You are not alone LDC we all are capable of that.

Gil is IMO a light weight, probably be ok if the AFL was on an even keel but they are being hit by multiple problems from different directions.

It does not help IMO that Gil is an insider at the AFL with what you would imagine are a number loyalties to people.

What the AFL needed when Vlad left was someone from the outside who did not owe anyone anything inside the AFL.

We are now stuck with an AFL management team that spends its time covering each others mistakes instead of fixing problems.

Hit the nail on the head there Old Dee.

The "Bombers" could start up a new (FLOS) Foundation League of Syria. Gil could open the first game.2 in 1

Inshallah!!!! Could be the Kuffar Bombers taking on all comers. No Kalashnikovs allowed otherwise no holds barred. That will take a bit of wind out of their sails.

We are now stuck with an AFL management team that spends its time covering each others mistakes instead of fixing problems.

We are now stuck with an AFL management team that spends its time covering each others mistakes instead of fixing problems.

I'd say that the AFL are fairly good at "fixing" problems (cough cough) - just not all that good at a) acknowledging that they exist in the first place and b) actually resolving them.

It's the "just make it go away" approach.

I think we should all be very satisfied as to the progress of this case. Even though CAS was very secure and virtually nothing got out of the Sydney hearings, and WADA likewise closed ranks, and even my normally cooperative sources would do no more than confirm or deny when we were on the right track. They had clearly learnt well from the Armstrong case when they came up against very powerful and rich media and PR interests, and rightly feared a similar circus in Australia. Directly from those learnings, they skilfully were able to avoid the circus, which left the usual hacks with nothing to write about or complain about.

I do though find the public utterances we have very very significant.

We all remember when ASADA referred to WADA to make the decision to refer the case to refer the appeal case to CAS, and McDevitt came out very aggressively and very specifically as to why ASADA thought Hird and Essendon were guilty. This surprisingly did not alert Essendon and the AFL as to what was coming. "Blindsided" I think Little said at the time which is unbelievable given his extensive corporate experience. The next utterance relevant came a week before the deadline for the referral to CAS from none other than the former head of WADA. and ex premier of NSW John Fahey,and a member of the WADA inner circle.

Fahey had this to say:
"Essendon's behaviour though this was almost un-Australian. To effectively shoot the messenger, and prevent a proper examination of what everybody knows occurred and everybody knows that what occurred was, to say the least, strange if not a breach of anti-doping rules. It is still extraordinarily strange that players could be given thousands of needles, off site. Every attempt was made to prevent an independent tribunal examining all the facts. That has cost literally millions of dollars and put the future sporting careers of many young footballers in jeopardy. It should have been dealt with long ago, and that is the tragedy of the whole case that it wasn't allowed to proceed in a reasonable time to a proper conclusion.Clearly the case was taken to prevent the [AFL anti-doping tribunal] inquiry occurring, They sought injunctions to prevent any information gathered by ASADA being used for purposes of examining anti-doping rule violations. They sought injunctions through the Federal Court and then Hird appealed the original decision."

Fahey all but said WADA were going to appeal, but when they did, Hird and EFC still maintained they were blindsided when the actual announcement was made.

And now we have another carefully calibrated announcement from WADA, this time from their global head in Montreal, David Howman:

WADA director-general David Howman has described how the most powerful anti-doping regulator framed its Court of Arbitration for Sport challenge of an AFL tribunal verdict that effectively cleared 34 players."Quite simply, if the BALCO cases had been decided under the principles followed by the AFL tribunal, none of the BALCO people would have been sanctioned. For us, the key issue [in appealing the AFL tribunal finding] was: can investigations be done in a way that BALCO and a whole lot of other previous cases were run? Or, is there going to be a significant change due to the way the AFL tribunal decided it? Because that would change the whole way that we put cases before courts. The standard of proof that was used in the cases that led to the first non-analytical sanctions [through BALCO] was quite different to the proof used in the AFL tribunal. So we are trying to find out what the correct standard is under the [WADA] Code.That puts it into perspective. It's a big principle."

This to me goes to nub of why WADA describes this case as so globally significant, and one WADA simply has to win. Otherwise it changes their whole "modus operandi", and considerably weakens it.

Of course what happened at Balco?  - athletes were found guilty and athletes, officials, medical staff and coaches were suspended for long periods of time.

I don't think Howman could have been any clearer just as Fahey could not have been. And make no mistake, this was a deliberate leak, one designed to prepare Essendon, the AFL and the wider Australian public for a considerable shock.

At least there are still some people of integrity left in the world......

 

 

Edited December 3, 20159 yr by Dees2014

The Hird situation is quite interesting in that if the tide of opinion, against one individual could become made to be one of " justified proportionate negativity" in certain circles of interest,

A- There is a scapegoat.

B- The club could actually stay united and function thus averting a serious chasm.

C- The public perception could be appeased, perhaps with minimal cost.

And we all move on

 

 

 

 

 

1 hour ago, willmoy said:

The Hird situation is quite interesting in that if the tide of opinion, against one individual could become made to be one of " justified proportionate negativity" in certain circles of interest,

A- There is a scapegoat.

