1 hour ago, Satyriconhome said:

Maybe Watson, like others including myself, just wants this to go away, this whole thing from start to finish has been a mess, let's put it to bed and get on with the new season, the one amusing thing in all this for me, was a news story a couple of days ago that Essendon were amongst the clubs who were fined for administrative breaches in regards to player whereabouts and it just seemed to fade away, as non news with past history and Whitfield implications ignored....my point about the whole anti drugs program is a circus run by clowns

once again Saty you are pointing blame the wrong way on that. ASADA can not make a ruling on Whitfield as the AFL have not supplied all the info as yet, even though it has been requested. 

It is the AFL who are incompetent and obstructionist, unless you would like ASADA to start making rulings with incomplete information. 

2 minutes ago, Chris said:

once again Saty you are pointing blame the wrong way on that. ASADA can not make a ruling on Whitfield as the AFL have not supplied all the info as yet, even though it has been requested. 

It is the AFL who are incompetent and obstructionist, unless you would like ASADA to start making rulings with incomplete information. 

cough...that would be a first, isn't that what they did in Essendon's case because the information had supposedly been shredded

I am no fan of the AFL

It's lovely how EFC are taking full responsibility. When a club says that 'they're taking responsibility' how does that actually look? By merely stating it is that enough?  Can someone please clarify physically what taking responsibility looks like? It reminds me of the time David Warner took responsibility for hitting Joe Root...

About [censored] Time

I'm surprised that several posters say this has let Gill off the hook.  As usual we don't know the full story.  It is possible Gil/AFL did make the decision that he couldn't keep it (albeit too late), told Jobe who then realised that he'd look a whole lot better if he appeared to take the initiative and hand it back.  The whole thing was doubtless stage-managed one way or the other.

18 minutes ago, Satyriconhome said:

cough...that would be a first, isn't that what they did in Essendon's case because the information had supposedly been shredded

I am no fan of the AFL

No, ASADA spent a long time putting together all the evidence that either existed or they had access to. Not really their fault if evidence they would like to have doesn't exist. 

1 minute ago, Chris said:

No, ASADA spent a long time putting together all the evidence that either existed or they had access to. Not really their fault if evidence they would like to have doesn't exist. 

Yes Chris, but you said ASADA wouldn't reach a decision with incomplete information, which is what they did, as you state above

2 hours ago, Satyriconhome said:

Maybe Watson, like others including myself, just wants this to go away, this whole thing from start to finish has been a mess, let's put it to bed and get on with the new season, the one amusing thing in all this for me, was a news story a couple of days ago that Essendon were amongst the clubs who were fined for administrative breaches in regards to player whereabouts and it just seemed to fade away, as non news with past history and Whitfield implications ignored....my point about the whole anti drugs program is a circus run by clowns

Watson was found guilty of cheating, he doesn't get to sit on his hands and wish it all away. 

I don't understand your sympathy for the players, they weren't duped, they were either dangerous ignorant or outright cheated, either way their actions wouldn't have been tolerated at a club with the games integrity at heart. 

he should have handed it back the moment he was found guilty if he wanted to honour what the medal stands for, not months later when the AFL has tipped him off to hand it back coz they were going to take it.

Just think, the fact noone knows what happens tells you everything you need to know, they invested huge $$ into this program, there is no way they wouldn't have kept detailed records in order to determine if it was working or not, the fact there were no records and the players didn't declare injections says it all really.

Jobe has done the right thing, but it took him way to long to get there.

29 minutes ago, Satyriconhome said:

cough...that would be a first, isn't that what they did in Essendon's case because the information had supposedly been shredded

I am no fan of the AFL

Saty for me it's quite simple, if Essendon provided any sort of records they could have cleared their name, they couldn't and didn't. 

every player is taught from u18 level how to record substances they take in detail and not one of the players did that despite an intense injection program that should have made such a simple thing more important than ever,

anyone critical at ASADA isn't acknowledging how hamstrung they've been through this process, they had little to work with because little existed to prove anything, which in itself strongly hinted at wrongdoing. 

as for Jobe, he was never going to be able to keep the medal so i am glad that part of this story is now over, at least he handled that aspect of this reasonably well.

10 minutes ago, Satyriconhome said:

Yes Chris, but you said ASADA wouldn't reach a decision with incomplete information, which is what they did, as you state above

semantics Saty. You know what I meant

i personally don't care whether he handed it back 2 months ago, now, or in fact ever, it's the afl 's job to manage that, not watson's..

the issue that irks me most is the inability of the afl to make timely decisions and to try and stage-manage watered down deals. they even invited watson, mitchell and cotchin to make submissions of what they thought the decision should be, puleeze!

This thread has – for obvious reasons – turned towards Watson's announcement. Repeated attitudinising about ASADA or anything else is the sort of derailing DL has pointed to recently. It will be treated as such from here on.

