There are a number of posts here with conflicting information about the various bodies right to supoena witnesses. For what it is worth, and it is not entirely clear to me either, is they can but need the support of the local judicial system. My understanding was they are still waiting for the Abbott government to enact legislation for this, which has been in recent months the subject of savage attacks on the Government about this from Coates and Fehey in the media. It is now thought that this is likely to be completed before the CAS starts in 6 or so months time. No doubt the gun lawyers amongst us can clarify.

In any case, I predict there will be a number of civil actions stemming from the players and the workcover cases, and in them they will be surely able to supenure witnesses. This could go on for years...I suggest the retired Essendon player agents are right now dusting off their legal advices...and Workcover are about to knock on that Tullarmarine door.

The thing ive noticed today and watching some of 360 is just how carefully everything the bombers say is phrased.

"The players are innocent" for example implies that someone else isnt, but it sounds fantastic.

"Essendon is extremely confident the players did nothing illegal". Again sounds fantastic.

Well 800 years ago everyone was extremely confident the earth was flat...

They have some amazing PR guys

SEN is a total Laugh...

I can't believe James Hird accused ASADA of destroying evidence of the use of thymomodulin.

This bloke seriously thinks he's the centre of the universe and everyone else is out to get him

There are a number of posts here with conflicting information about the various bodies right to supenure witnesses. For what it is worth, and it is not entirely clear to me either, is they can but need the support of the local judicial system. My understanding was they are still waiting for the Abbott government to enact legislation for this, which has been in recent months the subject of savage attacks on the Government about this from Coates and Fehey in the media. It is now thought that this is likely to be completed before the CAS starts in 6 or so months time. No doubt the gun lawyers amongst us can clarify.

In any case, I predict there will be a number of civil actions stemming from the players and the workcover cases, and in them they will be surely able to supenure witnesses. This could go on for years...I suggest the retired Essendon player agents are right now dusting off their legal advices...and Workcover are about to knock on that Tullarmarine door.

Natalie Hickey has posted on the appeal and touched on the issue of subpoenas:

How would YOU approach a WADA appeal to the Court of Arbitration for Sport? The prospect of compelling witnesses looks low to me.

• If this matter were in the Ordinary Arbitration Division we would have a chance of being able to compel witnesses. This is because CAS describes such subject matter as “commercial”.
• However, because we are in the Appeals Arbitration Division where the character is “disciplinary”, a basis for compulsion does not exist.
• Why does this distinction matter? It was at the heart of a key aspect of Justice Croft’s decision.
• ASADA had to prove that the AFL Tribunal hearing was capable of attracting the jurisdiction of the Commercial Arbitration Act 2011 (CAA) (hint!).
• Justice Croft held that proceedings before the AFL Anti-Doping Tribunal were not properly characterized as arbitration proceedings, and that if he was wrong about this, they were not of the necessary “commercial” kind.
• Consequently, Justice Croft found that the provisions of the CAA do not apply to a proceeding before the AFL Anti-Doping Tribunal, hence the provisions of s.27A of the CAA – relied upon in support of ASADA’s application for the issue of subpoenas – had no application.
• ASADA did not appeal this decision.

That this judgment concerned the very AFL Tribunal hearing from which WADA seeks to appeal makes the task hard enough

http://sociallitigator.com/2015/05/12/how-would-you-approach-a-wada-appeal-to-the-court-of-arbitration-for-sport/

I can't believe James Hird accused ASADA of destroying evidence of the use of thymomodulin.

This bloke seriously thinks he's the centre of the universe and everyone else is out to get him

I watched that on 360. Should have seen the look on Whatleys face...it was gold! Hird has now alleged ASADA of destroying evidence...why the hell would they even consider such a nonsensical idea? Hird just continues to go from bad to worse as a man with zero credibility in this whole saga.

Gerard Whately is the only journo other than Caro to face him off. The rest belong in the boys club of AFL.

I can't believe James Hird accused ASADA of destroying evidence of the use of thymomodulin.

This bloke seriously thinks he's the centre of the universe and everyone else is out to get him

OMG - I haven't been able to see 360 but this is a new level of delusion surely.

