Tracey did a great job of asking and answering the questions.

I think it's called leading the witness isn't it 'Jack', 'Red'?

James did a great job of staying on message...the 34 players were innocent.

 

Turned it off already. She might as well have her hand in his pants.

Oooohhhhh haha brutal comment.

The one real positive is that he threw Ian Robson under the bus, I think he has managed to come up smelling of roses to date. A lot of mates in the media...

Be interesting to see if he fires back, I think he's too smart to engage in this and will ride it out though.

I didn't know about  how Hird can't be banned by WADA because those rules were not in place when the incident occurred

 

 

The one real positive is that he threw Ian Robson under the bus, I think he has managed to come up smelling of roses to date. A lot of mates in the media...

Be interesting to see if he fires back, I think he's too smart to engage in this and will ride it out though.

Yes i have always been amazed that Ian Robson just sailed off into the sunset and joined Melbourne Victory...

 

Yes i have always been amazed that Ian Rosin just sailed off into the sunset and joined Melbourne Victory...

His timing was impeccable unlike others.

Loved this Ted Richards (Swans) tweet:
 

 

 

Loved this Ted Richards (Swans) tweet:
 

 

Summed up beautifully....!!

my first question would have been

the Text Message "Get me the Good Stuff We are playing Carlton this week" did you send that to Stephen Dank...??

Hird "There was nothing in it for Danks to dope the players!!!! Why would he do it?"

 

James, it's called stupidity. There was a [censored] up. Dank made a colossal mistake. I cannot believe that the diet-ABC reporter failed to make reference to the smoking gun - and it's direct from the horse's mouth itself:

 

http://www.theage.com.au/afl/afl-news/the-science-of-stephen-dank-20130823-2shhd.html

what an insult and abuse of the ethics centre

"I don't believe it. Yes, there is a possibility [that the players were given illegal supplements] - no-one knows, except Stephen Dank, what they put in those injection."

 

This sums it up for me.

They are innocent 

But no one knows

I mean seriously

The more he talks, the more Hird is trashing his legacy.

A friend of mine who works as a writer and researcher in sports media, including footy, told me his view on the outcome of Essendon's doping saga was "nothing's changed". Meaning that the people at the top who should be banned and heavily fined have got off scott free, in most cases with substantial financial gain (eg. Hird $1 mill + paid o/s study when under AFL ban) or having moved on in their field of business (Robson, Evans, Bomber, etc) without penalty. He wasn't dismissing the guilt of the players, but pointed out they are the most vulnerable party in this debacle and are the ones being penalised. Even Dank can move on and make some money from the public speaking circuit.

Edited January 17, 20169 yr by Moonshadow

And unlike the Weapon, why hasn't Dank sued Essendon if he has nothing to hide?

 

And unlike the Weapon, why hasn't Dank sued Essendon if he has nothing to hide?

Of course. If Gerard Whately had done that IV....

Agreed WJ. Reid says he was out of the loop and deliberately sidestepped, Hird says he was right in the loop and OK'ed the program.

Overall, Hird said he'd made mistakes and carries a sense of responsibility and guilt. But still proclaims total innocence regarding any banned substances. Tracey Holmes didn't refer to one single paragraph from the CAS decision that would contradict this belief.

It was a poor piece of interviewing that apart from Reid gave no new understandings or information. All you could say really was that Hird looks exceptionally worn out.

Did he say anything about Corcoran?

 

Did he say anything about Corcoran?

Nothing derogatory 'Bob', as you probably know they are close and that's why Corcoran was back at EFC. Another great piece of governance...

 

I only caught the last few minutes, but heard him say he still had faith in what Stephen Dank was doing because "what would Stephen Dank have to gain from doping his players?"....seriously, what a moron. There is such an obvious answer to that question, I can only assume he actually knows the answer, but isn't letting on.

"what would Stephen Dank have to gain from doping his players?" is straight out of the spin manual. Turn around the allegation with a rhetorical question aimed at the allegation. It both avoids an answer and allows you to either jump away from the allegation or redefine the allegation so that you can fob it off with a pat answer. If there is no follow up question it's move-along-now, nothing-to-see.

 

 

Doesn't the ABC have to explain why it agreed to such an interview? Why was the interviewer not someone from an AFL background? Why not have a panel of interviewers? Why no follow-up questions?

The ABC has given JH a platform, that is not its role. I would like an explanation.

 

"what would Stephen Dank have to gain from doping his players?" is straight out of the spin manual. Turn around the allegation with a rhetorical question aimed at the allegation. It both avoids an answer and allows you to either jump away from the allegation or redefine the allegation so that you can fob it off with a pat answer. If there is no follow up question it's move-along-now, nothing-to-see.

Cronulla are asking the same question James...

 

Doesn't the ABC have to explain why it agreed to such an interview? Why was the interviewer not someone from an AFL background? Why not have a panel of interviewers? Why no follow-up questions?

The ABC has given JH a platform, that is not its role. I would like an explanation.

that presumably was the conditions that hird had stipulated for an interview. alternative = no interview. plus holmes had enough pull at the abc

 

Cronulla are asking the same question James...

From WADA's submission in the CAS hearing ...

• Mr Dank has a history of use of TB-4 in athlete doping programs.

 

Tracey did a great job of asking and answering the questions.

I think it's called leading the witness isn't it 'Jack', 'Red'?

 

Yes it is.

Pathetic Interview. Actually shameful. I would expect any cub reporter would do better.

Am currently in Japan. Seems the interview was as predictably uninformative  as we all thought it would be. Back to the sumo wrestling. 

Holmes questioning was pathetic.  Fairly disgraceful interview and frankly a total waste of time.

Hird continues to lie unabated.