way under, Sydney will have right's to best players from nsw. Gold coast and GWS will both be in the top 4 for the next 8to10 years, with the nrl no teams get any favours no one gets extra money, no extra salary cap for any team, every team is on a level playing field, no lying everyone knows if a player is going or staying, the AFL is rotten to the core.

You sure sound angry.

...as I've said elsewhere, this is where the politics will really come in to play.

Now, who does the Premier support???

The Premier supports the CFMEU we've already seen that. I don't see this as political. WorkCover Victoria will smash Essendon regardless of a Liberal/Labor State Government. It is state based legislation but every employer in Australia must provide a safe workplace for their employees. Some kind of injecting program where the employer can't (wont) disclose what employees have been injected with is NOT safe work practise.

I appreciate what you are saying and I respect you personally vouching for them and their expertise, however, it is clear that their finding leaked well ahead of time (at least early enough for T Watson to be sprouting it hours prior) so in that sense it is behaving according to the usual dodgy AFL custom.

3AW's Ross Stevenson called the result last Friday.

A source "deep" within the AFL told him the verdict would be insufficient evidence!

I'm wondering if the "source" told the Tribunal the result before or after it told Ross??

I'm in the ASADA camp handing this travesty as quickly as possible over to WADA.

I also think that it should be done as soon and as secretly as possible.

Work is probably being done behind the scenes on a diplomatic scale to blunt any impact in the future that WADA will have on this case under the guise of protecting Australian Sporting Bodies and their "integrity" from international interference.

...as I've said elsewhere, this is where the politics will really come in to play.

Now, who does the Premier support???

The Premier supports the CFMEU we've already seen that. I don't see this as political. WorkCover Victoria will smash Essendon regardless of a Liberal/Labor State Government. It is state based legislation but every employer in Australia must provide a safe workplace for their employees. Some kind of injecting program where the employer can't (wont) disclose what employees have been injected with is NOT safe work practise.

You are of course right that about workplace safety, but lets see how this one pans out. I wouldn't be banking on the EFC being smashed.

I think we need to stop slamming the Tribunal.

I know all three personally and they are honourable and learned men.

They decided on the evidence before them and it was as they said not persuasive enough to find guilt.

That is not their fault.

I could imagine their private feelings on the matter may not be in line with their decision which was based on the law.

Incidentally 2 of them are former footballers and would have an idea how football clubs work and the pressure for footballers to comply with directions, from their Coaches/Administration.

And they plainly decided wrong...giving all allowances to the players and afl as opposed common sense and logic

Theyre your mates. Good for you

The tribunal was a sham

Red. Prior to the decision there was a thinking amongst many that even upon the evidence in the public domain it was almost inconceivable that the players could be exonerated. if I recall correctly your opinion was of this persuasion also.

How do YOU reconcile the outcome with what was known let alone what we didnt ?

Plainly the AFL got the decision it not only wanted but needed. Referendums are often won or more likely doomed by way of wording. I can only believe that the terms of reference given by the AFLfor this tribunal were such as to all but guarantee its preference.

Edited April 1, 201510 yr by beelzebub

Past tense Sue? So Worksafe have cleared them???

WTF?????

That would be even more outrageous. The directors should be jailed for allowing this to go on. If it happened in my workplace I would be in jail....

If I see another goose wearing his Essendon jumper in shopping centres I will spew!

Anyone else seen the hordes of wackos out and about?

Aren't you a lawyer WJ?

Not having the evidence to prove your case isn't a 'technicality'. It's simply losing the case.

Have a read of Jake Niall's article today: http://www.theage.com.au/afl/afl-news/the-essendon-verdict-the-inside-story-of-the-antidoping-tribunal-hearing-20150331-1mc2nb.html

You can see the significant problems ASADA had, and were always going to have, in making their case without positive tests. It's not a 'technicality' that got the players off, it's a lack of proof to the required standard.

I also quite like the irony of the vast majority on here putting their heads in the sand on the result - it couldn't possibly be that ASADA didn't have the evidence, it has to be a conspiracy! The AFL rigged it! The Murdoch press is rigging it! It's all rigged I tell you! Heads in the sand, ignoring the very real and far more believable possibility that ASADA simply didn't get the job done, doing the exact thing that they bagged Essendon for doing regarding its failure to take proper care.

You're kidding, right.

From what I can see, there was ample evidence but the Tribunal in its wisdom decided that they weren't prepared to accept that the evidence presented was sufficient for them to conclude to their comfortable satisfaction what was ingested into the systems of the players and the reason for them reaching that conclusion was the fact that the likes of Charter and Alavi refused to sign off on statements they had already made to the investigators. I look forward to reading their 100 page plus decision but, based on what I've read, I personally am in no doubt that the players were (among other things) given TB4 and that an appeal by WADA to CAS would have a strong chance of succeeding. In other words, it was open to the Tribunal members to come to their decision but I believe they were not only wrong but have done the sport a great disservice.

You're kidding, right.

From what I can see, there was ample evidence but the Tribunal in its wisdom decided that they weren't prepared to accept that the evidence presented was sufficient for them to conclude to their comfortable satisfaction what was ingested into the systems of the players and the reason for them reaching that conclusion was the fact that the likes of Charter and Alavi refused to sign off on statements they had already made to the investigators. I look forward to reading their 100 page plus decision but, based on what I've read, I personally am in no doubt that the players were (among other things) given TB4 and that an appeal by WADA to CAS would have a strong chance of succeeding. In other words, it was open to the Tribunal members to come to their decision but I believe they were not only wrong but have done the sport a great disservice.

and this is where they are plainly in error.

You dont need to TAKE anything...only have intent .

they plainly had intent

The Premier supports the CFMEU we've already seen that. I don't see this as political. WorkCover Victoria will smash Essendon regardless of a Liberal/Labor State Government. It is state based legislation but every employer in Australia must provide a safe workplace for their employees. Some kind of injecting program where the employer can't (wont) disclose what employees have been injected with is NOT safe work practise.

So true but so unlikely to happen

Tribunal Chairman misreads evidence . . . ASADA case thrown out due to typo!

.........................................................................JB4....................................

A day on, and still feel somewhat empty in response to the decision.

Some great points/posts above. We do not have clarity, and we do not have closure, though I accept that the tribunal was bound to come to the decision they did, given the difficulty with Charter and Alavi's evidence.

Suspect that the AFL's greatest impact on the next revision of the WADA code will not be adjustments for team sports, but a rewrite where not being able to produce records of what you've been injected with will become a doping offence.

Just reading between the lines, this is just going to be a long exercise.

Essendon played the long game hoping for a favorable outcome - which they now THINK they have.

But the long game ends with WADA, and the end result is the same. It hasn't changed, it will always remain the same.

Essendon have continued to buy time, every action they have taken has been about delaying the inevitable.

WADA has the last word, and the AFL will not be final arbiter's of the end result - a court will be. Nothing has changed.

Essendon just buy themselves time, as they have done throughout this whole process.