19 hours ago, DemonAndrew said:

Lots of bomber fans running with the 'wada code not set up for teams' line. Wada they talking about, honestly...

 

Trying to equate it to knowing what's in a flu shot is shocking too; if a gp gave me an std rather than a flu shot I'd sue the living pants off them - which is what you'd expect will happen to the bombers shortly.

It's a moot point really. It all comes down the individual anyway. Just because the individual resides in a team, that shouldn't absolve them of responsibility. Many Essendon fans don't seem to get that. Zaka didn't take drugs, so there is no real excuse for the rest of them IMO. The players needed to do more research, ask more questions, and not be so quick to accept the injections of questionable drugs. Those individuals the players trusted are still peddling out the same line about WADA being at fault. I think the only way the players can get some closure over this is to accept that you are ultimately responsible for what goes in your body. Not WADA, not the AFL, not EFC, but you.

4 hours ago, Mach5 said:

Those inside the club actually were expecting a good result ...

That's about the crux of it right there.

They didn't get it back in 2012, and they still don't get it.

The Director General of WADA is on the 3AW Breakfast Show NOW!

9 hours ago, Cards13 said:

Do you think Hird (not Doc Reid, which I'm surprised about) and or others in positions of power at Ess at the time will get penalised further? And if yes who by? 

I do believe Hird should be banned for life from this.

As I said earlier I think it is an open question now whether ASADA moves on Hird. In my view their statement post the ruling does not necessarily preclude them issuing further infraction notices on Hird and others from the regime (I think they should as the promoters and instigators should be prosecuted and punished - more so than the players). 

In any case I have no doubt a number of players will take legal action against Hird, and the damages could well be in the $millions. 

51 minutes ago, CBDees said:

The Director General of WADA is on the 3AW Breakfast Show NOW!

What was said?

Do I have this correct - The EFC Team doctor was excluded from the whole Dank process, and was not made aware of it by anyone in the club, by any of the players?

Surely, that defies belief.

At a minimum, wouldn't the players expect him to be involved in this, if it was all above board?

 

1 minute ago, Green Demon said:

Do I have this correct - The EFC Team doctor was excluded from the whole Dank process, and was not made aware of it by anyone in the club, by any of the players?

Surely, that defies belief.

At a minimum, wouldn't the players expect him to be involved in this, if it was all above board?

 

Apparently... Lloydy said last night he is amazed not 1 player informed Reid.

 

the other part of it that astounds me is the duty of care aspect from Reid. Writing a letter is enough... If I somehow (no one told me but I somehow got wind of it) knew of something illegal going on in my organisation (which then turned into a protracted and costly legal case against said company) and just wrote a letter, I'd be turfed for negligence.

16 hours ago, Seraph said:

Essendon presser now...

Still claiming innocence for the players. Idiots. 

 

11 minutes ago, Cards13 said:

Apparently... Lloydy said last night he is amazed not 1 player informed Reid.

 

the other part of it that astounds me is the duty of care aspect from Reid. Writing a letter is enough... If I somehow (no one told me but I somehow got wind of it) knew of something illegal going on in my organisation (which then turned into a protracted and costly legal case against said company) and just wrote a letter, I'd be turfed for negligence.

Cheers. He appears to failed in his duties, also. I find it hard to believe that we are getting the full picture, regarding Reid.

Assuming there is one, what is the basis of the line rolled out endlessly that WADA doesn't suit team sports?  What part of the code is supposedly so inappropriate?  Has anyone ever detailed that rather than just floated it as an excuse?

Bloke on RN says that at least oen player has asked the AFLPA to fund action against the AFL.  Will be interesting to see if this 'union' will actually take on the bosses rather than WADA.

One of the main features of this saga is the total collapse the public has in its confidence of the truth of what they are told by the football media.

We've previously seen commentators with agendas but in this case we were often blatantly lied to by the media who took one side or the other. A reading of the CAS decision should leave people with no doubt as to the involvement of propaganda involved in the affair.

Of course, it was Robbo who took the cake throughout and, he was at his very best last night on AFL360 when he suggested it was a split decision by four judges. For the record, it was a unanimous decision on guilt by all three judges with one judge believing no significant fault applied.

