coached by malthouse. haha. serves them right

but i agree, many will try and treat them like royalty. i can't see why sir james couldn't coach them

Farce of the highest order.

If the AFL has any hand in such an arrangement, then they should include any suspended non-EFC  player who wants to join in.   Or would that reveal too many secrets of Essendon's game plan.

32 minutes ago, sue said:

If the AFL has any hand in such an arrangement, then they should include any suspended non-EFC  player who wants to join in.   Or would that reveal too many secrets of Essendon's game plan.

Good point Sue, one would assume Crameri, Milky and Ryder will all be going on the trip to Micky World.

Surely it would be appropriate for our old coach Mark Neeld  to be their coaches?

12 hours ago, Dr John Dee said:

I don't know who else is on the estimates committee at the moment, but Di Natale and Madigan are likely to make Old Dee's wet tram tickets seem like knuckledusters.

Ben will have them for breakfast

19 hours ago, willmoy said:

Beveridge coming from Hawthorn and speaking as such should concern a lot of people.

Got a funny feeling someone in the media is going to come across some records of confusion. Getting near the point of no return now.

Beveridge IMHO was totally motivated by cosying up to his employers. In fact I wouldn't be surprised if Gordon put him up to it having some understanding of how those involved have operated in the past. After all the Dogs are seriously affected by the Essendon fallout. Their problem is they are blaming the wrong people: like the MFC, they should have had nothing to do with the Bombers post the 2012 scandal until the issues were clarified. 

For an organisation heavily associated with crisis management lawyers, supposedly expert in risk management, you would have thought they would at least get that right. Instead, they blame everyone else but themselves.

Have no idea why anyone would shake at the thought of either DiNatale or Madigan 'grilling' you. 

Suppose they need a purpose....wonder what that is !

DiNatale was put up as the leader of the Greens because they had nobody else with a veneer of respectability to be the main person. Unfortunately, he's not too bright.

Ben to Richard, " you're a doctor  what possibly could  be your concern with ASADA looking out for the health and welfare of athletes ? '

Next

Just out of curiosity, does this appeal now mean it's up to the EFC essentially to prove they didn't take TB4, and to do so with no records?

7 hours ago, Peter Griffen said:

Just out of curiosity, does this appeal now mean it's up to the EFC essentially to prove they didn't take TB4, and to do so with no records?

No . It's about showing the Swiss that WADA And CAS were in the wrong room with the wrong rulebook !!

Good luck with that lol

The thing I find continuously amusing is ostensibly the 34 want to get back in the room to quibble about "x". However the only criteria to appeal the decision is " Y" 

They aren't on the same page (never were really)

There is a fundamental incapacity of much of the football world to grasp the environment and its requirements/ protocols that they now find themselves playing by.

On 2/11/2016 at 10:02 AM, Chris said:

Beveridge has just added his name to the list of AFL land people who simply have no understanding or concept of what the WADA code is and what it stands for. I am not surprised they don't seem to know but I am surprised at just how little they seem to know. It really is embarrassing!

Here are the names I can remember

• The 34 players
• James Hird
• Paul Little
• Steven Dank
• The EFC board
• Many EFC supporters
• Andy D
• Gil Mc
• Paul Marsh
• Neil Balme
• Luke Beveridge
• Peter Gordon
• Bomber Thompson
• 90% of the media (the exceptions are Whateley and Wilson and maybe one or two others)
• AFL commission

I am sure there are others. Appalling state of affairs. 

Tracy Homes

Micheal Warner

Mark Robinson

 

Wow Just read Beveridge's comments:

Beveridge hit back at suggestions the players should have said something at the time.

"Anybody who steps out of line or is a boat rocker probably doesn't last that long," he said.

[The AFL players are all just sheep who follow their past player idols, therefore they have done no wrong. And if you do raise a voice you wil be punted out of the club - nice. Mind boggling comment]

"The Essendon players have been treated like a European cycling team who should know better.

[Why should the EFC be dofferent from nearly every other sport in the world?]

"Well, no, they shouldn't know better because they had no grounding to work from."

[Well what are they doing on their 20 hours of lectures on drugs every year?]

Re grounding- the education program starts at TAC cup under 16s.

These players have been told "if it goes into your body, its on you" from the age of 15.

It really isn't rocket science. 

4 hours ago, biggestred said:

Re grounding- the education program starts at TAC cup under 16s.

These players have been told "if it goes into your body, its on you" from the age of 15.

It really isn't rocket science. 

Makes you wonder what brain-destroying substance some of these EFC apologists were injected with during their playing days.

1 hour ago, jnrmac said:

Wow Just read Beveridge's comments:

Beveridge hit back at suggestions the players should have said something at the time.

"Anybody who steps out of line or is a boat rocker probably doesn't last that long," he said.

[The AFL players are all just sheep who follow their past player idols, therefore they have done no wrong. And if you do raise a voice you wil be punted out of the club - nice. Mind boggling comment]

"The Essendon players have been treated like a European cycling team who should know better.

[Why should the EFC be dofferent from nearly every other sport in the world?]

"Well, no, they shouldn't know better because they had no grounding to work from."

[Well what re they doing on their 20 hours of lectures on drugs every year?]