B- The club could actually stay united and function thus averting a serious chasm.

C- The public perception could be appeased, perhaps with minimal cost.

And we all move on

 

If EFC had stuck to the "Evans plan" way back when, all that would have come to pass and Hird would probably be back coaching EFC right now as the returned hero who died on the cross and returned to absolve everyone of their sins.

A good CAS verdict could be a nice Xmas present....

 

13 hours ago, Dees2014 said:

I think we should all be very satisfied as to the progress of this case. Even though CAS was very secure and virtually nothing got out of the Sydney hearings, and WADA likewise closed ranks, and even my normally cooperative sources would do no more than confirm or deny when we were on the right track. They had clearly learnt well from the Armstrong case when they came up against very powerful and rich media and PR interests, and rightly feared a similar circus in Australia. Directly from those learnings, they skilfully were able to avoid the circus, which left the usual hacks with nothing to write about or complain about.

I do though find the public utterances we have very very significant.

We all remember when ASADA referred to WADA to make the decision to refer the case to refer the appeal case to CAS, and McDevitt came out very aggressively and very specifically as to why ASADA thought Hird and Essendon were guilty. This surprisingly did not alert Essendon and the AFL as to what was coming. "Blindsided" I think Little said at the time which is unbelievable given his extensive corporate experience. The next utterance relevant came a week before the deadline for the referral to CAS from none other than the former head of WADA. and ex premier of NSW John Fahey,and a member of the WADA inner circle.

Fahey had this to say:
"Essendon's behaviour though this was almost un-Australian. To effectively shoot the messenger, and prevent a proper examination of what everybody knows occurred and everybody knows that what occurred was, to say the least, strange if not a breach of anti-doping rules. It is still extraordinarily strange that players could be given thousands of needles, off site. Every attempt was made to prevent an independent tribunal examining all the facts. That has cost literally millions of dollars and put the future sporting careers of many young footballers in jeopardy. It should have been dealt with long ago, and that is the tragedy of the whole case that it wasn't allowed to proceed in a reasonable time to a proper conclusion.Clearly the case was taken to prevent the [AFL anti-doping tribunal] inquiry occurring, They sought injunctions to prevent any information gathered by ASADA being used for purposes of examining anti-doping rule violations. They sought injunctions through the Federal Court and then Hird appealed the original decision."

Fahey all but said WADA were going to appeal, but when they did, Hird and EFC still maintained they were blindsided when the actual announcement was made.

And now we have another carefully calibrated announcement from WADA, this time from their global head in Montreal, David Howman:

WADA director-general David Howman has described how the most powerful anti-doping regulator framed its Court of Arbitration for Sport challenge of an AFL tribunal verdict that effectively cleared 34 players."Quite simply, if the BALCO cases had been decided under the principles followed by the AFL tribunal, none of the BALCO people would have been sanctioned. For us, the key issue [in appealing the AFL tribunal finding] was: can investigations be done in a way that BALCO and a whole lot of other previous cases were run? Or, is there going to be a significant change due to the way the AFL tribunal decided it? Because that would change the whole way that we put cases before courts. The standard of proof that was used in the cases that led to the first non-analytical sanctions [through BALCO] was quite different to the proof used in the AFL tribunal. So we are trying to find out what the correct standard is under the [WADA] Code.That puts it into perspective. It's a big principle."

This to me goes to nub of why WADA describes this case as so globally significant, and one WADA simply has to win. Otherwise it changes their whole "modus operandi", and considerably weakens it.

Of course what happened at Balco?  - athletes were found guilty and athletes, officials, medical staff and coaches were suspended for long periods of time.

I don't think Howman could have been any clearer just as Fahey could not have been. And make no mistake, this was a deliberate leak, one designed to prepare Essendon, the AFL and the wider Australian public for a considerable shock.

At least there are still some people of integrity left in the world......

 

 

...but this wasn't a leak. It was a comment on the reasons WADA decided to appeal and how they see the case. It was made at a conference, with the media in attendance and reporting.

No information has been forthcoming from the CAS hearing and that's as it should be. Whilst it would be nice to hear a bit of info, in reality it's good your sources are not forthcoming.

1 hour ago, jnrmac said:

A good CAS verdict could be a nice Xmas present....

 

"Good " will be determined by which side of the table you sit jnr.

I assume  by Good you mean that the EFC players get the crap kicked of them!

Edited December 3, 20159 yr by old dee

6 minutes ago, rjay said:

...but this wasn't a leak. It was a comment on the reasons WADA decided to appeal and how they see the case. It was made at a conference, with the media in attendance and reporting.

No information has been forthcoming from the CAS hearing and that's as it should be. Whilst it would be nice to hear a bit of info, in reality it's good your sources are not forthcoming.

not a leak as such I'd probably concur...but definitely  a deliberate and pointed comment. A shot across the bow before lining up the midship !!

12 minutes ago, beelzebub said:

not a leak as such I'd probably concur...but definitely  a deliberate and pointed comment. A shot across the bow before lining up the midship !!

