Just now, daisycutter said:

we should take odds on which afl decision will be made first (if ever) - whitfield or the downlow

poor l'il darlins have never had it so hard

On 3 November 2016 at 7:06 AM, ManDee said:

Gil,"Our team is working through it with ASADA, the right way forward and the process for that. Clearly it's something that a decision needs to be made sooner rather than later and I'm optimistic (it happens) in the next week or so," McLachlan said on Wednesday.26th

That's the longest nickname I've ever heard. But I like it.

According to Caroline Wilson of the Age the decision is delayed as ASADA want more info

The article includes at least two comments of some interest:

"Fairfax Media understands that the prevailing view at ASADA was that the two club officials involved appeared more culpable than Whitfield and should receive harsher penalties."

and

"While the AFL had stated it would examine the wider issues associated with working with ASADA and its rules after the Bombers' affair, it remains determined not to move on Allan, Lambert and Whitfield without the anti-doping body's blessing.

Both parties had previously been advised that, on all available evidence, the three had breached the national-doping code, a transgression that draws a four-year penalty. The expectation was that the AFL would negotiate down from the punishment."

http://www.theage.com.au/afl/asada-delay-on-lachie-whitfield-affair-20161107-gsk193.html

 

1 hour ago, Diamond_Jim said:

According to Caroline Wilson of the Age the decision is delayed as ASADA want more info

The article includes at least two comments of some interest:

"Fairfax Media understands that the prevailing view at ASADA was that the two club officials involved appeared more culpable than Whitfield and should receive harsher penalties."

and

"While the AFL had stated it would examine the wider issues associated with working with ASADA and its rules after the Bombers' affair, it remains determined not to move on Allan, Lambert and Whitfield without the anti-doping body's blessing.

Both parties had previously been advised that, on all available evidence, the three had breached the national-doping code, a transgression that draws a four-year penalty. The expectation was that the AFL would negotiate down from the punishment."

http://www.theage.com.au/afl/asada-delay-on-lachie-whitfield-affair-20161107-gsk193.html

 

Sickening.

 

One wonders what would need to happen before the afl would enforce the full penalty.

I would think nothing short of a player blowing up Gil's house with an underground meth lab.

10 minutes ago, faultydet said:

Sickening.

 

One wonders what would need to happen before the afl would enforce the full penalty.

I would think nothing short of a player blowing up Gil's house with an underground meth lab.

Unlikely.

It would be claimed that the lab in question was concocting a cure for cancer, which coincidentally contains all the ingredients of meth, but is not in fact meth.

Gillon's magnanimity over offering his home to be used to such noble ends would be applauded by the media, and he would be nominated for an Order of Australia.

Some wealthy benefactor would then build Gil a new, larger, home. One with reinforced concrete so that any future lab explosions don't actually destroy the home above.

8 minutes ago, faultydet said:

Sickening.

 

One wonders what would need to happen before the afl would enforce the full penalty.

I would think nothing short of a player blowing up Gil's house with an underground meth lab.

Maybe wholesale drug abuse like it appears there was at the Eagles.

http://www.theage.com.au/afl/afl-news/daniel-chick-begs-for-medical-help-after-old-rift-with-west-coast-resurfaces-20161107-gsk1mp.html

Oh! hang on, they didn't even investigate them, even though it was obvious to all that they were cheating. Perhaps if they had, they wouldn't have had to be dragged kicking and screaming in to the Essendon drug scandal.

The AFL should decide to forget about image and concentrate on integrity, if the do image will be restored.

 

Pathetic. The AFL are becoming the new FIFA. Are under-the-table political donations their next step to forming their own drug code, where they can do and say as they please and sweep everything under the rug for good?

I am surprised we are surprised.

The AFL is the typical sporting body that pays lip service to all areas concerning integrity.

 

56 minutes ago, Dante said:

Maybe wholesale drug abuse like it appears there was at the Eagles.

http://www.theage.com.au/afl/afl-news/daniel-chick-begs-for-medical-help-after-old-rift-with-west-coast-resurfaces-20161107-gsk1mp.html

Oh! hang on, they didn't even investigate them, even though it was obvious to all that they were cheating. Perhaps if they had, they wouldn't have had to be dragged kicking and screaming in to the Essendon drug scandal.

