Praise the returning hero!

[Satyriconhome 10,878]

7 minutes ago, daisycutter said:

think he just enjoys trolling and playing devil's advocate

It is not trolling, I think the bleaters who say posters are trolls because they don't agree with a posters opinion, are the same posters who call others idiots which is classic trolling behaviour

I am not playing devil's advocate, i am just yet to be convinced that the drug agencies know what they are doing, simple as that

 

[beelzebub 23,376]

3 minutes ago, Satyriconhome said:

It is not trolling, I think the bleaters who say posters are trolls because they don't agree with a posters opinion, are the same posters who call others idiots which is classic trolling behaviour

I am not playing devil's advocate, i am just yet to be convinced that the drug agencies know what they are doing, simple as that

 

Happy to acknowledge all of that Saty

Also think you're plain wrong on this matter

[Sir Why You Little 37,039]

4 minutes ago, Satyriconhome said:

It is not trolling, I think the bleaters who say posters are trolls because they don't agree with a posters opinion, are the same posters who call others idiots which is classic trolling behaviour

I am not playing devil's advocate, i am just yet to be convinced that the drug agencies know what they are doing, simple as that

 

Yawn...

[Satyriconhome 10,878]

3 minutes ago, beelzebub said:

Happy to acknowledge all of that Saty

Also think you're plain wrong on this matter

Which you are entitled to, at least you can actually debate an issue without resorting to 2 or 3 word trolling

[Sir Why You Little 37,039]

1 minute ago, Satyriconhome said:

Which you are entitled to, at least you can actually debate an issue without resorting to 2 or 3 word trolling

Why waste energy....

[daisycutter 29,616]

2 minutes ago, Sir Why You Little said:

Why waste energy....

why did you?

[Sir Why You Little 37,039]

4 minutes ago, daisycutter said:

why did you?

It was only 3 words

[Ted Lasso 19,518]

How is a drug agency supposed to do its job when players are writing incorrect information on forms and failing to keep records? 

Why are players shown sympathy when they at best totally failed to do something simple? I've never seen a player acknowledge their own failures just playing the victim

[daisycutter 29,616]

6 minutes ago, Sir Why You Little said:

It was only 3 words

followed by another 5 now making 8! 

[Mazer Rackham 14,971]

3 hours ago, Satyriconhome said:

There are 'legitimate' drugs that do the above as well if prescribed to the wrong person by incompetent physicians.

The agencies blanket ban so they can be seen to be doing something

The only time these agencies have success is when a sports person is dobbed in, and most of the time it is for avoidance, and never 100% proved

My opinion,  live with it

, 

Oh right!

 

It's all the agencies fault!

 

In that case, the players ARE hard done by.

They ARE returning heroes.

Jobe CAN keep his Charlie.

 

And let's get stuck in to those awful anti drug agencies for fighting an uphill battle trying to protect clean athletes from the ones who will happily cheat for wealth fame and glory.

We're on to you ASADA and WADA!

 

The jig is up, thanks to the keen perceptive mind of the Satyr. Well done Satyr!

[Sir Why You Little 37,039]

3 minutes ago, Ted Fidge said:

Oh right!

 

It's all the agencies fault!

 

In that case, the players ARE hard done by.

They ARE returning heroes.

Jobe CAN keep his Charlie.

 

And let's get stuck in to those awful anti drug agencies for fighting an uphill battle trying to protect clean athletes from the ones who will happily cheat for wealth fame and glory.

We're on to you ASADA and WADA!

 

The jig is up, thanks to the keen perceptive mind of the Satyr. Well done Satyr!

Absolute [censored] idiot. These are the types the AFL and Media love

"oh let Jab keep his Brownlow, it was a long time ago...."

[Chris 2,892]

7 hours ago, Satyriconhome said:

EFC players were not found guilty of taking a known performance enhancing drug either    all in the wording

They were cleared either, we were from memory. 

[Chris 2,892]

7 hours ago, Satyriconhome said:

Which again depending on what you read is either a horse medicine, something that aids patients after heart surgery, something that may aid recovery from injury or a performance enhancer   but because nobody can say definitively what it does WADA banned it just to be on the safe side, which is the spproach the drug agencies take coz they have no [censored] idea what they are doing   

They know exactly what TB4 does Saty and it is banned under a catch all that bans all drugs that perform that function, which is increasing vascularisation. The drug agencies know what they are doing. Only the AFL/EFC run media campaign would have anyone thinking otherwise. 

[Chris 2,892]

6 hours ago, Satyriconhome said:

There are 'legitimate' drugs that do the above as well if prescribed to the wrong person by incompetent physicians.

The agencies blanket ban so they can be seen to be doing something

The only time these agencies have success is when a sports person is dobbed in, and most of the time it is for avoidance, and never 100% proved

My opinion,  live with it

, 

There are plenty of legitimate drugs that are banned by WADA and you can only use with a TUE from WADA. What exactly is your point. Your comment on blanket banning makes me think some athletes should be able to take some things other athletes can't? That is actually available through a TUE but you need a good reason. 