Kudos however, should go to the Fairfax investigative team of Baker and McKenzie who exposed Dank and his ignorance of the legal status of TB4 very early on in this piece. Once it was published, the writing was on the wall as far as I was concerned. 

35 minutes ago, Green Demon said:

Do I have this correct - The EFC Team doctor was excluded from the whole Dank process, and was not made aware of it by anyone in the club, by any of the players?

Surely, that defies belief.

At a minimum, wouldn't the players expect him to be involved in this, if it was all above board?

 

"The players were duped" .... Ha. Or could it be ... the players were the dupers too.

Yes, for all the praise heaped upon Caro, she seems to have merely taken the significant work done by fairfax's investigative team and added commentary to it.

 

The whole thing is a sorry state of affairs and I am glad it's now officially concluded. 

19 minutes ago, Green Demon said:

Cheers. He appears to failed in his duties, also. I find it hard to believe that we are getting the full picture, regarding Reid.

The only way we were going to find out was when the AFL charged him two years ago. But then backed down immediately when he threatened counter action. They were more scared of what he had on them!

Some drips and drabs may come out in future actions against the club. but it appears that the doc has wriggled off the hook.

18 minutes ago, sue said:

Assuming there is one, what is the basis of the line rolled out endlessly that WADA doesn't suit team sports?  What part of the code is supposedly so inappropriate?  Has anyone ever detailed that rather than just floated it as an excuse?

It's become urban myth, hasn't it? That it was crafted with the Olympics in mind, and two year/four year penalties fit in with the Olympic cycle, and the worst druggies are all Olympic athletes, and, and ... (hand waving here) ... therefore it must have no applicability to non-Olympic sports. Busted syllogism.

It's leapt on by EFC apologists, and small-minded journos who otherwise should have no allegiance to drug cheats, because Hird can't have done anything wrong, nor the EFC, nor the players ... it's Dank! It's the AFL! It's the system, man! It's .... it's WADA themselves!!

From that point, tailor the facts to suit the conclusion.

28 minutes ago, sue said:

Assuming there is one, what is the basis of the line rolled out endlessly that WADA doesn't suit team sports?  What part of the code is supposedly so inappropriate?  Has anyone ever detailed that rather than just floated it as an excuse?

The comment I (think) heard on Channel 7 last night was that one of the judges believed that 7 of the 32 players shouldn't receive the same sanctions. WADA code apparently doesn't accommodate separate outcomes. If that is true, I have a problem with that.

Been scouring the CAS findings here  http://www.tas-cas.org/fileadmin/user_upload/Arbitral_Award_WADA_ESSENDON.pdf .. might have to wait until I retire to read it all, lol.

20 minutes ago, Whispering_Jack said:

One of the main features of this saga is the total collapse the public has in its confidence of the truth of what they are told by the football media.

We've previously seen commentators with agendas but in this case we were often blatantly lied to by the media who took one side or the other. A reading of the CAS decision should leave people with no doubt as to the involvement of propaganda involved in the affair.

Of course, it was Robbo who took the cake throughout and, he was at his very best last night on AFL360 when he suggested it was a split decision by four judges. For the record, it was a unanimous decision on guilt by all three judges with one judge believing no significant fault applied.

Kudos however, should go to the Fairfax investigative team of Baker and McKenzie who exposed Dank and his ignorance of the legal status of TB4 very early on in this piece. Once it was published, the writing was on the wall as far as I was concerned. 

I think credit should also be given to Caro and Patrick Smith in this saga, both of who have doggedly gone after the truth, when I am sure, at least in Smith's case, he would have got less than full some support from the powers that be at News Ltd. 

44 minutes ago, Green Demon said:

Cheers. He appears to failed in his duties, also. I find it hard to believe that we are getting the full picture, regarding Reid.

CAS put a fair bit of stress on the efforts made to keep Reid in the dark about the programme. Whether Reid managed to find out anything or not seems to have been secondary to painting a picture about secrecy and about the deceptions the players were party to.