Pot calling kettle black re destroying evidence.

Shredding evidence didn't help Phillip Morris nor should it help EssUndone.

I watched that on 360. Should have seen the look on Whatleys face...it was gold! Hird has now alleged ASADA of destroying evidence...why the hell would they even consider such a nonsensical idea? Hird just continues to go from bad to worse as a man with zero credibility in this whole saga.

Gerard Whately is the only journo other than Caro to face him off. The rest belong in the boys club of AFL.

Francis Leach on ABC we pretty reasonable in the "surely we have the right to recognise the prosecution right to peal" "the players have not been found guilty" "this is bigger than a minor backwater" arguments. Particularly arguing against KateCarnell of Chamber of Commerce who wanted it all to go away

Jara, the more you listen and read of some of these supposed industry giants of the airwaves/print , the more you come to understand it's all powered by self interest and bullshlt

The sideshows are almost as entertaining as the main event, especially until court 1 comes into frame.

Ladies and gentlemen take your partners (sides) for Thymosin Waltz !

Yes, B, it's the gift that keeps on giving, isn't it?

Even if we can't get much fun out of our own crappy team, we can have a bit of schadenfreude at the Bombers expense.

Had a cold, bit worse for the wear this morning. Heard the news: the perfect cure! Felt great.

As my wife said, by the time this is all over, the only one of the 34 still playing will be Dustin Fletcher.

If Essendon are flat this weekend and play with no intensity, I'd say they're cooked mentally.

Won't finish out the season.

One aspect of this case which I hope somebody in the media cottons on to is the massive slap in the face WADA have just delivered the AFL regarding their integrity. By ASADA declining to appeal through the AFL's own system and then WADA taking it right out of their hands, they have basically said that they have no faith in an impartial judgement being delivered by an AFL body. In essence, WADA and ASADA have just told the world they think the tribunal is crooked and delivers results based on the wishes of the AFL and not the evidence.

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/sport/afl/hird-shocked-by-wada-appeal-as-bungle-names-accused-bombers/story-fnca0u4y-1227352338353

Hird shocked by WADA appeal as bungle names accused Bombers

The Court of Arbitration for Sport last night breached the confidentiality provisions of the World Anti-Doping Code and angered Essendon and the AFL Players Association by publicly naming the 34 footballers accused of taking a banned substance.

Edit, from same article:

“Witnesses can be subpoened by CAS but if they refuse to collaborate, the CAS, like any arbitral tribunal in the world, would be obliged to seek the assistance of the competent state courts to have them testify,” CAS secretary general Matthieu Reeb told The Australian.

Here is some evidence for WADA

Hi everyone.

I do really feel for Essendon right now. They were my 2nd favourite team in 2012 so I still have a soft spot for them

Here are my favourite players from that list.

Thomas Bellchambers
Alex Browne
Jake Carlisle
Travis Colyer
Stewart Crameri
Alwyn Davey
Luke Davis
Cory Dell’Olio
Ricky Dyson
Dustin Fletcher
Scott Gumbleton
Kyle Hardingham
Dyson Heppell
Michael Hibberd
David Hille
Heath Hocking
Cale Hooker
Ben Howlett
Michael Hurley
Leroy Jetta
Brendan Lee
Sam Lonergan
Nathan Lovett-Murray
Mark McVeigh
Jake Melksham
Angus Monfries
David Myers
Tayte Pears
Brent Prismall
Patrick Ryder
Henry Slattery
Brent Stanton
Ariel Steinberg
Jobe Watson

Most of the criticism of Essendon on here is criticism of the club, not the players. I'm quite sure the players are frightened and doing exactly what they are told. It is Hird, Danks, Reid, Little et al who should be slaughtered. Yes, the players are guilty, and have ignored clear responsibility that lay with them; and yes, they have surely lied. But it is the sustained and systematic doping, together with the too-clever-by-half waivers and off-site cloak-and-dagger arrangements - and then, when caught out, the attempts to evade scrutiny/regulation (including the efforts of collaborator Demetriou, not forgetting the lawyers and press) - that is the real outrage here; and that was not the initiative of the players no matter how much they have stupidly and illegally gone along with it.