The AFL should decide to forget about image and concentrate on integrity, if the do image will be restored.

 

That would involve some sort of ability to project long term, something the saga with Jobe's medal has shown us they do not posses. 

Yesterday the AFL says ASADA is holding things up!  Today ASADA let the cat out of the bag and say they are awaiting for the full file from the AFL. http://www.afl.com.au/news/2016-11-08/asada-waits-on-afl-regarding-whitfield-case

Lo and behold the AFL have unearthed ASADA's request for more info from ASADA which they are clearly ignoring/dragging their heels on.

As draft penalties are being strongly mooted as a punishment for GWS  the AFL is desperately trying to stretch this out past draft night so GWS can use all those juicy picks on top end talent and their Academy kids. 

AFL are sooooo transparent!  Next years draft picks/Academy players may not be so juicy so 2017 draft penalties will be a lot more palatable. 

Edited November 8, 20168 yr by Lucifer's Hero

2 hours ago, Dante said:

Maybe wholesale drug abuse like it appears there was at the Eagles.

http://www.theage.com.au/afl/afl-news/daniel-chick-begs-for-medical-help-after-old-rift-with-west-coast-resurfaces-20161107-gsk1mp.html

Oh! hang on, they didn't even investigate them, even though it was obvious to all that they were cheating. Perhaps if they had, they wouldn't have had to be dragged kicking and screaming in to the Essendon drug scandal.

The AFL should decide to forget about image and concentrate on integrity, if the do image will be restored.

 

that sounds likethat would require an afl 10 year decision cycle

49 minutes ago, daisycutter said:

that sounds likethat would require an afl 10 year decision cycle

It is already over ten DC it looks like 15 or 20 not me.

Buckle up folks, it could be a long ride!  http://www.theage.com.au/afl/afl-news/fears-lachie-whitfield-case-may-drag-on-for-years-20161108-gsku6f.html

"The Australian Sports Anti-doping Authority has asked the AFL for every text message, email, document and record of interview from its Lachie Whitfield investigation amid fears the case is destined to become an Essendon-like saga, dragging on for years via the courts".   The AFL should have handed over all the evidence in the beginning rather than 'negotiate' for months over 'key documents'.  They just don't learn!

Ironically, the AFL seem to have dug a deep hole for all concerned:  'What could have been a minor infraction in May last year has become a major conspiracy with the sports world watching to establish precedent'.

Seriously, tho the AFL are looking increasingly incompetent as they allow their obsession with 'image' to override common sense!

Scene: AFL headquarters. Gil McLaughlin at his desk. He punches some numbers into his phone handset.

GM: Mark? Come in here please.

The door opens and Mark Evans enters.

ME: Yes Gil?

GM: These ASADA people are on our arses over this Whitfield thing. They want to see the report from our integrity department.

ME: The integrity department?

GM: Yes. The integrity department.

ME: Right. (pause) The integrity department.

GM: Yes. They want to see the report from the integrity department.

ME: The report from the integrity department. Right.

GM: We do have one, don't we?

ME: The integrity department? Yes, of course we do.

GM: Hmm. Yes. That's what I thought.

ME: It's just that ... um ...

GM: What?

ME: Well ... do you know who heads it up?

GM: Me?

ME: Yes. Do you know who heads up the integrity department?

GM: Well I thought you knew!

ME: Me?

GM: Well you're the bloody general manager of the bloody joint. You're the one who should know who's in the bloody integrity department!

ME: Me? But they don't even report to me!

GM: Well they sure as hell don't report to me!

ME: Do they have an office?

GM: They must have. When I took over from Vlad he gave me this thing next to the desk. See it? It looks just like a waste paper basket but it's got that sign on it. "Integrity department" it says. Anything for the integrity department, he said, file it in there. Next morning the guys from the integrity department will have taken it away. They do, too. Like clockwork.

ME: Ah. Now I understand.

GM: Good. So get me the bloody Whitfield report from the integrity department!

ME: (thinks) That gives me an idea ... that Malaysian student who cleans the house reckons she's got a PhD in philosophy and ethics ... might be just the ticket ...