There's a lot of talk already (in fact, there has been for a long time) about the players suing the club. But I'd be interested to know what the legal minds on Demonland think of the chances of success, given the extent to which the CAS findings implicate the players in maintaining secrecy, not checking substances etc. This is a step well beyond signing consent forms.

Added: this emphasis by CAS on the players themselves is also an obvious case against the 'not suitable for teams' line now being run since it places responsibility and consequences firmly in the hands of individual players.

I find it difficult to believe that a Team doctor would not show more interest in what is going on, he obviously had some concerns, what was the basis for those concerns. So he writes one letter and figures I don't need to do anything more? 

How can he be an effective team doctor without knowing what the players are injecting so he can consider the impact that these drugs could have on any treatment he prescribes. 

I also find it utterly incompressible that no-one other than Danks knows what they really took, or has records, receipts, etc.. and that if they took nothing illegal then why has Danks not come out with the records to prove it. I would assume that as his employer at the time and as the matter is about health and safety that Essendon could have tried to legally compel him to provide that information. but they did not and again I wonder why?

20 minutes ago, DemonAndrew said:

Yes, for all the praise heaped upon Caro, she seems to have merely taken the significant work done by fairfax's investigative team and added commentary to it.

 

The whole thing is a sorry state of affairs and I am glad it's now officially concluded. 

Not sure that is entirely true. She was onto this story long before the Fairfax Investigative Team got hold of it. True, McKenzie extracted information out of Dank which no-one else was able to, but Caro has been a crusader about this from the beginning often in the face of undisguised hostility from the "AFL boys' club". But then again, that is nothing new for Caro.

I can't understand the players legal position. This judgement finds them guilty of being implicated in the doping either by omission or commission so I am not sure they will have a leg to stand on.

20 minutes ago, sue said:

Bloke on RN says that at least oen player has asked the AFLPA to fund action against the AFL.  Will be interesting to see if this 'union' will actually take on the bosses rather than WADA.

Paul Marsh: Hello, Mr McLachlan?

Gil McLachlan: Yes. Who is this?

PM: It's Paul.

GM: Paul?

PM: Paul. Paul Marsh.

GM: Oh yes. Paul. Let's see. The pH in the upstairs pool is a bit low this week. And the hedge along the side needs a bit of a trim.

PM: No, Mr McLachlan. Paul Marsh. I'm not calling about any gardening.

GM: .... sorry?

PM: I'm from the AFL Players Association.

GM: From the AFL ... oh yes. Of course. Why are you call--

PM: It's the Essendon players, Mr McLachlan. They're going to launch legal action against the AFL!

GM: Ha, ha. How cute. But you didn't call me just to tell me that, did you?

PM: Mr McLachlan, they want me to pay for it! The AFLPA, that is.

GM: Paul. I'd think very carefully about whether you're acting in the best interests of the body you represent.

PM: But Mr McLachlan, that's what I mean! I have to at least look like I'm sticking up for the players!

GM: It is a little tricky. Hmm ... let me think .... here's what we'll do. I'll slash your budget down to a pittance. So you can't even buy your lunch. Then you can't possibly pay for legal action. Or any other nonsense ideas  these players get.

PM: Yes, Mr McLachlan. Thank you, Mr McLachlan.

GM: And Paul?

PM: Yes, Mr McLachlan?

GM: Don't forget that pool.

PM: No, Mr McLachlan. Sorry, Mr McLachlan.

13 hours ago, drdrake said:

Utmost respect for Tim Watson. To man up and do the news and the special on now would be extremely tuff.  Ultimate professional

You serious. He is a parasite on the news community. He was giving "in depth truth" when there was a conflict of interest. He still thinks they are innocent and that there is good chance Jab Watson will keep his brownlow. He should step down from his media job. He has been nothing but a disgrace throughout this whole saga.

After watching/listening to a few media opinions about the verdict really impressed with Rebecca Wilson (Sydney Telegraph), Caro Wilson (Last night on FC) and believe it or not The Purple Headed Warrior (Last night on FC). All really understand where the AFL sits in relation to WADA/CAS, and how arrogant EFC has been throughout the saga.