THE BOMBERS' SWISS ADVENTURE

[Macca 16,961]

16 minutes ago, Sir Why You Little said:

 

2012 should be marked with an *** to remind players what happened. 

You should have said that earlier as that is obviously the base of your argument. 

Full disclosure saves a needless argument. 

Edited September 9, 2016 by Macca

[Sir Why You Little 37,033]

7 minutes ago, Macca said:

You should said that earlier as that is obviously the base of your argument. 

Full disclosure saves a needless argument. 

It has always been my stance Macca. If Cotchin and Mitchell get  Brownlows the whole disgrace will be forgotten years from now. 

[Bluey's Dad 3,419]

25 minutes ago, Sir Why You Little said:

It has always been my stance Macca. If Cotchin and Mitchell get  Brownlows the whole disgrace will be forgotten years from now. 

I disagree.

Cotchin and Mitchell were the 'best and fairest' players in that year, according to how the umpires vote.

Watson cheated, he doesn't deserve it, they do.

I don't think it's something people will forget. Hell everyone remembers Corey McKernan and Chris Grant, and this is a far far bigger story.

[Sir Why You Little 37,033]

2 minutes ago, Choke said:

I disagree.

Cotchin and Mitchell were the 'best and fairest' players in that year, according to how the umpires vote.

Watson cheated, he doesn't deserve it, they do.

I don't think it's something people will forget. Hell everyone remembers Corey McKernan and Chris Grant, and this is a far far bigger story.

The next generation won't know if The 2012 medal is awrded to Cotchin and Mitchell. 

Leave it as  ***2012 and people will always question why. 

Watson was the Captain of Systematic Team Drug Cheating. He probably won it because of those drugs. 

An asterix will forever remind future players what happened

[daisycutter 29,613]

25 minutes ago, Sir Why You Little said:

It has always been my stance Macca. If Cotchin and Mitchell get  Brownlows the whole disgrace will be forgotten years from now. 

i really doubt it. will become a long lasting trivia question

[Sir Why You Little 37,033]

24 minutes ago, daisycutter said:

i really doubt it. will become a long lasting trivia question

Maybe for our generations. But The AFL will want it forgotten going forward. 

The Players Association should be demanding an asterix 

but they seem to be tainted as well

[deejammin' 2,370]

11 hours ago, La Dee-vina Comedia said:

If the CAS decision is re-affirmed, I don't see how Watson can keep his medal.

What would be particularly galling if I were Watson or an Essendon supporter is that I suspect the supplements did nothing to help him or the team. So, a 12 month suspension, widespread opprobrium and three or four wasted years may well have been for nothing.

While I respect and understand your comment I actually think the biggest success of the Essendon, Hird and his sympathisers campaign has been to con fans into thinking the bold statement. 

Essendon came into 2012 having been spanked by Carlton in the first Elimination final with a list most thought would need to go backwards before it went forwards. They started out the season unexpectedly on fire winning their first 9 games in a row with amazing fitness and strength before an unprecedented spate of soft tissue injuries crippled the list and their season. 

The reality is a lot of people think the performance enhancing drugs mustn't have worked as Essendon didn't make finals, but really had they kept their pumped up players on the park they could probably have made finals or even top 4 based on their first 9 rounds. The combination of the drugs enabling the Essendon players to get too big too soon for their own bodies and bad luck is what I believe kept them from succeeding, not a failure of Tb4 and other substances to enable them to recover faster and endure larger training loads than a clean athlete.

Also on Jobe Watson compare his 2012 stats to every other year he played and you will see a sharp spike in almost every category, 3 more possessions a game than his next best year, 2 more marks etc etc. Sure some players have a blinder but the coincidental fact that in the year he was being injected with a number of substances including Tb4 he played so much better than his career average and the good luck that unlike his colleagues he didn't succumb to injury and was able to take the park during the height of the Dank/Robinson/Hird program says to me that his performance was clearly enhanced by what CAS has found to be illegal performance enhancing substances. 

