On 04/12/2015 at 10:34, 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.

Melksham should have demanded actual proof, of the legality of the drugs he was being injected with. His fault, and we are about to pay the price.

I'll be calling for Goodwins head on a plate.

Isn't this over yet!!

  On 04/12/2015 at 10:34, bing181 said:

Well, we now have something of a vested interest in this. For our and Melksham's sakes, ...

Too bad for us. We can't let our own vested interest affect our desire for a just outcome.

If the players did wrong, they deserve to go. If the support staff did wrong, they deserve to go.

The fact that we will suffer should not alter our steadfastness. Otherwise we're on the road to corruption too.

  On 04/12/2015 at 10:49, DemonOX said:

Isn't this over yet!!

wont be over for 2 years.

 

Then we have the legal battles between the player managers, and the AFL, and essedon. We will be enjoying this for a decade.

  On 04/12/2015 at 10:34, 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.

I think the issue is bigger than our vested interest 'bing181'...if he was stupid enough to tow the party line then he deserves all he gets if found guilty. I hope we have good reason to trade him in though.

  On 04/12/2015 at 00:01, 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" ?

But can you find a carrier pigeon to take it? 

Let's just pretend Melksham did his ACL this week

if he doesn't play for 18 months we will survive. 

What James Hird allowed at Essendrug is much bigger

trading Melksham was always stupid in my opinion. But it was done. 

  On 04/12/2015 at 12:03, Sir Why You Little said:

Let's just pretend Melksham did his ACL this week

if he doesn't play for 18 months we will survive. 

What James Hird orchestrated at Essendrug is much bigger

trading Melksham was always stupid in my opinion. But it was done. 

edited

Honestly the dots are so close together it's like playing join the dots on a redhead. You might as well dip them in paint.

And i should know, im a ranga and my arms look like the top of a flathead. 

#freckles

So...just thinking through the next steps of this and coming up with questions .

If they're found guilty and it seems pretty certain now (no big surprise to any one there except slobbo) they sue the club for  lost income, lost reputation, damage to health. This could be really big money when multiplied by 34. Im not sure I understand why there is also talk of them suing the  AFL? But if the AFL dont wear it... it could potentially  destroy the bombers. 

Also, some question from the tiny angle of our perspective. If Melksham sues Essundone...could that partially or fully cover his years pay this year?  Will we also be allowed to secure another player in his place? 

The more worrying aspect to this is if Goodwin also goes down. Many will scream at the club about his appointment but at the time his signing was massive.  Would McCartney step in ( giving us yet ANOTHER care taker coach) would Roos continue (highly doubtful) or do we terminate Goodwin and find another? thoughts??

After reading todays reports and the players completely neglecting to mention to drug testers about some of the injections, I withdrawal any and all defence I have made recently of them and have no sympathy at all towards them

  On 04/12/2015 at 12:59, Wells 11 said:

So...just thinking through the next steps of this and coming up with questions .

If they're found guilty and it seems pretty certain now (no big surprise to any one there except slobbo) they sue the club for  lost income, lost reputation, damage to health. This could be really big money when multiplied by 34. Im not sure I understand why there is also talk of them suing the  AFL? But if the AFL dont wear it... it could potentially  destroy the bombers. 

Also, some question from the tiny angle of our perspective. If Melksham sues Essundone...could that partially or fully cover his years pay this year?  Will we also be allowed to secure another player in his place? 

The more worrying aspect to this is if Goodwin also goes down. Many will scream at the club about his appointment but at the time his signing was massive.  Would McCartney step in ( giving us yet ANOTHER care taker coach) would Roos continue (highly doubtful) or do we terminate Goodwin and find another? thoughts??

If they sue essendon there is NO guarantee they will win.

After all - they were responsible for what went into their bodies...

  On 04/12/2015 at 10:34, 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.

couldnt give a rats about Milkshake.   Never expected him to play in 2016  ( at least ) anyway

I'm finally starting to get a really good feeling about this.

 

This was, for a while at least, looking like the scum had written a "how to" manual, for sporting clubs worldwide, to cheat with illegal, performance enhancing drugs, and get away with it.

