On 08/08/2016 at 06:36, Choke said:

Huh?

Which Melbourne forum have YOU been reading?

Can't be this one.

Demonland is the epicentre of well considered opinion and constructive debate*

*relatively speaking

  On 09/08/2016 at 01:46, TRIGON said:

Demonland is the epicentre of well considered opinion and constructive debate*

*relatively speaking

Surely not.

*remembers previous visits to Bomberblitz and Yellow and Black*

Perhaps you have a point.

  On 28/07/2016 at 04:16, Dante said:

Well what was it Thommo, if there were no drugs there then how could you say that only 12 to 14 had the drug injected?

http://www.theage.com.au/afl/afl-news/afl-season-2016-mark-thompson-says-members-of-the-essendon-34-will-sue-afl-for-50-million-20160728-gqfifu.html

 

"Thompson also made the startling claim that at least 20 members of the Essendon 34 were unfairly suspended because they weren't given the banned peptide thymosin beta 4, even though the CAS found otherwise.

"If this drug happened to be at the club, which they've got no proof it has been at the club or injected to any player, but if it did it wasn't 34 that had it – [it was] 12 or 14," Thompson said.

"So that means if it's 14, it means 20 blokes are out there sitting a year out that are innocent. Now that's unfair, isn't it?"

 

Thompson may well be correct and it could be explained by them having a placebo group in their illegal immoral drug experiment. However that does not make them innocent. further, if they had a placebo group you can be sure as hell that they kept records, where are they?

 

Still guilty!

  On 09/08/2016 at 02:18, ManDee said:

Thompson may well be correct and it could be explained by them having a placebo group in their illegal immoral drug experiment. However that does not make them innocent. further, if they had a placebo group you can be sure as hell that they kept records, where are they?

 

Still guilty!

The striking thing about Thompson's remarks is how infantile they are.  We didn't do anything naughty, but if we did it was just half of us and look how unfair it is on the other half to mention it.  You'd hear a more cogent argument in a primary school playground.

  On 09/08/2016 at 01:46, TRIGON said:

Demonland is the epicentre of well considered opinion and constructive debate*

*relatively speaking

Not to mention the suppository of all information..............

  On 09/08/2016 at 02:18, ManDee said:

Thompson may well be correct and it could be explained by them having a placebo group in their illegal immoral drug experiment. However that does not make them innocent. further, if they had a placebo group you can be sure as hell that they kept records, where are they?

 

Still guilty!

Usually only properly and ethically conducted clinical trials - ones with ethics approval, full records, consent and reporting of results, risk / benefit, and background work prior to the experiment - use placebo.  Shonky unethical ones don't.

  On 09/08/2016 at 04:46, monoccular said:

Usually only properly and ethically conducted clinical trials - ones with ethics approval, full records, consent and reporting of results, risk / benefit, and background work prior to the experiment - use placebo.  Shonky unethical ones don't.

I started laughing  after "ethically" mono

Technically 'placebo' irrelevant as only INTENT is required for a penalty. 

Russian/Chinese swimmer - automatically a drug cheat and shouldn't be at the olympics.

 

Essendon footballer - great bloke, was just vitamins, what would wada know, clearly innocent. 

  On 09/08/2016 at 13:01, biggestred said:

Russian/Chinese swimmer - automatically a drug cheat and shouldn't be at the olympics.

 

Essendon footballer - great bloke, was just vitamins, what would wada know, clearly innocent. 

Its quite incredible isnt it. I guess the bombers fall back on "there wasn't any definitive proof" and it was really just  " poor record keeping" or the players being "tired after training" and not filling in the WADA sheets properly.  I would so LOVE it if Hurley or Hibberd walked.....while it would be great if they chose us  I would enjoy it either way. Soon enough we're going to have to put up with all the glory stories about essendon rising from the ashes of all this, and that is seriously going to make me vomit.

  On 09/08/2016 at 20:27, Wells 11 said:

Its quite incredible isnt it. I guess the bombers fall back on "there wasn't any definitive proof" and it was really just  " poor record keeping" or the players being "tired after training" and not filling in the WADA sheets properly.  I would so LOVE it if Hurley or Hibberd walked.....while it would be great if they chose us  I would enjoy it either way. Soon enough we're going to have to put up with all the glory stories about essendon rising from the ashes of all this, and that is seriously going to make me vomit.

Regadless of what they took they still FAILED to tell ASADA about their injection programme - a key determinant of their penalty. They can crab walk away from the mess anyway they like but it doesn't change the fact they are guilty of not keeping records - another penalty.

 

Rabble. As for Thompson he is of dubious character and always has been. plenty of stories about his petulance, arrogance and behaviour

  On 09/08/2016 at 13:01, biggestred said:

Russian/Chinese swimmer - automatically a drug cheat and shouldn't be at the olympics.

 

Essendon footballer - great bloke, was just vitamins, what would wada know, clearly innocent. 

Mack Horton may have started a "players' revolt". Other Olympic athletes have jumped on board and are basically saying "One strike and you're out - forever". I hope the players' revolt succeeds. Sports like cycling, athletics and many others have been too weak for too long.