We'll never know how much worse Essendon or Jobe would have gone without the program, maybe it would have been the same, but this is the eternal argument of drugs in sport and given the rigour and systematic intensity of Essendons program in 2012 and their improved performance during that time it's highly, highly likely that drugs helped both the team and Jobe win his Brownlow.

Its a shocking endictment on the Afl and AFL media that this hasn't been discussed more openly and this blanket "the drugs didn't work anyway" argument has been allowed to be preeminent. As to anyone who looks at it logically it seems highly, highly unlikely that the drugs didn't help in some way.

Edited September 9, 2016 by deejammin'

[Sir Why You Little 37,033]

Totally agree Jammin'

they were flying for the first half of the season...

[The Great Pretender 463]

It's pretty cut and dried to me. 

If the appeal fails, he must lose the Brownlow and it must go to the next highest vote getter(s) from that year.

This is what the Olympic Movement and most sports do in these cases. Just ask Jared Tallent who received his gold from London a couple of months before the Rio Olympics after the "winner" of the race was found to be a drug cheat at the time. 

[monoccular 17,424]

On 9 September 2016 at 7:30 PM, Sir Why You Little said:

Totally agree Jammin'

they were flying for the first half of the season...

Presumably this was in reference to EssUndone or could it have been another team, this season?  

I seem to recall another team shot out of the blocks this year, then died.   I wonder if they have been / were swabbed?

[Sir Why You Little 37,033]

1 minute ago, monoccular said:

Presumably this was in reference to EssUndone or could it have been another team, this season?  

I seem to recall another team shot out of the blocks this year, then died.   I wonder if they have been / were swabbed?

Nought were not twice their normal body mass

[daisycutter 29,613]

you know afl/asada/wada/cas et al don't do themselves any favours by taking so long to make decisions, in some cases taking years

it's just not good enough. they need some new mechanisms or powers. we seem to be going backwards in some (many) areas

[Mazer Rackham 14,971]

13 hours ago, The Great Pretender said:

It's pretty cut and dried to me. 

If the appeal fails, he must lose the Brownlow and it must go to the next highest vote getter(s) from that year.

I ran your post through my artificial intelligence botnet supercomputer and it deduced that you're not Gil McLachlan.

[Biffen 12,943]

Channel 7 ,the Afl, and the Watsons are all tied up here.

Gillon and Jobe are Albert Park neighbours so it will be a private matter with little mention on 7, perhaps dealt with on Cup Day or on Us Election Day.

If Jobe weren't such a spoon fed little cheat he would hand it back without anyone asking.

[Ted Lasso 19,509]

It's really dissapointing in my opinion that Jobe hasn't handed the Brownlow back, he's a leader of the club and supposed to be one of the best 18 leaders in the AFL players ranks, if he doesn't know what he took then he needs to set the example

sorry jobe but not being 100% sure what you took = not being 100% sure that you didn't cheat = hand the medal back and give it to those who are sure they didn't

[sue 9,102]

Waiting for the appeal to make a decision is pretty thin since as far as I can see the appeal is based on a technicality, not an issue of fact.

[La Dee-vina Comedia 16,751]

4 minutes ago, sue said:

Waiting for the appeal to make a decision is pretty thin since as far as I can see the appeal is based on a technicality, not an issue of fact.

Do you mean the AFL waiting to make a decision? Or Jobe waiting to decide whether he'll hand the medal back? Or something else? Either way, whether the appeal is based on a technicality or not, isn't that decision, once it's made, the definitive result? 

[ManDee 7,134]

The AFL should have demanded the medal back. After the appeals are exhausted they should award the medal to Cotchin/Mitchell.

The 34 did not continue playing pending an appeal, so Watson's tainted Brownlow should be stripped from him.

The AFL try so hard, it hurts to watch, grow a spine Gil. Make a decision.

