THE SAGA CONTINUES - WADA APPEALS

[Chris 2,892]

Dank is all huff and puff!

He has been threatening to sue (someone, anyone) for a long time and has done nothing.

He did not attend theTribunal, nor 'defend' himself when he had the chance and now is squealling!

This is more bluster...as you say he has no case to go to the supreme court.

His only option is to appeal...to the AFL Tribunal no less!!! Ironic isn't it!

He is snookered whatever he does!

Unfortunately I think you are right, Dank has never actually done what he said he would. If only he would follow through just this once.

[Lance Uppercut 10]

From: The Guardian

http://www.theguardian.com/sport/2015/jun/26/afl-essendon-stephen-dank-banned-for-life

“The Australian Football League anti-doping tribunal has concluded its deliberation with respect to the sanction of the former Essendon Football Club support person found to have breached the AFL anti-doping code,” a statement read.

“The tribunal has imposed a lifetime sanction, commencing on 25 June 2015.”

A lifetime ban for what?

And the clubs and players are innocent?

If Dank is guilty he cannot be alone.

the answer is right there in the article you just quoted:

Dank in April was found guilty on 10 counts of breaching the AFL’s anti-doping code, including charges of trafficking and attempted trafficking of, and complicity in, matters related to prohibited substances.

Wada code says that attempted trafficking and trafficking is a 4 year penalty, or life if there are repeated occasions

Edited June 26, 2015 by Lance Uppercut

[ManDee 7,134]

kind of remarkable that you ask what he was banned for when the answer is right there in the article you just quoted:

Dank in April was found guilty on 10 counts of breaching the AFL’s anti-doping code, including charges of trafficking and attempted trafficking of, and complicity in, matters related to prohibited substances.

Wada code says that attempted trafficking and trafficking is a 4 year penalty, or life if there are repeated occasions

It was a rhetorical question, too subtle for you? Sorry

My point was if he has been found guilty, who ordered and who received the substances he has been found guilty of trafficking? Also rhetorical - the Essendon Football Club and its coaches and players. Obvious really.

PS: I have read the WADA code thanks.

[Outside fifty 967]

Organised criminals inside the Essendon circle. That's ridiculous

Actually Charters history makes very interesting reading Lance. At times he has claimed to be in fear for his life from various criminal groups. As you are well aware Charters and Hird have a history. I think a reasonable person would consider that inner sanctum.

Edited June 26, 2015 by Outside fifty

[bing181 9,218]

You may notice a pattern to my contributions - recognising that I'm a guest on this board and the general vibe that dissenting opinion isn't exactly welcome here I tend to only respond when I am directly referenced.

Not so much about dissenting opinion, more that in the feral world of football supporters, and even more feral world of club internet forums, you're seen as persona non grata.

[sue 9,102]

Does LanceU post on other club's forums or are we especially favoured? If only us, what have we done to deserve it? Surely we are no more rabid on this subject than supporters of other non-EFC clubs.

[Ethan Tremblay 30,856]

Lance give yourself an uppercut.

[Uncle Fester 2,848]

Go away Tania...

Lol

[Ted Lasso 19,513]

I would think this would make a circumstancial case from WADA significantly stronger, accusing a guy who has been banned for life for moving PED's of providing an AFL club who can't detail what was given in an injection program because they have no records the very same drugs.

[Guest]

Tania, this is only a complex situation if you/they are trying to prove that Essendon, Hird et al shouldn’t really be blamed for injecting players with unknown but known substances (see how stupid that is?)

Any professional organisation or individual would be crucified if their defence was they didn’t keep notes, or lost them – go to a State Administrative Tribunal with that and see how you go.

Keeping notes/records is less about helping you to remember and more about ethical practice - you know this Tania

Edited June 26, 2015 by coconut

[DemonFrog 1,354]

Oh, another thing I've done on quite a number of occasions is admitted publicly I'm wrong when I've been wrong. Strange concept that, eh

So you are saying that you are not from Essendon then?

[Ethan Tremblay 30,856]

So you are saying that you are not from Essendon then?

Placing her index finger over her upper lip to make a finger moustache...

"My name is not Tania, who is this Tania? I am Lance. All I'm saying is James and the players are victims."