Yep, it's a very deliberate and pointed comment 'bb' and I hope we get the right result without any fear or favour.

With the drugs and money (gambling) in sport now the shine is going off. It's really important for the integrity of the game that this is addressed properly, to date it hasn't been.

6 hours ago, rjay said:

...but this wasn't a leak. It was a comment on the reasons WADA decided to appeal and how they see the case. It was made at a conference, with the media in attendance and reporting.

No information has been forthcoming from the CAS hearing and that's as it should be. Whilst it would be nice to hear a bit of info, in reality it's good your sources are not forthcoming.

Rjay, I agree it was very sensible of CAS and WADA to play this very close to their chests. In fact that was a large part of the point of my post ie they are playing Essendon and the AFL very strategically, and in fact beating them hands down on this issue, contrary to the Hird and EFC propaganda, and their tame friends in the media. 

As far as the term "leak" is concerned, i agree it was a deliberate act on their behalf and therefore could not strictly be termed a leak. Maybe i should have put it in inverted commas, so i humbly apologise  for being so slack!

Edited December 4, 20159 yr by Dees2014

39 minutes ago, beelzebub said:

not a leak as such I'd probably concur...but definitely  a deliberate and pointed comment. A shot across the bow before lining up the midship !!

This is finally going to be resolved when you are out of the Country bb.

Do you need us to send you a "telegram" ?

33 minutes ago, rjay said:

Yep, it's a very deliberate and pointed comment 'bb' and I hope we get the right result without any fear or favour.

With the drugs and money (gambling) in sport now the shine is going off. It's really important for the integrity of the game that this is addressed properly, to date it hasn't been.

 

And that is totally the point, a result, either way, as long it has been given without favour, fear or leanings based on what the outcome may do to the competition. The competition will survive with or without Ess.

2 minutes ago, Cards13 said:

 

And that is totally the point, a result, either way, as long it has been given without favour, fear or leanings based on what the outcome may do to the competition. The competition will survive with or without Ess.

If you think there will be no EFC in the future you are seriously mistaken.

They have the 2nd or 3rd most followers nationally, they are rich and powerful.

But most of all Gil and Company want them back and playing well.

The result of the WADA appeal if it goes badly will only be a hiccup for 2016.

 

25 minutes ago, old dee said:

This is finally going to be resolved when you are out of the Country bb.

Do you need us to send you a "telegram" ?

Thats OK OD...I believe the internet exists where I'm going 

 

( good luck trying to send a telegram these days !! lol ) 

http://www.mondaq.com/australia/x/448422/Sport/What+in+the+WADA+is+going+on+with+the+Essendon+34

13 minutes ago, old dee said:

If you think there will be no EFC in the future you are seriously mistaken.

They have the 2nd or 3rd most followers nationally, they are rich and powerful.

But most of all Gil and Company want them back and playing well.

The result of the WADA appeal if it goes badly will only be a hiccup for 2016.

 

Unfortunately  Essendon have created enough of a buffer to survive this crime. Happily abbeted  by Vlad and his Diminutives and then Gil and his Dills !!

They'll carry on but they still have a few surprises coming their way.  They wont be leaving struggle street in any hurry despite what they think.

5 minutes ago, beelzebub said:

Unfortunately  Essendon have created enough of a buffer to survive this crime. Happily abbeted  by Vlad and his Diminutives and then Gil and his Dills !!

They'll carry on but they still have a few surprises coming their way.  They wont be leaving struggle street in any hurry despite what they think.

Sadly if the worst happens Gil will make sure the struggle is as short as possible.

3 minutes ago, daisycutter said:

http://www.mondaq.com/australia/x/448422/Sport/What+in+the+WADA+is+going+on+with+the+Essendon+34

"At this stage, it appears that WADA has made a high-stakes bet for what appears to be very little return "  Really ?? LITTLE  ??  A humorous irony there in itself , but would hardly describe  the Integrity of Sport as be a 'little return !!

Only a fanboy would write anything so inept.

How are SWAAB connected to Essendon I wonder ?  And for their benefit obviously an outside non biased entity has to be the ones to arbitrate as this particular code has show itself incapable of doing so without foregoing any consideration to either it's commercial interests or  persuasive stakeholders

9 minutes ago, beelzebub said:

Thats OK OD...I believe the internet exists where I'm going 

 

( good luck trying to send a telegram these days !! lol ) 

Small joke there bb!

But considering where you are going perhaps not so far out of whack!

13 minutes ago, daisycutter said:

http://www.mondaq.com/australia/x/448422/Sport/What+in+the+WADA+is+going+on+with+the+Essendon+34

Ha ha ha. I saw that a few days ago. I wonder why the guy didn't simply sign off with his EFC membership number.

12 minutes ago, old dee said:

Small joke there bb!

But considering where you are going perhaps not so far out of whack!

I got it

2 hours ago, old dee said:

"Good " will be determined by which side of the table you sit jnr.

I assume  by Good you mean that the EFC players get the crap kicked of them!

 

You assume correctly!