I am wary of sharp tongued female lawyers OD, they are particularly dangerous creatures. They are adept at suing every Tom, [censored] & Harry when they feel or their messianic client feels personally affronted.

I knew Ernest it was a small joke.

I do however understand your caution

I find the leaking of this information intriguing. The Leak has had to of come from the AFL, and perhaps the Tribunal it's self. What purpose would this serve? It taints the whole process more than we already suspected and makes the AFL's processess bereft of integrity. FIFA looks almost saintly in comparison. Maybe Seb can get a gig at the AFL? I can only theorise that some of the people involved in the process aren't very happy with the way this has gone down and are now tipping a bucket on the whole side show. I do love a good conspiracy theory.

Maybe someone has a conscious Of?

AFL perhaps to be mentioned in WADA dispatches as being incompetent for want of better word

and covering their collective future 'rses.

It was leaked to the herald sun aka hird newsletter so presumably someone thinks this exonerates the players

I think you are right, the campaign is well under way for the players. Listen to Pat Smith this morning and he's on this bandwagon now...

Maybe someone has a conscious Of?

now that would be something, I doubt it is in their lexicon. like OF I find the leak intriguing. it does taint the whole thing even more if that is possible.

now that would be something, I doubt it is in their lexicon. like OF I find the leak intriguing. it does taint the whole thing even more if that is possible.

Yes probably a silly idea

by treating all offences as an aggregate, rather than individually accumulating they avoid the issue of being taken to task on any individual offence

as some offences involve ess players and some don't and by rating attempted trafficking concurrent with actual trafficking it doesn't in itself strongly implicate players as such

it does sound apologetic re players (maybe fairly) but avoids any reference to wada code where the player is ultimately personally responsible (ie guilty) for taking any banned substance

the degree of being duped/mislead etc is only valid in terms of sentence not guilt/innocence. all this is not discussed but is left as seeming apologia for the players

So,if you really read it carefully, i don't think it helps the players at all, as it seems to increase the likelihood that the players were given banned substances

so if the hun thinks this helps players they may need to rethink

Maybe someone has a conscious Of?

As improbable as it sounds it may just be the case. Imagine being the Integrity Officer at the AFL, what a horribly conflicted position that would be. I can just see Gil now."Look the other way Brett while me and Mr little sort this one out"

Poor poor Essendon.

All they did was sign up for Dank's "Competitive Advantage Package" and that evil Dank colluded with a rogue pharmacist to inject them with god knows what.

Ask Hird, he'll tell ya, "we don't know what they were injected with"

Let's ban Dank and then we can all go back to sleep.

by treating all offences as an aggregate, rather than individually accumulating they avoid the issue of being taken to task on any individual offence

as some offences involve ess players and some don't and by rating attempted trafficking concurrent with actual trafficking it doesn't in itself strongly implicate players as such

it does sound apologetic re players (maybe fairly) but avoids any reference to wada code where the player is ultimately personally responsible (ie guilty) for taking any banned substance

the degree of being duped/mislead etc is only valid in terms of sentence not guilt/innocence. all this is not discussed but is left as seeming apologia for the players

So,if you really read it carefully, i don't think it helps the players at all, as it seems to increase the likelihood that the players were given banned substances

so if the hun thinks this helps players they may need to rethink

by treating all offences as an aggregate, rather than individually accumulating they avoid the issue of being taken to task on any individual offence

as some offences involve ess players and some don't and by rating attempted trafficking concurrent with actual trafficking it doesn't in itself strongly implicate players as such

it does sound apologetic re players (maybe fairly) but avoids any reference to wada code where the player is ultimately personally responsible (ie guilty) for taking any banned substance

the degree of being duped/mislead etc is only valid in terms of sentence not guilt/innocence. all this is not discussed but is left as seeming apologia for the players

So,if you really read it carefully, i don't think it helps the players at all, as it seems to increase the likelihood that the players were given banned substances

so if the hun thinks this helps players they may need to rethink

The players had the chance to collectively claim they were duped and would have copped a light penalty at the beginning. Most likely served in the off season. Too late for them to claim that now. Of course Hird would have had to resign if that was the case.