I thought that I had read somewhere a statement from the golden haired one that the injection program was entirely voluntary? 

If my memory is correct then the players had a choice if they wanted to participate in the program.

This fact also makes it interesting to know why they had lied about not having injections to ASADA. 

 

 

7 hours ago, Peter Griffen said:

Just out of curiosity, does this appeal now mean it's up to the EFC essentially to prove they didn't take TB4, and to do so with no records?

From The Age article by John Pierik yesterday (Sat 13th):

"...The players insist the 2010 AFL anti-doping code did not allow for a de novo hearing.
A new code introduced last year did, but the players believe the case falls under the original code, as the ASADA investigation began in 2013.

Sports lawyer Daniel Stuk said the players faced a tough fight to clear their names.

"The problem with the argument is that CAS considered what would have happened if the AFL anti-doping policy had remained as originally drafted and WADA had sought a de novo hearing as part of its appeal. CAS ruled that it would have been able to hear the appeal as a de novo hearing regardless," he said...."

If the players were successful (next to zero possibility) then the case would return to the CAS.
BTW the full report of the AFL Tribunal (1400 or so pages) is somewhere on the 'net. A poster on BF listed a summary. It's impossible to believe how the tribunal was not comfortably satisfied. Essentially Dank's use of TB4 at Cronulla, and the molecular weight of the PED taken from Alavi's premises were the killers.

1 hour ago, M_9 said:

From The Age article by John Pierik yesterday (Sat 13th):

"...The players insist the 2010 AFL anti-doping code did not allow for a de novo hearing.
A new code introduced last year did, but the players believe the case falls under the original code, as the ASADA investigation began in 2013.

Sports lawyer Daniel Stuk said the players faced a tough fight to clear their names.

"The problem with the argument is that CAS considered what would have happened if the AFL anti-doping policy had remained as originally drafted and WADA had sought a de novo hearing as part of its appeal. CAS ruled that it would have been able to hear the appeal as a de novo hearing regardless," he said...."

If the players were successful (next to zero possibility) then the case would return to the CAS.

BTW the full report of the AFL Tribunal (1400 or so pages) is somewhere on the 'net. A poster on BF listed a summary. It's impossible to believe how the tribunal was not comfortably satisfied. Essentially Dank's use of TB4 at Cronulla, and the molecular weight of the PED taken from Alavi's premises were the killers.

Yes, WADA would argue that the afl 2015 code update was not a "change" but a "clarification" of an existing right for de novo, implicit in previous afl acceptance of WADA code.

20 hours ago, daisycutter said:

coached by malthouse. haha. serves them right

but i agree, many will try and treat them like royalty. i can't see why sir james couldn't coach them

One would have thought that they needed fitness and skills coaches not game day coaches? but then if it wastes Essendons money then I am all for Mick coaching them

On ‎12‎/‎02‎/‎2016 at 8:14 AM, jnrmac said:

I suspect the biggest chance is the fact that all players were treated the same in terms of penalties. But the lack of records probs means that players can't claim they were/werent given certain substances.

Its interesting that Hal Hunter went through the injection regime but didn't sign a waiver form. Hence he was not charged. The forms are therefore likley to be the most compelling evidence..  

 

One wonders how many other Essendon players were subjected to the injection program, and why were they not asked to sign waivers? do these other guys worry about what they were given. So are these Essendon players in trouble because they signed waivers and others didnt?  I would have thought everyone in the injection programme would have been included.

40 minutes ago, Deecisive said:

One would have thought that they needed fitness and skills coaches not game day coaches? but then if it wastes Essendons money then I am all for Mick coaching them

Although I assume that Essendon FC can't pay for Mick or any other coach, fitness or otherwise. Perhaps a sponsor could. I'm sure someone will correct me if I'm wrong.

12 minutes ago, La Dee-vina Comedia said:

Although I assume that Essendon FC can't pay for Mick or any other coach, fitness or otherwise. Perhaps a sponsor could. I'm sure someone will correct me if I'm wrong.

nothing stopping a private benefactor paying directly and in lieu of a normal club donation

different, but really the same thing as essendon paying. in fact i wouldn't be at all surprised if that is what happens and the guy brags about it to all and sundry, the club says they are grateful and did nothing wrong and afl says that it is happy that no rules were broken and add how concerned they are for the players welfare

it's the brand thing you know, forget mabo or the vibe

5 hours ago, sue said:

Makes you wonder what brain-destroying substance some of these EFC apologists were injected with during their playing days.

Testosterone. Makes you stupid, aggressive, and bald. :D

5 hours ago, DemonFrog said:

I thought that I had read somewhere a statement from the golden haired one that the injection program was entirely voluntary? 

If my memory is correct then the players had a choice if they wanted to participate in the program.

This fact also makes it interesting to know why they had lied about not having injections to ASADA. 

 

 

 

Riemers was quite clear about the injections being optional. There does seem to have been quite a bit of pressure though (see, e.g. Riemers being delisted).

 

28 minutes ago, La Dee-vina Comedia said:

Although I assume that Essendon FC can't pay for Mick or any other coach, fitness or otherwise. Perhaps a sponsor could. I'm sure someone will correct me if I'm wrong.

 

Sponsors, no. Coterie, yes.