On 29/11/2015 at 00:47, Redleg said:

If found guilty they will get that bulk discount for a number of reasons including delay, time served player co- operation etc.

no they wont Red. what co-operation...they stalled ..were party to the proceeding that stalled...Only when CORNERED have they done ANYTHING.

Only time served is voluntary suspension of about 4-half months...thats all they get off.

  On 28/11/2015 at 14:11, bing181 said:

They'll get some sort of "no significant fault" discount of 6 months, perhaps (though unlikely IMHO) 12 months.

That would make it more like 13+ months.

They'll miss a season. In part why Melksham was offered a 4 year deal IMHO. Would be interested to see the details of the contract.

no significant fault is bullshlt.. Thats the Essendon line of argument.. ironic no ??

Its beholding upon the individual.. ignorance is no excuse either in law...or the WADA code

  On 28/11/2015 at 22:51, sue said:

Correct. A club would trust the AFL more than EFC. But would a club really believe the AFL had inside knowledge on the penalties sufficient to take a tainted player with no concerns. I think not.

I think it is far more likely that the AFL has offered some sort of compensation to any club brave enough to spread the pain from EFC in 2016. The AFL must have a plan how to run EFC in 2016 if a swathe of players are rubbed out. Maybe it would be a variant of that.

wants to be a bloody good plan ...because they are getting smacked on the bum...( the 34 ) count on it... And if the contingency doesnt stack up so should any clubs officaldom for doing such a dumb thing.

  On 28/11/2015 at 10:38, Buffalo said:

Uh-Oh chongo, the game is up - definitely NOT good news for the Dons (or Milkshake I'm afraid)..

WADA likens Essendon to BALCO case

In fact, I'd go so far as to suggest Hulett and Wagner were drafted just in case Melksham got suspended.

For the longevity of the game. I hope this proves to be the outcome.

Maximum bans are the only way to clean up professional sport.

Melksham & Goodwin should be nervous

Essendon are cooked. The legal backlash to this could take them to the wall

Where are you James??

Tram tickets are waiting!

  On 29/11/2015 at 03:07, Sir Why You Little said:

For the longevity of the game. I hope this proves to be the outcome.

Maximum bans are the only way to clean up professional sport.

Melksham & Goodwin should be nervous

Essendon are cooked. The legal backlash to this could take them to the wall

Where are you James??

The scum are hoping for a decision as soon as possible, so whatever ban they get is mostly used up in another off season. It would have been part of their plan all along.

I'm hoping that the previous self imposed ban is ignored, as they continued to train as a group, and thumb their nose at ASADA/WADA.

Full bans. 2 years, with no discounts. They are filthy scum, who have shown zero remorse, and bucket loads of contempt. The worst of the worst.

  On 29/11/2015 at 03:33, faultydet said:

The scum are hoping for a decision as soon as possible, so whatever ban they get is mostly used up in another off season. It would have been part of their plan all along.

I'm hoping that the previous self imposed ban is ignored, as they continued to train as a group, and thumb their nose at ASADA/WADA.

Full bans. 2 years, with no discounts. They are filthy scum, who have shown zero remorse, and bucket loads of contempt. The worst of the worst.

And this is exactly why i hold Vlad in such contempt. His warning of impending doom to Essendrug 36 hours before it all started was abhorrent to the game. Essendrug were always able to destroy evidence thus extending their time to shed guillty employees.

Andrew Demitrio should also be grilled by CAS

Does anyone on this forum know for how long, if at all, were there any current or ex Essendon Players or Coaches that negotiated, or are negotiating in confidence,( ie not through Rag Outlets) with ASADA/WADA.

Neither do I.

  On 29/11/2015 at 03:33, faultydet said:

The scum are hoping for a decision as soon as possible, so whatever ban they get is mostly used up in another off season. It would have been part of their plan all along.

I'm hoping that the previous self imposed ban is ignored, as they continued to train as a group, and thumb their nose at ASADA/WADA.

Full bans. 2 years, with no discounts. They are filthy scum, who have shown zero remorse, and bucket loads of contempt. The worst of the worst.

While we all might find that desirable it simply is not going to happen.

There will be substantial reductions from two years for a number of questionable reasons

  On 29/11/2015 at 03:49, old dee said:

While we all might find that desirable it simply is not going to happen.

There will be substantial reductions from two years for a number of questionable reasons

I'm still holding out hope, that justice will be served.

The AFL showed their hand, when they put the submission to CAS, that the players should not serve bans. fkn disgusting. I'm still furious about it.

Shows the farce of the Tribunal hearing for what it was.