Edited June 16, 201510 yr by america de cali

Let the good times roll!

Why is no-one talking Collingwood getting a team sanction?

The media are being wilfully blind.....

The players had the chance to collectively claim they were duped and would have copped a light penalty at the beginning. Most likely served in the off season. Too late for them to claim that now. Of course Hird would have had to resign if that was the case.

that's very true

however i wouldn't discount the possibility of a reduction if found guilty by cas

doubt it would be as generous as the (supposed) offer they were originally made though

anyway pretty sure cas doesn't take much notice of the hun or essendon supporter propaganda mills

Lance? Hello? Are you still here?

Text messages between Dank and Alavi about mixing Thymosin and AOD but I don't believe the AFL Tribunal was comfortably satisfied that Dank went as far as administering TB4 into the players' bodies. He just ordered the stuff from a Chinese supplier which manufactures TB4, bragged about it to the media until told it was S2 and talked to the compounding chemist about testing something on players but the Tribunal got him for something else. A bit like getting Al Capone for tax evasion but not for all of the other crimes he committed.

Dank's dark deeds documented . . . but players took nothing, oh really??

HERALDSUN 16/6Tribunal chief says the Bombers ‘swallowed’ Dank’s supplements program

THE secret AFL trial of Stephen Dank has been blown open by the leaking of details of the confidential hearings.

After months of AFL tribunal deliberations over Dank’s role in the Essendon supplements program, the Herald Sun

has obtained the transcript of last Tuesday’s penalty hearing.

http://resources.news.com.au/files/2015/06/15/1227399/212783-hs-file-transcript-2015.pdf

WOW!!

To me, that removes any doubt that the Essendon players took TB4, and they probably took a whole lot of other banned substances too. I can't believe this was leaked into the public domain.

Saint Joan De Dank at the Stake...

Text messages between Dank and Alavi about mixing Thymosin and AOD but I don't believe the AFL Tribunal was comfortably satisfied that Dank went as far as administering TB4 into the players' bodies. He just ordered the stuff from a Chinese supplier which manufactures TB4, bragged about it to the media until told it was S2 and talked to the compounding chemist about testing something on players but the Tribunal got him for something else. A bit like getting Al Capone for tax evasion but not for all of the other crimes he committed.

and said to a player "have you had your thymo injection today?"

And Hird was across ALL of it.

"Bring the good stuff we are playing Carlton this week"

CHeating scum should be banned for life.

And Hird was across ALL of it.

"Bring the good stuff we are playing Carlton this week"

CHeating scum should be banned for life.

And the prjck, the one who said he would take full responsibility, hasn't, and as far as I know has never tried to explain what he meant by this.

Sorry, what?

what i was told in early 2014 was correct

The Hun Back page i am still trying to locate

I read it but stupidly didn't keep it

Can anybody explain why this latest revelation wasn't front and centre on AFL360 tonight? Genuine question. I know I'm naive, but it doesn't make sense to me.

Can anybody explain why this latest revelation wasn't front and centre on AFL360 tonight? Genuine question. I know I'm naive, but it doesn't make sense to me.

Makes perfect sense. The media, EFC and AFL from day one have tried to seperate Dank and EFC and the players. They have tried to make it two seperate issues. Today they made yet another move to make Dank look like the bad guy (which he probably is). Wait a week or so and there will be more about how hard done by the players are.

It is all to get the public to think how they want the public to think. EFC has been massively successful in their media campaign from day one. This is just another example of it continuing.

Why is no-one talking Collingwood getting a team sanction?

The media are being wilfully blind.....

Because

a) that rule is at the discretion of the AFL, so not a sure thing, and the team sanction could be anything if applied.

b) Given AFL teams play with 22 players, and these two were clearly not part off a team doping exercise it seems a team sanction is not warranted.

c) They did not play, they tested positive in the off season. What type of sanction would you give them? Loss of premiership points for the fans they didn't play? Loss of prize money from the NAB cup they didn't play in?

Team sanctions are there to ban systematic doping teams or strip results from teams where multiple players were using banned substances which may have given them an advantage. Not to punish a club where players acted individually.