[Chris 2,892]

6 hours ago, Satyriconhome said:

It is not trolling, I think the bleaters who say posters are trolls because they don't agree with a posters opinion, are the same posters who call others idiots which is classic trolling behaviour

I am not playing devil's advocate, i am just yet to be convinced that the drug agencies know what they are doing, simple as that

 

What have they done that makes you think they don't?

[daisycutter 29,616]

30 minutes ago, Chris said:

They know exactly what TB4 does Saty and it is banned under a catch all that bans all drugs that perform that function, which is increasing vascularisation. The drug agencies know what they are doing. Only the AFL/EFC run media campaign would have anyone thinking otherwise. 

just to clarify for others. It comes under class S2 and a subsection of S2 as described by chris above

It does not come under class S0 which is a complete catch-all category for drugs not generally released for human consumption (which some posters have alluded to)

[Chris 2,892]

20 minutes ago, daisycutter said:

just to clarify for others. It comes under class S2 and a subsection of S2 as described by chris above

It does not come under class S0 which is a complete catch-all category for drugs not generally released for human consumption (which some posters have alluded to)

The confusion I think stems from AOD coming under S0 as a drug not approved for human use. As you say TB4 is banned under S2 as it is deemed performance enhancing. 

Edited September 25, 2016 by Chris

[daisycutter 29,616]

22 minutes ago, Chris said:

The confusion I think stems from AOD coming under S0 as a drug not approved for human use. As you say TB4 is banned under S2 as it is deemed performance enhancing. 

correct chris

and just to complete the loop tb4 IS approved for human use and yes does have valuable therapeutic uses in medicine, just as many other performance enhancing drugs such as steroids and growth hormones do. if athletes need to use wada restricted drugs for genuine medical reasons then they can apply to wada for an exemption with strict conditions and generally (but not always) including a period of non-sporting participation 

[Ted Lasso 19,518]

12 hours ago, Chris said:

They know exactly what TB4 does Saty and it is banned under a catch all that bans all drugs that perform that function, which is increasing vascularisation. The drug agencies know what they are doing. Only the AFL/EFC run media campaign would have anyone thinking otherwise. 

Don't even bother arguing with him mate, he consistently misses the point with this, people can claim the drug agencies don't know what they're doing all they like, i am yet to see an admission from Saty that the players actions heavily impacted what they could do in this situation.

when there are no records and players not putting correct information on the ASADA forms there is only so much an anti drug agency can do. 

of everyone in this situation, ASADA is the group i feel for the most, they've been painted as the incompetent big bad wolf out to get the poor Essendon victims. even the AFL has rubbished them publicly for threatening their precious revenue, happy to sacrifice the integrity of the game to maintain cash flow through all of this

[daisycutter 29,616]

54 minutes ago, Abe said:

Don't even bother arguing with him mate, he consistently misses the point with this, people can claim the drug agencies don't know what they're doing all they like, i am yet to see an admission from Saty that the players actions heavily impacted what they could do in this situation.

when there are no records and players not putting correct information on the ASADA forms there is only so much an anti drug agency can do. 

of everyone in this situation, ASADA is the group i feel for the most, they've been painted as the incompetent big bad wolf out to get the poor Essendon victims. even the AFL has rubbished them publicly for threatening their precious revenue, happy to sacrifice the integrity of the game to maintain cash flow through all of this

and let's not forget that asada have very limited powers of investigation and cannot subpoena anyone to give evidence

like swimming with a bag of cement tied to your waist

[Ted Lasso 19,518]

1 minute ago, daisycutter said:

and let's not forget that asada have very limited powers of investigation and cannot subpoena anyone to give evidence

like swimming with a bag of cement tied to your waist

Absolutely! imagine the dirty secrets that would have come out if someone could have made Dank speak under oath, i suspect we'd be looking at the EFC very differently

[Mazer Rackham 14,971]

18 minutes ago, Abe said:

Absolutely! imagine the dirty secrets that would have come out if someone could have made Dank speak under oath, i suspect we'd be looking at the EFC very differently

The whole thing came to light because of an Aus Crime Commission investigation that was checking out bikie gangs. It then unearthed Dank, then EFC.

The ACC went to ASADA and the rest is history.

Except that the info ACC gave to ASADA could not be used as evidence! I'm hazy on why but it had to do with cross-agency intelligence and not compromising future court cases. ASADA had to go and dig it all up from scratch. (What was left of it that is.)

Supposedly, one day the ACC report will be tabled in parliament and then we'll find out a lot more as to what really went on.

[Bluey's Dad 3,419]

21 hours ago, Tony Tea said:

Let's hope Essendon does not win a flag in the near future. The "redemption story" sycophancy in the media would be utterly unbearable.

My god, I hadn't considered this.

I don't think I could produce enough vomit to do my feelings justice.

[beelzebub 23,376]

6 hours ago, Choke said:

My god, I hadn't considered this.

I don't think I could produce enough vomit to do my feelings justice.

Im sure you will....we all will

[daisycutter 29,616]

31 minutes ago, beelzebub said:

Im sure you will....we all will

wonder if there will be mass vomiting in sydney town if tb4-cronulla win 

of course we know there will be if storm wins but for different reasons