Well judging from the texts Hird was sure it was the pies and the cats...

4 minutes ago, DemonAndrew said:

Well judging from the texts Hird was sure it was the pies and the cats...

There was another one i was told....Have won a lot of Flags lately...

44 minutes ago, Sir Why You Little said:

There was another one i was told....Have won a lot of Flags lately...

That puts a line through us.

1 hour ago, daisycutter said:

the lack of mention/blame/investigation of dank by officialdom and the media is certainly curious and tempts one to think they have something to fear from him, either costly litigation or that he has knowledge of things that would embarass or incriminate other parties. the constant deflection and blame shifting is quite obvious 

What he has is the list of the various substances actually put into the players. The thought of that getting out terrifies the EFC (and by extension the AFL). They have gotten off lightly. No way known they will do anything to upset Dank's apple cart.

Just now, Ted Fidge said:

What he has is the list of the various substances actually put into the players. The thought of that getting out terrifies the EFC (and by extension the AFL). They have gotten off lightly. No way known they will do anything to upset Dank's apple cart.

think he's got more than that, ted.

The self interest in all of this beggars believe.

 

Is the game too dirty to follow now, like religion and politics or will all of this just go away when the ball is bounced and we start having our right full success.

I really want the ACC to finish the job. They could not have just stopped recording; or is this just Rulesgate waiting to blow.

6 minutes ago, willmoy said:

Is the game too dirty to follow now, like religion and politics or will all of this just go away when the ball is bounced and we start having our right full success.

I really want the ACC to finish the job. They could not have just stopped recording; or is this just Rulesgate waiting to blow.

I think it's a lot bigger than AFL 'willmoy', I hope they do tip the bucket & maybe we will find a few interesting people caught up in the mess.

6 minutes ago, willmoy said:

Is the game too dirty to follow now, like religion and politics or will all of this just go away when the ball is bounced and we start having our right full success.

I really want the ACC to finish the job. They could not have just stopped recording; or is this just Rulesgate waiting to blow.

Once the TV Rights deals were into the $ Billions it was always going to get dirty. I am just a little suprised at how quickly it has happened. 

The AFL funding the PA is just wrong...

21 minutes ago, Sir Why You Little said:

Once the TV Rights deals were into the $ Billions it was always going to get dirty. I am just a little suprised at how quickly it has happened. 

The AFL funding the PA is just wrong...

Was all gonna go to sheet as soon as Vlad ticked off on gambling.

 

Still can't get anyone to reasonably explain to me why the WADA code doesn't suit team sports.

 

20 minutes ago, biggestred said:

Still can't get anyone to reasonably explain to me why the WADA code doesn't suit team sports.

 

That's because it does. 

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/business/opinion/essendon-doping-case-34-players-await-next-stage-of-saga/news-story/63741caa2d4aed085fe7796b742e13ad#load-story-comments

53 minutes ago, biggestred said:

Still can't get anyone to reasonably explain to me why the WADA code doesn't suit team sports.

 

I think it does.

However the argument I've read is the coercive power sports teams have over their athletes and the athletes submitting to team directions. Pretty weak argument if you ask me but it's the only one I've heard. 

1 minute ago, Ethan Tremblay said:

I think it does.

However the argument I've read is the coercive power sports teams have over their athletes and the athletes submitting to team directions. Pretty weak argument if you ask me but it's the only one I've heard. 

That's the exact reason the code is written how it is - that each athlete has personal and total responsibility to what goes into their bodies.

6 minutes ago, biggestred said:

That's the exact reason the code is written how it is - that each athlete has personal and total responsibility to what goes into their bodies.

Yep, it's a pretty ridiculous argument. Like I said, it's the only one I've heard. 

Has anyone working in an AFL club come out and said the CAS ruling was the right call?

 

17 minutes ago, Cards13 said:

Has anyone working in an AFL club come out and said the CAS ruling was the right call?

 

Kochie?

This is damming in itself. 

Will we get a top up player ... have Melbourne FC asked?? I thought Matt Dea despatched by Tigers was a good rebounding defender. Bombers have grabbed him. 

Mitch Golby or Brodie Martin would be good backups in Melkshams absence. I do not want to see Matt Jones or Terlich coughing up the footy time after time.

I'd rather we were able to list another rookie.

The next 18yo Aaron davey might be out there

There is still 9 weeks before the season starts

a lot to play out yet. 

9 hours ago, biggestred said:

Still can't get anyone to reasonably explain to me why the WADA code doesn't suit team sports.

 

Because (1) we don't need it because we're AUSSIES and AUSSIES don't cheat, and (2) an AFL team got caught. Like dolphin in a tuna net.

Both in violation of the Australian Constitution.

9 hours ago, Ethan Tremblay said:

I think it does.

However the argument I've read is the coercive power sports teams have over their athletes and the athletes submitting to team directions. Pretty weak argument if you ask me but it's the only one I've heard. 

The WADA code also includes the expectation that sanctions will be applied against teams where individuals (2 or more) are caught out. The fact that nobody seems to be pursuing this at the moment doesn't make the code itself inadequate.

The issue I have with this rule about top up players is that the AFL has gone out and given the so far exclusive right to Essendon to search out these players. This gives the perpetrator of the offence, a head start over the other clubs who have lost players but were not offenders which puts them at a disadvantage.

Moreover, the decision to not take into consideration the fact that Essendon will potentially have 12 players coming back in 2017 as a factor in their draft position is also unfair given that it will likely put the perpetrators at a further advantage over rival clubs.

It really is outrageous.

13 hours ago, Ethan Tremblay said:

I think it does.

However the argument I've read is the coercive power sports teams have over their athletes and the athletes submitting to team directions. Pretty weak argument if you ask me but it's the only one I've heard. 

That's not a problem with the code, it is a problem with the sport. Arguing this is really arguing that we should be allowed to juice up our players and you should ban is not the players, so the team still gets the benefit. Laughable and exactly what the code aims to stamp out. 

Pretty much every very argument I have heard as to why it doesn't suit is from people with little understanding of why the code is how it is, and everyone of these thinks the players are innocent and are spitting the dummy.