Edited June 26, 2015 by Ethan Tremblay

[Lance Uppercut 10]

c'mon, you can do better than that. Surely it's far more likely I'm Ian Hanke than Tania Hird? Spreading misinformation and obfuscating and shutting down critical discussion on Demonland to subvert justice as part of the nefarious and evil "Hird PR team" web of deceit, all whilst drinking overpriced red and rolling a cuban cigar around in my fingers, cackling wildly

Edited June 26, 2015 by Lance Uppercut

[sue 9,102]

Hey Lance - maybe only you can respond to my earlier post:

Does LanceU post on other club's forums or are we especially favoured? If only us, what have we done to deserve it? Surely we are no more rabid on this subject than supporters of other non-EFC clubs.

[Guest]

c'mon, you can do better than that. Surely it's far more likely I'm Ian Hanke than Tania Hird? Spreading misinformation and obfuscating and shutting down critical discussion on Demonland to subvert justice as part of the nefarious and evil "Hird PR team" web of deceit, all whilst drinking overpriced red and rolling a cuban cigar around in my fingers, cackling wildly

Tania, did James get his accommodation sorted for Switzerland whilst on his holiday in France?

[Bluey's Dad 3,419]

Hey Lance - maybe only you can respond to my earlier post:

Does LanceU post on other club's forums or are we especially favoured? If only us, what have we done to deserve it? Surely we are no more rabid on this subject than supporters of other non-EFC clubs.

I don't want to speak for him but I think he mentioned previously that Dees2014 had been quoted on other forums and that lead him here.

[Lance Uppercut 10]

Hey Lance - maybe only you can respond to my earlier post:

Does LanceU post on other club's forums or are we especially favoured? If only us, what have we done to deserve it? Surely we are no more rabid on this subject than supporters of other non-EFC clubs.

like I said earlier, I generally only bother posting when I'm directly addressed. It's called the right of reply. Most people tend to think it's a worthwhile concept.

In this instance my good friend Dees2014 or whatever his name is misinterpreted something he read which he mistakenly thought validated an earlier misconception he had regarding the burden of proof at CAS, and because I have previously helpfully pointed out the error to him, along with others that he's made, he took the opportunity to direct a triumphant diatribe towards me. Unfortunately it backfired badly because it actually proved even further how wrong he'd been. I'm sure you agree it would have been remiss of me not to try to help him see the error of his ways, given he does like to position himself as somewhat of an expert in the whole thing, and such fundamental inabilities with such basic concepts is a tad concerning.

In fact, the only reason I signed up to this forum at all was because he and some other of your prominent posters were calling me out on here, by name, calling me all kinds of names and making false assertions that I'd signed up here previously under an alias. Once I signed up to set them straight I got asked a lot of questions, some worthwhile, some not. I responded to the worthwhile ones. It's kind of a catch 22. If I respond, I get told to [censored]. If I don't, I get accused of shirking it or ducking it or some other nonsense.

Oh well. I can only do what I can do.

Edited June 26, 2015 by Lance Uppercut

[sue 9,102]

like I said earlier, I generally only bother posting when I'm directly addressed. It's called the right of reply. Most people tend to think it's a worthwhile concept.

In this instance my good friend Dees2014 or whatever his name is misinterpreted something he read which he mistakenly thought validated an earlier misconception he had regarding the burden of proof at CAS, and because I have previously helpfully pointed out the error to him, along with others that he's made, he took the opportunity to direct a triumphant diatribe towards me. Unfortunately it backfired badly because it actually proved even further how wrong he'd been. I'm sure you agree it would have been remiss of me not to try to help him see the error of his ways, given he does like to position himself as somewhat of an expert in the whole thing, and such fundamental inabilities with such basic concepts is a tad concerning.

In fact, the only reason I signed up to this forum at all was because he and some other of your prominent posters were calling me out on here, by name, calling me all kinds of names and making false assertions that I'd signed up here previously under an alias. Once I signed up to set them straight I got asked a lot of questions, some worthwhile, some not. I responded to the worthwhile ones. It's kind of a catch 22. If I respond, I get told to [censored]. If I don't, I get accused of shirking it or ducking it or some other nonsense.

Oh well. I can only do what I can do.

Thank you. Now that you have cleared up Dees2014's misunderstandings, perhaps you might go away as a simple way to avoid your catch 22 problem. Whatever the veracity of your posts and the errors of some of the rest of us, your posts engender a lot more heat than light on this forum. The heat is very boring and the light can be found elsewhere (or even here without your input). Hence my earlier post of one word: Yawn.

Edited June 26, 2015 by sue

[faultydet 7,594]

In fairness, i can understand why Lance posts on here. Of course its natural to defend yourself when you think you have been wronged.

