It's getting very interesting now...and Caro with the first leak from the hearing.

Did it come from the AFL or player managers???

9 minutes ago, jnrmac said:

Wow, this is pretty interesting..

http://www.smh.com.au/afl/cas-concern-over-why-bombers-omitted-to-mention-thymosin-injections-20151204-glfnbm.html

The EFC players dod not mention the hundreds of injections nor thymosin when interviewed in 2012. The inference being that if there was nothing to worry about and they were being above board why wouldn't they have mentioned it....

Ooh, there is some pain to come...

 

 

 

They forgot to mention the reason they are in the shite??

un[censored]believable as Andrew Dice Clay famously said....You could not write a better script than this whole saga in reality...

This could be the dam wall breaking.....

9 minutes ago, jnrmac said:

Wow, this is pretty interesting..

http://www.smh.com.au/afl/cas-concern-over-why-bombers-omitted-to-mention-thymosin-injections-20151204-glfnbm.html

The EFC players dod not mention the hundreds of injections nor thymosin when interviewed in 2012. The inference being that if there was nothing to worry about and they were being above board why wouldn't they have mentioned it....

Ooh, there is some pain to come...

 

 

 

Well where does this leave us? I suggest that the issues canvassed earlier in this post regarding the coaching of witnesses being schooled by the EFC/Hird PR machines (so criticised by some on here) are coming into stark reality. Their testimonies are remarkably consistent, even in their lying. Well what a surprise, and what a surprise too (not) that WADA picked it up and the CAS Arbitrators recognise it.

In this, we have to be aware that all this is orchestrated: WADA will have deliberately leaked this to Caro who has duly reported it. It will have made the HIRD/AFL wall go into free fall, and helped prepare the football public for the inevitable guilty verdict. 

 

Interesting though the the last line about everyone being upbeat about the outcome. I suggest a straight plant from the AFL PR department - Liz Lukin at her finest!

"Two Essendon players whose names have not been made public returned elevated levels ofThymosin Beta 4 in frozen urine samples which were retested by WADA in Germany."

 

Does this not mean the Club goes down....??

 

31 minutes ago, rjay said:

It's getting very interesting now...and Caro with the first leak from the hearing.

Did it come from the AFL or player managers???

I would suggest WADA. One of their judicious leaks. Put the scares right up the Hird/EFC camp- they are rightly [censored] themselves

4 hours ago, ManDee said:

 

I know you meant lawyers Beeb but I would go so far as to say about half of the laywers lose in every criminal case.

 

 

Edit:-  remove repeated word.

Exactly. 

27 minutes ago, Dees2014 said:

I would suggest WADA. One of their judicious leaks. Put the scares right up the Hird/EFC camp- they are rightly [censored] themselves

Yes ...two can play this game. 

The worm has turned.

39 minutes ago, Sir Why You Little said:

"Two Essendon players whose names have not been made public returned elevated levels ofThymosin Beta 4 in frozen urine samples which were retested by WADA in Germany."

 

Does this not mean the Club goes down....??

 

I would think it puts the club in the sights for some penalties....and not the AFL type.

Remember. . ASADA hasn't  gone after the club......yet

30 minutes ago, Dees2014 said:

I would suggest WADA. One of their judicious leaks. Put the scares right up the Hird/EFC camp- they are rightly [censored] themselves

although caro does make explicit reference to comments made to her by player managers (who obviously got it from players who attended or their legal reps)

Edited December 4, 201510 yr by daisycutter

If the AFL Tribunal missed that obvious hole in the player's interviews they aren't the legal whizz-kids some would have us believe they are.

 

Edit to add: Or perhaps the evidence of those interviews wasn't presented by ASADA - either because they didn't know or were incompetent.  If they didn't know that's not a great sign either.

Edited December 4, 201510 yr by sue

11 minutes ago, beelzebub said:

 

 

11 minutes ago, beelzebub said:

I would think it puts the club in the sights for some penalties....and not the AFL type.

Remember. . ASADA hasn't  gone after the club......yet

Yes i know where it stands....But 2 Drug Cheats found in the same team means.....Big no no's doesn't it

We have all read that stipulation through the years of this ride....