If the "players' revolt" succeeds, all sports will be better off. And the Essendon situation probably* would not have happened. With a penalty as strict as "One strike and you're out - forever" no responsible* organisation would contemplate going as close to the line as that club did. 

[*"probably" and "responsible" are my get out clauses. Maybe some professional sporting clubs would be that irresponsible.] 

  On 09/08/2016 at 23:02, La Dee-vina Comedia said:

Mack Horton may have started a "players' revolt". Other Olympic athletes have jumped on board and are basically saying "One strike and you're out - forever". I hope the players' revolt succeeds. Sports like cycling, athletics and many others have been too weak for too long.

If the "players' revolt" succeeds, all sports will be better off. And the Essendon situation probably* would not have happened. With a penalty as strict as "One strike and you're out - forever" no responsible* organisation would contemplate going as close to the line as that club did. 

[*"probably" and "responsible" are my get out clauses. Maybe some professional sporting clubs would be that irresponsible.] 

I could not agree more LDC but in the case of the IOC it will never happen.

They are morally corrupt to their boot laces.

  On 09/08/2016 at 23:11, old dee said:

I could not agree more LDC but in the case of the IOC it will never happen.

They are morally corrupt to their boot laces.

Corrupt, weak and out of touch. 

  On 09/08/2016 at 06:35, beelzebub said:

Technically 'placebo' irrelevant as only INTENT is required for a penalty. 

That was my point Beeb, Thompson's thinking may have been that some players were on placebos therefore innocent.  As you state correctly intent is all that is required for guilt here. The placebo argument is no defence.

Interesting seeing gatlin booed today after being banned  twice (10 years ago)

Will the great blokes at essendon who are victims of an afl lead conspiracy get booed too?

  On 15/08/2016 at 08:26, biggestred said:

Interesting seeing gatlin booed today after being banned  twice (10 years ago)

Will the great blokes at essendon who are victims of an afl lead conspiracy get booed too?

Nah

  On 15/08/2016 at 08:35, old dee said:

Nah

if they play the gf (or finals) next year (which they won't) then yeah

  On 09/08/2016 at 23:30, ManDee said:

That was my point Beeb, Thompson's thinking may have been that some players were on placebos therefore innocent.  As you state correctly intent is all that is required for guilt here. The placebo argument is no defence.

This whole placebo thing should have the club nailed for the entire drug cheating program. There is absolutely zero point in placebos unless you are recording the results to identify levels of success. So he's basically admitted now they had kept records. Where are they? What happened to them, and most importantly - why?

Guilty [censored] drug cheats!

Interesting they suddenly win a game after Brisbane have moved up the ladder and it doesn't effect their draft position.

Coincidence????

  On 09/08/2016 at 02:18, ManDee said:

Thompson may well be correct and it could be explained by them having a placebo group in their illegal immoral drug experiment. However that does not make them innocent. further, if they had a placebo group you can be sure as hell that they kept records, where are they?

 

Still guilty!

 

Pretty sure I heard last night that Hibberd was in the rooms before the EFC game and that Jobe and the boys had been texting the EFC players after their victory.

Isn't contact banned between the banned players and the players and the administration of the club?

If so that is appalling and shows just how much the AFL thinks of CAS/ASADA/WADA and how much the rules don't apply to them.

  On 15/08/2016 at 23:04, jnrmac said:

Pretty sure I heard last night that Hibberd was in the rooms before the EFC game and that Jobe and the boys had been texting the EFC players after their victory.

Isn't contact banned between the banned players and the players and the administration of the club?

If so that is appalling and shows just how much the AFL thinks of CAS/ASADA/WADA and how much the rules don't apply to them.

Spot on again jnr I have seen a number of comments from Worsfold taking about some of the banned players and what they are thinking.

The AFL is doing a perfect job of the three wise monkeys.

  On 15/08/2016 at 23:04, jnrmac said:

Pretty sure I heard last night that Hibberd was in the rooms before the EFC game and that Jobe and the boys had been texting the EFC players after their victory.

Isn't contact banned between the banned players and the players and the administration of the club?

If so that is appalling and shows just how much the AFL thinks of CAS/ASADA/WADA and how much the rules don't apply to them.

If that is the case then should we be wary of Hibberd lest the AFL in their usual consistent corrupt manner, suddenly decide to actually activate one small part of the WADA orders whilst ignoring most of them?

  On 15/08/2016 at 23:04, jnrmac said:

Pretty sure I heard last night that Hibberd was in the rooms before the EFC game and that Jobe and the boys had been texting the EFC players after their victory.

Isn't contact banned between the banned players and the players and the administration of the club?

If so that is appalling and shows just how much the AFL thinks of CAS/ASADA/WADA and how much the rules don't apply to them.

Have you considered that Hibberd might just be a good bloke and that he's been fitted up on absolutely no evidence by a foreign court that doesn't understand AFL?

Those boys have done nothing wrong and look at how much they've suffered already and it will be a celebration of something or other when they return to the game.

Welcome to the future.