So I would like to think that WADA will deal with the root cause and source of this monstrous, calculated and systematic, anti-sport programme. Essendon Football Club, united in support of its rogue operators, collectively sacrificing their weak-minded players to the club's "whatever it takes" reckless and defiant ambition - that's got to be the real target at CAS.

So, my question: Is WADA going to appropriately deal with the club and its officials - or just punish the 34 players? How likely is it that a 2 (4?) year ban will be imposed on the club, in the event of the Appeal being upheld? Can life bans come out of this - as several of us on here would consider right and necessary - or has the scale of Essendon's misconduct exceeded the scale of any punishments available to CAS?

Greg Baum gets it ~

WADA appeal into Essendon verdict: Too big even for City Hall

I think one of the commentators in the aftermath of the AFL Tribunal decision claimed it was an advantage that two of its members had played football at a high level. I couldn't disagree more. That close connection more likely clouded their senses of what it took to deal with the elements of the case and to conclude to a standard of comfortable satisfaction. Perhaps it was inevitable but we really never came close to the truth and perhaps we never will given the shady nature of the witnesses who were either coerced into not giving direct evidence to the tribunal or simply refused of their own volition. The tribunal seemed to draw little or no inferences from the fact that they did not make themselves available or that the data about the programme they presided over was removed from the face of the earth leaving me at least in little doubt that the players were injected with the substance Dank imported and that it was exactly what the Chinese company he imported it from actually manufactures.

Baum nails it with this -

If this ever was a case that could be worked out between like-minded acquaintances in back corridors or at football games and other convivial haunts, it is no longer. You have to think that this is at least partly why WADA has appealed, that without impugning the integrity of the jurists on the AFL tribunal, it felt their decision was made in an atmosphere altogether too cousinly and collegial. It was made in the shadows of City Hall.

If Essendon are flat this weekend and play with no intensity, I'd say they're cooked mentally.

Won't finish out the season.

and then they'd be painted as the hard done victims, poor "misunderstood Essendon!!! "... Reap as you sow Bombers

Most of the criticism of Essendon on here is criticism of the club, not the players. I'm quite sure the players are frightened and doing exactly what they are told. It is Hird, Danks, Reid, Little et al who should be slaughtered. Yes, the players are guilty, and have ignored clear responsibility that lay with them; and yes, they have surely lied. But it is the sustained and systematic doping, together with the too-clever-by-half waivers and off-site cloak-and-dagger arrangements - and then, when caught out, the attempts to evade scrutiny/regulation (including the efforts of collaborator Demetriou, not forgetting the lawyers and press) - that is the real outrage here; and that was not the initiative of the players no matter how much they have stupidly and illegally gone along with it.

So I would like to think that WADA will deal with the root cause and source of this monstrous, calculated and systematic, anti-sport programme. Essendon Football Club, united in support of its rogue operators, collectively sacrificing their weak-minded players - that's got to be the real target at CAS.

So, my question: Is WADA going to appropriately deal with the club and its officials - or just punish the 34 players? How likely is it that a 2 (4?) year ban will be imposed on the club, in the event of the Appeal being upheld? Can life bans come out of this - as several of us on here would consider right and necessary - or has the scale of Essendon's misconduct exceeded the scale of any punishments available to CAS?

The players had a responsibility to know what was being injected into their bodies - part of being a professional sportsperson requires that responsibility. That responsibility can't be just put aside - these injections weren't forced upon them - they had a choice.

I've never bought into their victim mentality. Just imagine it was one player only and not 34 players?

So, if it was one player only and that one player allowed his club to inject various substances into his body on hundreds of occasions (to the stomach region) would anyone have any sympathy for him? I doubt it.

The same circumstances would be involved too - he'd have to have walked across the road to a dodgy anti-aging clinic to receive these hundreds of injections.

And why are we so sure that the players didn't know what was being injected into their bodies anyway ? It's quite possible that it's all a collective lie - there's a lot at stake.