ME: (aloud) I think I've just remembered where the integrity department is. Coming right up Gil!

Sounds familiar......... 

If the AFL have been trying to help cover up, ASADA should ban Gil and any other officials for four years as well.

Christ, they are beyond incompetent. So many signs of malicious intent to withhold the truth. 

3 hours ago, SaberFang said:

Christ, they are beyond incompetent. So many signs of malicious intent to withhold the truth. 

One of the traits of psychopaths is an inability to learn from past mistakes. 

It's all so very convenient for the AFL to not have to make a decision on the Whitfield case at this particular time. 

With so much of the GWS Giants draft strategy based on academy selections, for the AFL to ban them from a round or two of this year's draft (as it has done in the past with clubs that offended against its rules) would play absolute havoc with the system. 

This year's draft is already tainted as a consequence of the decision made earlier this year on Essendon's draft position after 12 of its players were banned as drug cheats.

Now, with the Giants holding second pick and with the delays giving them immunity from possible draft sanctions the draft is further compromised.

This is the way the AFL operates.

On 11/3/2016 at 9:34 AM, ManDee said:

Quoting myself, yes I know. But seems to become more fitting by the day. Still waiting.

1 hour ago, Whispering_Jack said:

It's all so very convenient for the AFL to not have to make a decision on the Whitfield case at this particular time. 

With so much of the GWS Giants draft strategy based on academy selections, for the AFL to ban them from a round or two of this year's draft (as it has done in the past with clubs that offended against its rules) would play absolute havoc with the system. 

This year's draft is already tainted as a consequence of the decision made earlier this year on Essendon's draft position after 12 of its players were banned as drug cheats.

Now, with the Giants holding second pick and with the delays giving them immunity from possible draft sanctions the draft is further compromised.

This is the way the AFL operates.

I think we're losing some focus here.

There is no requirement under WADA/ASADA for GWS to face any sanctions. This would be purely an AFL move.

They have flagged (through media mouthpieces) sanctions in the draft but they are not obligated to follow through.

I think the issue is why they seem to be holding up any action on Whitfield, Allan and Lambert.

Surely it would be better for the game if they were to take swift action and show there is no room for this behaviour in the AFL. Unfortunately for some unknown reason that horse has bolted.

 

32 minutes ago, rjay said:

I think we're losing some focus here.

There is no requirement under WADA/ASADA for GWS to face any sanctions. This would be purely an AFL move.

They have flagged (through media mouthpieces) sanctions in the draft but they are not obligated to follow through.

I think the issue is why they seem to be holding up any action on Whitfield, Allan and Lambert.

Surely it would be better for the game if they were to take swift action and show there is no room for this behaviour in the AFL. Unfortunately for some unknown reason that horse has bolted.

 

1.  They hope, like a naughty child, that if they hide it will just go away

2.  They do not want to feel pressured towards making a "tough call" re the draft that could harm their love child, GW$. 

10 minutes ago, monoccular said:

1.  They hope, like a naughty child, that if they hide it will just go away

2.  They do not want to feel pressured towards making a "tough call" re the draft that could harm their love child, GW$. 

...but they don't have to make a call on the draft. They were the ones that flagged the draft sanctions.

They do have to make a call on the individuals involved though.

3 hours ago, rjay said:

I think we're losing some focus here.

There is no requirement under WADA/ASADA for GWS to face any sanctions. This would be purely an AFL move.

They have flagged (through media mouthpieces) sanctions in the draft but they are not obligated to follow through.

I think the issue is why they seem to be holding up any action on Whitfield, Allan and Lambert.

Surely it would be better for the game if they were to take swift action and show there is no room for this behaviour in the AFL. Unfortunately for some unknown reason that horse has bolted.

 

Agree they have no requirement to impose draft or any other sanctions if they decide they're not approporiate  - the delay however, means they don't even have to consider them which is most convenient.

1 hour ago, Whispering_Jack said:

Agree they have no requirement to impose draft or any other sanctions if they decide they're not approporiate  - the delay however, means they don't even have to consider them which is most convenient.

There's always next year.