If there is a ban it will be back dated and there will be bugger all missed games!

Ah I see you are bringing back the ol wet tram ticket OD

If there is a ban it will be back dated and there will be bugger all missed games!

Sandor Earl's four year suspension was back-dated to 2013 (when it was the last time he played)! In the case of Essendon players, August 2015 was the last time those still in the system played. The (so-called) voluntary suspension that some elected to 'serve' last year was a farce, as they still continued to report for work, train and play practice matches. They only thing that they didn't do was field a full list for the NAB Challenge. Unless it walks like a duck, quacks like a duck and looks like a duck, then it probably isn't a duck (read suspension for duck)!

There is one certainty in this bb

One of us is going to be wrong

You both could be wrong.

Sandor Earl's four year suspension was back-dated to 2013 (when it was the last time he played)! In the case of Essendon players, August 2015 was the last time those still in the system played. The (so-called) voluntary suspension that some elected to 'serve' last year was a farce, as they still continued to report for work, train and play practice matches. They only thing that they didn't do was field a full list for the NAB Challenge. Unless it walks like a duck, quacks like a duck and looks like a duck, then it probably isn't a duck (read suspension for duck)!

The suspensions they served only make sense if followed by being cleared or being suspended. They are still allowed to train etc so if they are cleared they have not lost condition etc due to the hearing being underway. It actually does make sense and isn't a farce as long as you can't then count it for suspensions after the appeal is heard, if you could then you would time appeals so you serve a whole lot of voluntary suspensions in the off season.

You both could be wrong.

How?

I think bugger all will be the actual result and bb thinks they will all get two years starting December 2015 ( or there about. )

No OD. If given say 2 years...they can DEDUCT time served ( voluntary suspensions )

Thats it. They're doing time. I know we differ.

Will the time spent on the mandatory out of season rest period count as time served? (I'm not arguing whether it should or shouldn't be, just asking.) If so, if found guilty all players would be able to claim 8 (?) weeks deducted from any penalty for every year since the breach occurred.

How?

I think bugger all will be the actual result and bb thinks they will all get two years starting December 2015 ( or there about. )

Half of them get 12 months.

Will the time spent on the mandatory out of season rest period count as time served? (I'm not arguing whether it should or shouldn't be, just asking.) If so, if found guilty all players would be able to claim 8 (?) weeks deducted from any penalty for every year since the breach occurred.

If that were the case this would have been rolled out much earlier by Essendon. It doesnt work that way. Suspensions apply to active infractions. There are none. The appeal process starts the clock again however any time previously served as an official voluntary ( or otherwise ) suspension can be applied again the length of ban.

If that were the case this would have been rolled out much earlier by Essendon. It doesnt work that way. Suspensions apply to active infractions. There are none. The appeal process starts the clock again however any time previously served as an official voluntary ( or otherwise ) suspension can be applied again the length of ban.

Is that the case if it is not continuous? My understanding is that it isn't. The appeal re set the whole thing to zero so any ban would be from the last day they played.

My tip is if they are found guilty they will get a reduction due to the no significant fault clause of 50% meaning it will be a 12 month ban from round 23 2015.

Edited October 16, 20159 yr by Chris

Is that the case if it is not continuous? My understanding is that it isn't. The appeal re set the whole thing to zero so any ban would be from the last day they played.

My tip is if they are found guilty they will get a reduction due to the no significant fault clause of 50% meaning it will be a 12 month ban from round 23 2015.

minus 4.5 mths for early 2015 voluntary suspension = 7.5 months. available to play mid march 2016......?

extra problem is decision on guilt probably won't be handed down until early 2016

then there will be a further delay as it is referred to afl to decide penalty which could take a quite a few weeks

might be lucky to get everything wrapped up by season start

minus 4.5 mths for early 2015 voluntary suspension = 7.5 months. available to play mid march 2016......?

Do they get the 4.5 months? I don't think they do, and they shouldn't. It was a voluntary suspension during the initial trial and they were serving it in order to back date any suspension from that trial. Surely they can't claim it from the new trial as the period is not continuous.

Do they get the 4.5 months? I don't think they do, and they shouldn't. It was a voluntary suspension during the initial trial and they were serving it in order to back date any suspension from that trial. Surely they can't claim it from the new trial as the period is not continuous.

i don't know. but it's all interpretation. and don't forget it is the afl who actually exercise the penalty and you can be sure the afl would look at every possible loophole to minimise actual game time loss

either way expect plenty of spin from hq

Is that the case if it is not continuous? My understanding is that it isn't. The appeal re set the whole thing to zero so any ban would be from the last day they played.

My tip is if they are found guilty they will get a reduction due to the no significant fault clause of 50% meaning it will be a 12 month ban from round 23 2015.

Iver read nowhere where any ban will go back to last game. Thats an Essendon ploy. The Ban starts from when handed down with deductions applied from then. I dont think they can play the no significant fault as ASADA/WADA would right highlight not EVERYONE did it. Why not ? Because it was self -responsibility to act and some did. From my watching/readings etc the only thing that can be applied ( in this instance ) is time served.. There are no back dates here and thats been stated somewhere by WADA...only deductions.