Natalie Hickey has posted on the appeal and touched on the issue of subpoenas:

http://sociallitigator.com/2015/05/12/how-would-you-approach-a-wada-appeal-to-the-court-of-arbitration-for-sport/

Very interesting article. In addition to subpoenas she talks about the selection of judges: "Depending on ‘which side you’re on’, you may elect for – say – someone affiliated with the Australian Institute of Sport or International Athletic Federation or Athletics Australia (well accustomed to the concept of athlete responsibility for substances they ingest or otherwise take), or you may prefer someone affiliated with the International Cricket Council or Australian Rugby League Judiciary Panel (well accustomed to the challenges faced by young men in a team sport environment)"

David Grace is head of Athletics Australia (AA) and the leading QC for the players at the AFL Tribunal. He is also mates with John Wylie (Australian Sports Commission chair - ASC) and Mike Fitzpatrick (AFL Commission chair). Don't underestimate how far their network extends in legal and sporting circles in Australia.

As a general comment about the world of politics, business and law (and the politics of those) I quote from my post #76 yesterday morning.

I like your confidence bb. Unfortunately, I have seen far too much pulling of strings and calling in of favours to believe what SHOUD happen DOES happen. The AFL Tribunal only confirmed my belief. Yes, I know that CAS is a different and an outside jurisdiction... The scope for subtle influence/favourable interpretation of subjective rules is still there. If 2 of the 3 on the CAS panel are not from Australia and are not from Athletics, my concern will continue.

Like in any court its members will be selected with a clear view of their decision making and interpretations of law history. This is a case where justice must not only be done but also be seen to be done. Hopefully a judge that has had anything to do with International Athletics, AA or the ASC members will not be selected.

Thankfully, the CAS rules for selection of judges allows for 'challenges'.

What I thought was a point that was well made last night was when Whateley said "by the standards the AFL tribunal set, Armstrong would not have been suspended and WADA don't appeal losing cases"

Now I remember him being in the not enough evidence camp last year.

Big turn around.

What I thought was a point that was well made last night was when Whateley said "by the standards the AFL tribunal set, Armstrong would not have been suspended and WADA don't appeal losing cases"

Now I remember him being in the not enough evidence camp last year.

Big turn around.

That's because he has woken up to his role as an independent journalist. This must have been hard given he is employed by the News Ltd dominated EFC/HIrd apologists and at times it did look as if he had joined them.

If James Hird thought ASADA had 'destroyed' evidence why did he not just produce his own/EFC copy?

Is he so used to lying that he can't even see the transparency of this lie?

Beggars belief!!

Also, why has he waited till now to make this amazing 'disclosure'.

PS: does anyone know if the 360 show is available anywhere on line if you don't have foxtel

The hubris and sense of entitlement shown by Hird is breathtaking. I wonder if WADA would have appealed the decision if Essendon had the balls to get rid of him. It is untenable for one of the main architects of the scheme to remain as coach.

unlike some on this forum I do feel for the players - they were entitled to believe that their Club would be acting within acceptable standards and weren't in a position of power to question what was being done. A football club is a bit like the army - you do what you're told or else.

The players had a responsibility to know what was being injected into their bodies - part of being a professional sportsperson requires that responsibility. That responsibility can't be just put aside - these injections weren't forced upon them - they had a choice.

I've never bought into their victim mentality. Just imagine it was one player only and not 34 players?

To me you have argued against yourself. To me it is key that it was 34 players not one player.

From the minute you walk through the door of an AFL club it is all team team team .Team rules, team meetings, travelling as a team, fly the flag for your teammate, don't let the team down - you don't question - you just accept as part of the team.

So the coach and administration from within the club stand up in front of the team and say we are putting you on supplement program - it is approved and kosher. This is completely different from a single player taken aside and injected or worse - someone from outside the club. This is your club requiring compliance to the team ethos which is drilled into these players day in and day out.

I understand why the players need to be whacked as it is clear that players have to be responsible for what they take but I also have a certain amount of sympathy for the players. My contempt for the coach and administrators knows no bounds for breaking that all important trust of the players.

The day of putting your trust in any club to do the right thing by the TEAM was completely over the day the coach and administrators stood up in front of the group at Essendon and said - don't worry - this is all above board.

Funniest thing is had ASADA won the case, Essendon would have appealed, now they're acting like wada are out of line for doing the same thing