14 minutes ago, sue said:

If the AFL Tribunal missed that obvious hole in the player's interviews they aren't the legal whizz-kids some would have us believe they are.

 

Edit to add: Or perhaps the evidence of those interviews wasn't presented by ASADA - either because they didn't know or were incompetent.  If they didn't know that's not a great sign either.

The AFL tribunal  missed nothing. More the point it didn't go looking !!

I know certain folk who visit these boards have knowledge of some of the 3 wise ones. Id be asking them over that single malt... what gives !!

18 minutes ago, Sir Why You Little said:

 

Yes i know where it stands....But 2 Drug Cheats found in the same team means.....Big no no's doesn't it

We have all read that stipulation through the years of this ride....

I, like you ( and no doubt other interested  observers  ) will be very interested  to see how this particular  aspect plays out.

 

http://giphy.com/gifs/love-extra-butter-z66wZincEFYYg

 

This is WADA right now......

 

(maybe someone can teach me how to directly post a gif on the new site huh?)

9 minutes ago, beelzebub said:

The AFL tribunal  missed nothing. More the point it didn't go looking !!

I know certain folk who visit these boards have knowledge of some of the 3 wise ones. Id be asking them over that single malt... what gives !!

I wouldn't buy a single malt for any of them. 

2 minutes ago, faultydet said:

http://giphy.com/gifs/love-extra-butter-z66wZincEFYYg

 

This is WADA right now......

 

(maybe someone can teach me how to directly post a gif on the new site huh?)

Just waiting...only a few more days....
Patience Monty....

Just now, Sir Why You Little said:

Just waiting...only a few more days....
Patience Monty....

Like i said earier SWYL, i'm hoping it drags on now. Makes any punishment more harsh if its "in season"

8 minutes ago, faultydet said:

Like i said earier SWYL, i'm hoping it drags on now. Makes any punishment more harsh if its "in season"

Sure nothing like sleepless nights with LBM...?

Just now, Sir Why You Little said:

Sure nothing like sleepless nights with LBM...?

lost me mate.

 

LBM?

2 minutes ago, faultydet said:

 

 

2 minutes ago, faultydet said:

lost me mate.

 

LBM?

Look it up...It will make sense....

3 minutes ago, Sir Why You Little said:

 

Look it up...It will make sense....

Ha!

 

'onya google.

 

Nice one Sir

5 minutes ago, faultydet said:

Ha!

 

'onya google.

 

Nice one Sir

Be getting rather tense at the Airport now....

"The past and present Essendon players and the AFL had remained hopeful that even if found guilty of doping violations they were unlikely to miss football games. This followed submissions from the AFL and ASADA.

However all parties remain less optimistic following the CAS hearing."

 

And so they should.

Again, there are some who would say the players have nothing to answer for, and the CLUB, dribbles the same line over and over. "the supplements were all legal"

 

Oh really? So legal, and above board, that EVERY SINGLE player interviewed, neglected to mention them, in an interview with ASADA, about the taking of DRUGS?!?!?!?!

 

Jesus, the mind boggles that anyone can give these blokes the time of day. Every step of the way, they have been uncooperative, and boy oh boy, isn't that being generous?

 

32 minutes ago, faultydet said:

Like i said earier SWYL, i'm hoping it drags on now. Makes any punishment more harsh if its "in season"

Well, we now have something of a vested interest in this. For our and Melksham's sakes, I'd prefer it was as early as possible, especially if the ban pans out to 13 - 14 months (18 months, minus the 4 ½ months provisional). He would miss 2016, but how much of 2017 he misses would depend on when the axe falls.

1 minute ago, bing181 said:

Well, we now have something of a vested interest in this. For our and Melksham's sakes, I'd prefer it was as early as possible, especially if the ban pans out to 13 - 14 months (18 months, minus the 4 ½ months provisional). He would miss 2016, but how much of 2017 he misses would depend on when the axe falls.

With every new bit of info that i read, I really cant see this going any other way than a full 2 year ban, less time served.

 

Its an absolute joke to think that there would be any discounts, when CAS have just uncovered evidence of secrets, and half truths. 

 

Dots joined.

 

Guilty as hell.