 

It now shows the signs that this may not be the case after all, and that real justice might actually be done. Lets be honest here, and put all AFL, or Australian bias aside. Essedon appear to have cheated, and on a massive scale, and the publicly reported evidence showed that there was indeed an attempt by the players to cover it up.

 

Unprecedented in Australian sport, and also unprecedented in scale. Lets hope the penalties are also unprecedented in worldwide team sports, once the real and true verdict is brought down. Take it completely out of the afl's hands, and give the CLUB the full 2 year ban. Filthy scum deserve nothing less.

  On 04/12/2015 at 09:10, beelzebub said:

Yes ...two can play this game. 

The worm has turned.

The worm has not turned .........  he is still denying everything. 

This whole  saga reminds of those films where the murderous  felons think they have got away with their heinous  deed. That body will never be found , all wrapped  up and weighted down. 

Then one day a hiker....the inquisitive  type...notices something odd caught by a branch. 

And then it all unravels from there...

Camera.....action !!!  (Popcorn  )

When Milkshake is banned.  If Goody proves a baddy, well the club can just deal with it. 

If they've  been stupid enough to bring this upon themselves/ourselves  then they can bloody well fix it.

I think in some ways the club has fallen into footy groupthink  about this. The AFL is about to be taught a long overdue lesson. 

Can't  wait for the chorus of indignation to rise from their bleeding hearts.

I can hear however the warbling of the Fat Lady warming up.

It's  curtains for Essendon...and their numnut players. 

More fool us.

The excuses should prove entertaining  at least

  On 04/12/2015 at 13:12, biggestred said:

If they sue essendon there is NO guarantee they will win.

After all - they were responsible for what went into their bodies...

A truly double  edged sword if ever .

  On 04/12/2015 at 13:12, biggestred said:

If they sue essendon there is NO guarantee they will win.

After all - they were responsible for what went into their bodies...

As far as drugs in sport, yes, they were responsible.

But Essendon has just admitted to Worksafe that they failed to provide their players with a safe workplace. Leading those players to lose income, reputation, etc ... ugly ugly ugly. Every ambulance chasing lawyer in Victoria will be on realestate dot com this morning, scouting out their new holiday house.

It's not clear from Caro's article why the players were called upon to testify but when a court  or tribunal finds some of the evidence "troubling" you would have to start feeling somewhat uncomfortable if you are charged with an offence.

I was already comfortably satisfied about the players' guilt but this new "evidence" doesn't seem to help the players because there are certain inferences now open to CAS upon which to draw in considering the guilt of the players that probably weren't taken into account by the Tribunal. It wouldn't help the players on the question of their penalty if found guilty if CAS concluded that the players failed to mention the so called "good thymosin" when discussing the supplements they had taken. After all, the obligation on the part of the players to be aware of what they have ingested into their bodies is paramount. 

Not looking good for Jobe; nor for 11 others at his club and a few elsewhere including one at Melbourne. 

In recent times, I've felt that the players might get off lightly because of the way the saga has dragged on (much of it due to the way their club, coaches and officials conducted themselves) but I can't see them getting off without serving some significant time. 

And as for Hird and Reid - they rightfully should, as suggested above, be suffering from loose bowel movements ATM.

Had a bit of a giggle when I read this one:

Collingwood feared Essendon's interest in suspended defender Lachlan Keeffe

I'd be happy if the players found to be misleading during interviews recieved 2 years less time served and those who were open re what they thought they were injected with had reduction from 2 years down to 6 months due to no significant fault and helping in identifying others, or effectively no additional time due to time served.

This ensures that players who tried to hide what they were given recieve the full penalty while those 'duped' recieved a reduction. The club admin would ultimately be penalised by lawsuits against the club and admin.

dot....dot, dot...........dot dot sot !!! 

  On 04/12/2015 at 23:34, chookrat said:

I'd be happy if the players found to be misleading during interviews recieved 2 years less time served and those who were open re what they thought they were injected with had reduction from 2 years down to 6 months due to no significant fault and helping in identifying others, or effectively no additional time due to time served.

If "time served" is taken into account, one hopes that it's noted that in this case, the time was out of season and involved a few relatively meaningless NAB Challenge games and the players could otherwise train and keep themselves fit for the season.

  On 04/12/2015 at 23:45, beelzebub said:

dot....dot, dot...........dot dot sot !!! 

Those dots are really needle marks