[hemingway 7,627]

1 hour ago, ManDee said:

The AFL should have demanded the medal back. After the appeals are exhausted they should award the medal to Cotchin/Mitchell.

The 34 did not continue playing pending an appeal, so Watson's tainted Brownlow should be stripped from him.

The AFL try so hard, it hurts to watch, grow a spine Gil. Make a decision.

Guys we should know by now that despite the odd issue, the AFL, the Clubs and the footy media are all in bed together. It is a business and decisions are made to benefit the industry. The EFC has a major stake in the business. As a result, conflicts arise and business interests predominate. 

AFL CEOs, have for a very long time been deal makers. You can just add Gil to a long list of deal makers.  Principles get easily pushed aside when your objective is to achieve the best commercial or business deal.

I suspect that for the next 10 years we will be moaning about GWS.  The playing field has been tipped upside down to give them a leg up for business reasons. There is nothing fair or even handed about the AFLs support for GWS. I was listening to someone rabbiting on about what a wonderful recruiting job GWS had done. Save me! They may have done a great job in development, but recruiting wise, the AFL has done the job for them. 

Anyway, back to topic, I will eat my hat if Jobe is required to hand back his "Downlow Medal". In any event, who would want it? To be known as the recipient of Jobe's tarnished medal.  

[binman 42,899]

On 9/9/2016 at 6:37 PM, deejammin' said:

While I respect and understand your comment I actually think the biggest success of the Essendon, Hird and his sympathisers campaign has been to con fans into thinking the bold statement. 

Essendon came into 2012 having been spanked by Carlton in the first Elimination final with a list most thought would need to go backwards before it went forwards. They started out the season unexpectedly on fire winning their first 9 games in a row with amazing fitness and strength before an unprecedented spate of soft tissue injuries crippled the list and their season. 

The reality is a lot of people think the performance enhancing drugs mustn't have worked as Essendon didn't make finals, but really had they kept their pumped up players on the park they could probably have made finals or even top 4 based on their first 9 rounds. The combination of the drugs enabling the Essendon players to get too big too soon for their own bodies and bad luck is what I believe kept them from succeeding, not a failure of Tb4 and other substances to enable them to recover faster and endure larger training loads than a clean athlete.

Also on Jobe Watson compare his 2012 stats to every other year he played and you will see a sharp spike in almost every category, 3 more possessions a game than his next best year, 2 more marks etc etc. Sure some players have a blinder but the coincidental fact that in the year he was being injected with a number of substances including Tb4 he played so much better than his career average and the good luck that unlike his colleagues he didn't succumb to injury and was able to take the park during the height of the Dank/Robinson/Hird program says to me that his performance was clearly enhanced by what CAS has found to be illegal performance enhancing substances. 

We'll never know how much worse Essendon or Jobe would have gone without the program, maybe it would have been the same, but this is the eternal argument of drugs in sport and given the rigour and systematic intensity of Essendons program in 2012 and their improved performance during that time it's highly, highly likely that drugs helped both the team and Jobe win his Brownlow.

Its a shocking endictment on the Afl and AFL media that this hasn't been discussed more openly and this blanket "the drugs didn't work anyway" argument has been allowed to be preeminent. As to anyone who looks at it logically it seems highly, highly unlikely that the drugs didn't help in some way.

Good post.

Further to that the use of PEDs don't just benefit athletes in the period they are using them. I don't understand the science but i have read a number of times that athletes often get a lifetime benefit from using PEDs. it is one the reasons there is so much angst towards people such as Gatlin.

A quick google found this article,  http://www.bbc.com/news/science-environment-24730151 The research is about steroid use but i'm sure i have read similar stuff about PEDs

 

[Willmoy1947 4,085]

4 hours ago, Biffen said:

Channel 7 ,the Afl, and the Watsons are all tied up here.

Gillon and Jobe are Albert Park neighbours so it will be a private matter with little mention on 7, perhaps dealt with on Cup Day or on Us Election Day.

If Jobe weren't such a spoon fed little cheat he would hand it back without anyone asking.