So for mine should say Milkshake cop a 2 year he may be afforded around 17 weeks or there abouts deduction starting from around Nov 20 ( approx )

I have no doubt the AFL are brainstorming how to dilute that but there wont be many ways. Howman just met with the Dill and Dillon to ratify that the AFL is indeed on board with WADA/ASADA...i.e the Code

Iver read nowhere where any ban will go back to last game. Thats an Essendon ploy. The Ban starts from when handed down with deductions applied from then. I dont think they can play the no significant fault as ASADA/WADA would right highlight not EVERYONE did it. Why not ? Because it was self -responsibility to act and some did. From my watching/readings etc the only thing that can be applied ( in this instance ) is time served.. There are no back dates here and thats been stated somewhere by WADA...only deductions.

So for mine should say Milkshake cop a 2 year he may be afforded around 17 weeks or there abouts deduction starting from around Nov 20 ( approx )

I have no doubt the AFL are brainstorming how to dilute that but there wont be many ways. Howman just met with the Dill and Dillon to ratify that the AFL is indeed on board with WADA/ASADA...i.e the Code

Have they actually served any time though? A voluntary reduction that was only in place as the start of a subsequent penalty surely cant be included, especially when there was no actual penalty during that time.

I wonder if the players have put themselves on the same now the season is over so they can claim it if they are found guilty? Would be the smart move if it is available.

I have no doubt the AFL will do everything in their power to dilute any sentence and it will be a balancing act between no punishment as the players have done enough BS that they peddle and doing enough to satisfy WADA so they don't appeal the sentence. I think 12 months may get the job done.

I'm sure all Demonlanders will join with me as we restate our deeply-held long-term belief that these innocently duped players have suffered enough and should be free and unencumbered to play on next year

Maybe the AFL will accumulate all the days of the week except game day, meaning they've already done their time......

Ah I see you are bringing back the ol wet tram ticket OD

Never left it jnr

Half of them get 12 months.

Surely it is all guilty or none.

how does half work.

I'm sure all Demonlanders will join with me as we restate our deeply-held long-term belief that these innocently duped players have suffered enough and should be free and unencumbered to play on next year

Especially since one of them is now a dee!

Have they actually served any time though? A voluntary reduction that was only in place as the start of a subsequent penalty surely cant be included, especially when there was no actual penalty during that time.

I wonder if the players have put themselves on the same now the season is over so they can claim it if they are found guilty? Would be the smart move if it is available.

I have no doubt the AFL will do everything in their power to dilute any sentence and it will be a balancing act between no punishment as the players have done enough BS that they peddle and doing enough to satisfy WADA so they don't appeal the sentence. I think 12 months may get the job done.

I think some have actually served a period of voluntary suspension. This still counts Im lead to believe Chris. Those that just are on holiday, not actually at work per se etc counts as nothing.

I suppose we'll know when preseasons start again. Be interesting to see what 'stories' are used

I think some have actually served a period of voluntary suspension. This still counts Im lead to believe Chris. Those that just are on holiday, not actually at work per se etc counts as nothing.

I suppose we'll know when preseasons start again. Be interesting to see what 'stories' are used

I'm not sure how you could tell the difference between a voluntary suspension and not actually being at work. What we're discussing here is one of the difficulties associated with (a) playing a team sport and (b) playing a seasonal sport. Sportspeople who play an individual sport which has all year round competitions (eg, tennis, golf) have different training and paying regimes from team-based summer or winter seasonal sports. I have no idea how the WADA/ASADA penalty regimes work, but a "one size fits all" approach (if indeed that's what their policy is) won't work across all types of sport.

I'm not sure how you could tell the difference between a voluntary suspension and not actually being at work. What we're discussing here is one of the difficulties associated with (a) playing a team sport and (b) playing a seasonal sport. Sportspeople who play an individual sport which has all year round competitions (eg, tennis, golf) have different training and paying regimes from team-based summer or winter seasonal sports. I have no idea how the WADA/ASADA penalty regimes work, but a "one size fits all" approach (if indeed that's what their policy is) won't work across all types of sport.

You actually inform ASADA/AFL that you are undertaking suspension. You then must follow the guidelines. However some managed to eek 'special dispensations" for events from the AFL.

Not just a case of going off the clock unofficially

I think some have actually served a period of voluntary suspension. This still counts Im lead to believe Chris. Those that just are on holiday, not actually at work per se etc counts as nothing.

I suppose we'll know when preseasons start again. Be interesting to see what 'stories' are used

All the players still playing provisionally suspended themselves during the off season last year, no news if they have, or can do the same this year. You are right that they need to inform the AFL/ASADA that they are doing this.

This suspension is available to the player during their trial so that they can come back sooner, the condition of the suspension is that they can not play but they can train. This is so if they are found to be not guilty then they resume playing without any loss of condition on training. Essentially they are suspended without loosing anything other than competition time. It makes sense.

I can't see how this could possibly be included in any suspension coming from the appeal. Their provisional suspension cost them nothing the first time as they were found not guilty and to count it now goes against the intent of suspending people. If they can count it then they could in essence keep appealing so the timing means they serve 2 years in the off season, while still training, and then claim it all and play on. I could be wrong but am fairly sure I read somewhere when WADA appealed that the provisional suspension is off the table.

Wont be too long now ( well sorta ) before we'll all know Chris. I'll repeat my thinking that if warranted some of the 'affected' might start coming up with doozies of excuses as to why they arent at the club.

Be refreshing is someone just said..."look, it's prudent to the long term'

edit :

Chris...I believe it plays out that as the appeal still goes to teh original infractions and a suspension was undertaken by players with that regard that its still in play. Im not sure at all about now, in terms of any other time they can claim.

Im sure that now better informed an affected player would ask the League what works and what doesnt. Cant blame them for that. Horse bolted though.

Edited October 16, 20159 yr by beelzebub