Im just tired of the repetition, and nit picking. I just want it to all be over, but not before the cheating scum have been gutted, and humiliated, as the filthy lying drug cheats that i believe they are.

[ManDee 7,134]

......

.......In reality, your whiny aggressive attitude doesn't deserve my considered responses, frankly speaking. This is a good example of some of the stupidity I just mentioned,

........

........I'll tell you what that is. It's lazy debating and cheating.

....

.....but never mind that in your righteous thunderings eh?

Troll.

[Lance Uppercut 10]

Thank you. Now that you have cleared up Dees2014's misunderstandings, perhaps you might go away as a simple way to avoid your catch 22 problem. Whatever the veracity of your posts and the errors of some of the rest of us, your posts engender a lot more heat than light on this forum. The heat is very boring and the light can be found elsewhere (or even here without your input). Hence my earlier post of one word: Yawn.

personally I like to read opinions of people I don't agree with. I enjoy debate, and the cut and the thrust of it. I don't like being surrounded by people who have the same opinion as me, I find it boring and I don't learn anything. It's why I don't spend any time on Bomberblitz and rarely post on the BigFooty Essendon thread on the same topic. Even gameday threads. I find it intellectually stimulating to put forward my own perspective and try to understand others, even if I don't agree with them.

But, if this community is too insular for that, and gets too offended by the simple presence dissenting thoughts and opinions then believe me, I'm happy to no longer contribute.

[hemingway 7,627]

like I said earlier, I generally only bother posting when I'm directly addressed. It's called the right of reply. Most people tend to think it's a worthwhile concept.

In this instance my good friend Dees2014 or whatever his name is misinterpreted something he read which he mistakenly thought validated an earlier misconception he had regarding the burden of proof at CAS, and because I have previously helpfully pointed out the error to him, along with others that he's made, he took the opportunity to direct a triumphant diatribe towards me. Unfortunately it backfired badly because it actually proved even further how wrong he'd been. I'm sure you agree it would have been remiss of me not to try to help him see the error of his ways, given he does like to position himself as somewhat of an expert in the whole thing, and such fundamental inabilities with such basic concepts is a tad concerning.

In fact, the only reason I signed up to this forum at all was because he and some other of your prominent posters were calling me out on here, by name, calling me all kinds of names and making false assertions that I'd signed up here previously under an alias. Once I signed up to set them straight I got asked a lot of questions, some worthwhile, some not. I responded to the worthwhile ones. It's kind of a catch 22. If I respond, I get told to [censored]. If I don't, I get accused of shirking it or ducking it or some other nonsense.

Oh well. I can only do what I can do.

Irrespective of who is right or wrong I like your fight Lance. You might have taken on the whole schoolyard but you fight well.

[ManDee 7,134]

personally I like to read opinions of people I don't agree with. I enjoy debate, and the cut and the thrust of it. I don't like being surrounded by people who have the same opinion as me, I find it boring and I don't learn anything. It's why I don't spend any time on Bomberblitz and rarely post on the BigFooty Essendon thread on the same topic. Even gameday threads. I find it intellectually stimulating to put forward my own perspective and try to understand others, even if I don't agree with them.

But, if this community is too insular for that, and gets too offended by the simple presence dissenting thoughts and opinions then believe me, I'm happy to no longer contribute.

No problem with dissenting thoughts, its the constant put downs, rudeness and arrogance you display when you are questioned or you fail to answer fully. Your bully boy behavior is unacceptable and I will call you out. Troll.

[Bluey's Dad 3,419]

personally I like to read opinions of people I don't agree with. I enjoy debate, and the cut and the thrust of it. I don't like being surrounded by people who have the same opinion as me, I find it boring and I don't learn anything. It's why I don't spend any time on Bomberblitz and rarely post on the BigFooty Essendon thread on the same topic. Even gameday threads. I find it intellectually stimulating to put forward my own perspective and try to understand others, even if I don't agree with them.

But, if this community is too insular for that, and gets too offended by the simple presence dissenting thoughts and opinions then believe me, I'm happy to no longer contribute.

I have no issue with you being here Lance, but let's call a spade a spade here. You like the conflict, and you get a rise out of the DL community so you stay.

But let's not pretend it's because of the intellectual stimulation of debate. You're here to prove other people wrong and thus validate your inflated ego.

[deefrag 277]

Tania, did James get his accommodation sorted for Switzerland whilst on his holiday in France?

Best keep James away from court rooms . . remember last time!