I reckon that Watson is having a pretty rough time of it at the moment, the worst being probably within himself. If he, as leader had made a statement about it earlier,one could assume that in his eyes nothing happened and was all full speed ahead, but he didn't  and he still hasn't. So more deliberation and speculation. Not a good look..

Meanwhile back in reality land we have people playing and winning finals and no one else is doing anything about it. Did we really think we had stopped all of it.Mum and Dad celebrate and the kid looks in the mirror that night and says how good he is....

[FireInTheBennelly 4,072]

16 minutes ago, binman said:

Good post.

Further to that the use of PEDs don't just benefit athletes in the period they are using them. I don't understand the science but i have read a number of times that athletes often get a lifetime benefit from using PEDs. it is one the reasons there is so much angst towards people such as Gatlin.

A quick google found this article,  http://www.bbc.com/news/science-environment-24730151 The research is about steroid use but i'm sure i have read similar stuff about PEDs

 

This is what I've been harping on about. These players will still be reaping the benefits of their cheating and should therefore not be allowed to remain at the club that instigated the whole mess. They should have all been forced out to other clubs. If no club wants them, [censored] em!

[deejammin' 2,370]

16 minutes ago, binman said:

Good post.

Further to that the use of PEDs don't just benefit athletes in the period they are using them. I don't understand the science but i have read a number of times that athletes often get a lifetime benefit from using PEDs. it is one the reasons there is so much angst towards people such as Gatlin.

A quick google found this article,  http://www.bbc.com/news/science-environment-24730151 The research is about steroid use but i'm sure i have read similar stuff about PEDs

 

Great stuff.

Its the whole problem with drugs in sport once they have been taken where do the benefits for the cheating athletes/disadvantages for everyone else end?

Essendon have already tainted 4 seasons of football by playing with the benefits of extensive PED use. Thankfully they didn't win the flag but who knows what impact they had on ladder positioning and percentage? Would the other results have been the same?

There should be universal outrage from all supporters, other players and club administrators about the way this has tainted the results of every year from 2012-2015. Instead there's actually debate about whether a player who won an individual medal at the height of an illegal performance enhancing drug program should give it back? Incredible influence Essendon PR and AFL HQ business as usual has had...

[Bluey's Dad 3,419]

4 minutes ago, deejammin' said:

Great stuff.

Its the whole problem with drugs in sport once they have been taken where do the benefits for the cheating athletes/disadvantages for everyone else end?

Essendon have already tainted 4 seasons of football by playing with the benefits of extensive PED use. Thankfully they didn't win the flag but who knows what impact they had on ladder positioning and percentage? Would the other results have been the same?

There should be universal outrage from all supporters, other players and club administrators about the way this has tainted the results of every year from 2012-2015. Instead there's actually debate about whether a player who won an individual medal at the height of an illegal performance enhancing drug program should give it back? Incredible influence Essendon PR and AFL HQ business as usual has had...

The AFL and Essendon's ability to muddy the waters and prolong the entire saga has given the average punter extreme fatigue over the whole issue. They just want it over, the care factor is now very low. There was no baying for blood after CAS's verdict, despite Essendon only ever being punished for governance breaches, and not actually for the drug taking itself.

A cynic might think this was the plan from the beginning.

[La Dee-vina Comedia 16,751]

50 minutes ago, binman said:

Good post.

Further to that the use of PEDs don't just benefit athletes in the period they are using them. I don't understand the science but i have read a number of times that athletes often get a lifetime benefit from using PEDs. it is one the reasons there is so much angst towards people such as Gatlin.

A quick google found this article,  http://www.bbc.com/news/science-environment-24730151 The research is about steroid use but i'm sure i have read similar stuff about PEDs

 

I think the concern about Gatlin is less about  the "lifetime benefit" and more about the lack of a "lifetime ban". To badly paraphrase, to get caught doping once may be regarded as misfortune but to be caught twice looks like carelessness.