Agree with WYL's comment that maximum bans are the only way to clean up sport. Would love to know what WADA requested as bans. Hopefully they see it the same way I do.

maximum bans. but not only for the players.

the club must burn for this.

if 2 of them are guilty the whole club must be rubbed out for 2 seasons.

8 games and a bye? so be it.

  On 29/11/2015 at 04:19, biggestred said:

maximum bans. but not only for the players.

the club must burn for this.

if 2 of them are guilty the whole club must be rubbed out for 2 seasons.

8 games and a bye? so be it.

Yeah, its funny the way this has evolved, and its mostly due to the biased commentary from AFL media, and AFL accredited reporters.

When this started, it was all over the place, that 2 drug users, meant a TEAM ban for 2 years, but because of the lies and distortions being peddled for the last 2 years, people are being conditioned to think that a small, or no ban for players only, is somehow acceptable.

God I hope CAS dont fall for this. It was, if proven, drug cheating on a massive, and unprecedented scale, and the entire club should be banned from the sport, as per WADA rules.

Good call biggestred. Seems I have been a victim of the media bias also.

Theres either...No significant fault....or it's THEIR fault.

Can't be a little pregnant nor a little dead. Either are...or not.

They're at fault. Many factors about that but they are.

  On 29/11/2015 at 03:27, old dee said:

Tram tickets are waiting!

want to put a beer on that Old ?

Lots of speculation. And not just here.

I fail to see how anyone, much less the AFL, can give assurances about the outcome of an independent judiciary panel.

We will not see Melksham next year.

  On 29/11/2015 at 07:20, bing181 said:

Lots of speculation. And not just here.

I fail to see how anyone, much less the AFL, can give assurances about the outcome of an independent judiciary panel.

We will not see Melksham next year.

Where else of note bing?

I know this is against what most see here, but I have little wish to see the players have the book thrown at them.

IMO the blame for this debacle lays squarely at the feet of the EFC and the AFL (due to poor teaching standards, ie check with club doctors).

If WADA are serious,mths would suspend the whole football club for two seasons at least, but only give the players a slap on the wrist. Let the AFL clean up the mess caused by suspending Essenscum

The players are as much to fault.

They are the ones initially advantaged and the the team.

bugger the stupid idiots and pillory those that used them.

  On 29/11/2015 at 07:56, beelzebub said:

The players are as much to fault.

They are the ones initially advantaged and the the team.

bugger the stupid idiots and pillory those that used them.

Yes they were advantage, but disagree they are as much to fault. Fact is the AFL training told them to check anything through their club doctor. This was done through the club. They were screwed by a club administration that would do "whatever it takes", the club should be punished to the max not the players IMO

  On 29/11/2015 at 08:45, Rod Grinter Riot Squad said:

Yes they were advantage, but disagree they are as much to fault. Fact is the AFL training told them to check anything through their club doctor. This was done through the club. They were screwed by a club administration that would do "whatever it takes", the club should be punished to the max not the players IMO

the obligation is to seek fact. They sought concord. They sought some sort of consideration. They were their own fools. Stuff them.

Don't give me this peer shlt etc. Where were the fukked up doey eyed parents the numnuts ?

The rule? Common sense...surely

  On 29/11/2015 at 08:45, Rod Grinter Riot Squad said:

Yes they were advantage, but disagree they are as much to fault. Fact is the AFL training told them to check anything through their club doctor. This was done through the club. They were screwed by a club administration that would do "whatever it takes", the club should be punished to the max not the players IMO

But they didnt.

They went across the road and got injected at the local clinic.

  On 29/11/2015 at 06:06, beelzebub said:

want to put a beer on that Old ?

Putting a beer on a wet tram ticket won't do much for either, I would have thought ...

  On 29/11/2015 at 09:12, Red and Bluebeard said:

Putting a beer on a wet tram ticket won't do much for either, I would have thought ...

There's context

  On 29/11/2015 at 08:45, Rod Grinter Riot Squad said:

Yes they were advantage, but disagree they are as much to fault. Fact is the AFL training told them to check anything through their club doctor. This was done through the club. They were screwed by a club administration that would do "whatever it takes", the club should be punished to the max not the players IMO

and what about all the wada training, when the athlete is told he has ultimate personal responsibility. did that fall on deaf ears?

34 athletes and a number of support staff and NOT ONE sought an outside opinion

  On 29/11/2015 at 09:20, daisycutter said:

and what about all the wada training, when the athlete is told he has ultimate personal responsibility. did that fall on deaf ears?

34 athletes and a number of support staff and NOT ONE sought an outside opinion

boggles the mind eh ?