1 minute ago, Satyriconhome said:

Sorry, I don't,  that is there job, but as a quasi government department, it is the usual all wind and [censored] and no action, and when they have a win, it is all about triumphalism, and most of the wins are because somebody does the supposedly un-Australian thing and dobs in

I agree with Reid, how he has come out of this smelling of roses is beyond me

I'm not sure on that, but the EFC made it nearly impossible for them, which to me is a very un-Australian thing to do. 

8 minutes ago, Dr John Dee said:

This thread has – for obvious reasons – turned towards Watson's announcement. Repeated attitudinising about ASADA or anything else is the sort of derailing DL has pointed to recently. It will be treated as such from here on.

care to expand on that doc? i know it's late in the day and i function better in the mornings, but i'm not very clear on what you are censuring

10 minutes ago, Dr John Dee said:

This thread has – for obvious reasons – turned towards Watson's announcement. Repeated attitudinising about ASADA or anything else is the sort of derailing DL has pointed to recently. It will be treated as such from here on.

Just curious, but are you going to lock this thread now? because if discussing ASADA or the Essendon case is derailing the thread now it seems pointless to have it at all. 

Other readers are not interested in the petty point-scoring that is occurring between posters.  Stick to the subject

9 minutes ago, george_on_the_outer said:

Other readers are not interested in the petty point-scoring that is occurring between posters.  Stick to the subject

isn't the subject the Bombers doping Saga? i am not being deliberately argumentative, but i am not sure what is okay and what isn't. 

maybe change the title of the thread if you're only wanting conversation related to Jobe handing the brownlow back, or lock it?

Edited November 11, 20168 yr by Dr evil

On Thursday, October 13, 2016 at 4:39 PM, La Dee-vina Comedia said:

44 minutes ago, Satyriconhome said:

I agree but it goes towards my argument, the only real guilty ones here are Hird, Dank, Reid the board and AFL, and we will never find out the real story

The players were probably told don't worry about anything, they were stupid and naive

It cost them a year out of the game and Watson his medal, something that he will always be remembered for

Again, I regard the drug agencies as a joke

Saty. The rules are written forr the exact scenario.  The reality is however it got into their system they are the ones benefitting. It is why it is totally up to the player to take responsibility. 

They did not, wilfully or ignorantly.

They are guilty. They cheated. The end

8 minutes ago, Satyriconhome said:

My post asking why was actually deleted, I thought that the discussion was actually quite good, because everybody was being allowed to get their point across, without the usual temper tantrums, which is what I thought the mods wanted and the posters were displaying, I for one am not point scoring, I am being allowed to express my opinion which is refreshing and I am receiving some really good replies and counter arguments

Agreed, i felt we and others were having a strong debate without crossing the line, i suspect the mods aren't stoked about the same things being bought up over and over, but if that's the case, perhaps it's time to move on from this thread, the SAGA should be finally over with Jobe handing the medal back.

4 hours ago, daisycutter said:

care to expand on that doc? i know it's late in the day and i function better in the mornings, but i'm not very clear on what you are censuring

Sorry, it might look confusing now since another mod has put the vacuum cleaner through the kinds of posts I was referring to.*

 

4 hours ago, Dr evil said:

Just curious, but are you going to lock this thread now? because if discussing ASADA or the Essendon case is derailing the thread now it seems pointless to have it at all. 

See above. In any case the key word was 'attitudinising'. I didn't say anything about discussion.

 

* edit: that hadn't happened to the extent I thought. Now it has. This post is now redundant. I hope.

Interested to hear opinions on the Brownlow, 

do you think the best course of action is to

1. Award a brownlow medal to Sam Mitchell and Trent Cotchin
2. Have no winner for the 2012 season?

My view is that the next best and fairest player eligible should be awarded the medal.

41 minutes ago, Dr evil said:

Interested to hear opinions on the Brownlow, 

do you think the best course of action is to

1. Award a brownlow medal to Sam Mitchell and Trent Cotchin
2. Have no winner for the 2012 season?

My view is that the next best and fairest player eligible should be awarded the medal.

Mitchell and Cotchin should and i think will get one.

To add to this i believe they should get medals because they should not miss out on the games highest individual honor because another player has been found guilty of breaking the rules later. 

they're rightful winners in my opinion.

Edited November 11, 20168 yr by Abe

I don't think there's anything wrong with having an open discussion or well-argued disagreements. I think DJD is just saying try not to labour on repetitious points that aren't grounded in reality; ie, trolling for the sake of trolling.

I haven't got much else to say on this matter. With Jobe handing back the medal (undoubtedly after being tapped on the shoulder), the matter is basically finished. What a downright shame we have yet another stage-managed drug fiasco for the AFL to move onto.

I think there should be no winner of the Brownlow for that year. In the (far) past of the VFL, there were breaks or gaps in awards such as the premierships due to extenuating circumstances. I'm not comparing world wars or death with a drug cheat, just that sometimes awards don't have to be awarded.

Watson will be compensated for handing the Brownlow back, he already has a pending compensation claim, I'm guessing the claim will be boosted now.