Jump to content

THE BOMBERS' DOPING SAGA - THE FAT LADY SINGS

Whispering_Jack
Whispering_Jack
in General Discussion

Featured Replies

23 minutes ago, iv'a worn smith said:

I have always said, as a club, the EFC got off very lightly on this, so in my view yes.  I still can't believe that as a club, they get the first draft pick in 2016, in less than a year of serving their sanction.  I don't buy, the they have served their time, get out clause.  Regardless of the rights or wrongs on Watson's individual case, the outcome for him personally, will affect him for life. While slightly off topic, I think GWS should also get slammed, over the Whitfield affair. 

Totally agree

  • Quote
    • Like 1
     
    1 hour ago, iv'a worn smith said:

    It may have been said on here previously and if so, I apologise.  However, while I am not a mathematician, who can examine various computations, is it not feasible that had Watson not receive the votes he did, they could have gone to other players and therefore an entirely new scenario may have arisen, which may have seen an entirely different outright winner.

    Unlike a foot race, where the place getters are clear, the vagaries of a prize obtained through a voting system is not a clear. While I would not begrudge Mitchell or Cotchin being granted a medal, I just don't think it can be as cut and dry as that.  

    i'va the umpires only gave 3 players votes per game. it is therefore impossible to remove watson's votes and promote other player's votes completely. no-one knows who the 4th or 5th or even sometimes the 6th umpire's fairest and best player would have been

    occam's razor would suggest just use the next final positions i.e. cotchin/mitchell

  • Quote
    Just now, daisycutter said:

    i'va the umpires only gave 3 players votes per game. it is therefore impossible to remove watson's votes and promote other player's votes completely. no-one knows who the 4th or 5th or even sometimes the 6th umpire's fairest and best player would have been

    occam's razor would suggest just use the next final positions i.e. cotchin/mitchell

    I get that DC, which is why I lean to the * option in this case.

  • Quote
    •  
    1 hour ago, iv'a worn smith said:

    It may have been said on here previously and if so, I apologise.  However, while I am not a mathematician, who can examine various computations, is it not feasible that had Watson not receive the votes he did, they could have gone to other players and therefore an entirely new scenario may have arisen, which may have seen an entirely different outright winner.

    Unlike a foot race, where the place getters are clear, the vagaries of a prize obtained through a voting system is not a clear. While I would not begrudge Mitchell or Cotchin being granted a medal, I just don't think it can be as cut and dry as that.  

    The most sage of all comments to date about this IWS :)

    What you suppose is ENTIRELY possible and more likely PROBABLE

    Hence the most logical of outocmes is to vacate the wiinner for this year, and leave as such.

  • Quote
    23 minutes ago, Dr evil said:

    I think a strongly lead AFL would have seen Essendons actions as an attack on their rules and their integrity rather than a mess they have to clean up, i think at the very least the Bombers should have lost out on their first round pick, the Lions were awarded a priority selection to help them but missed out on pick 1 because Essendon did the wrong thing, it's a long way from fair.

    perhaps the AFL might be keep for Essendon to keep quiet about some of the details of the SAGA as well. 

    now you're getting to the heart of the matter    mess !! :rolleyes:

  • Quote

    5 minutes ago, daisycutter said:

    i'va the umpires only gave 3 players votes per game. it is therefore impossible to remove watson's votes and promote other player's votes completely. no-one knows who the 4th or 5th or even sometimes the 6th umpire's fairest and best player would have been

    occam's razor would suggest just use the next final positions i.e. cotchin/mitchell

    that assumes his eligibility.  

  • Quote
    19 hours ago, Choke said:

    What do the betting agencies do in situations like this?

    They're part and parcel of the AFL experience now, according to the ever increasing levels of advertising.

    I had a bet on Cotchin at the odds of $110, but that's the only detail of the bet I can remember. Betfairs online history doesn't allow you to go back very far.

    I sent them an email early in the piece to ask for the bet details and what would happen but received an email undeliverable response. I didn't bother following up at that stage as there was still a lot to play out. If the Brownlow is given to them though I will definitely be following up and will report the outcomes. 

  • Quote
    • Like 2
    25 minutes ago, iv'a worn smith said:

    I get that DC, which is why I lean to the * option in this case.

    ok, understand (and i suspect this will be the result today, even if i disagree)

    btw your footrace analogy is not always so simple. generally to get to a final you must qualify through heats, semis, prelims etc before the final. in all these races someone has been eliminated and denied the chance to progress to the finals thus complicating the theoretical result just as in the afl example. In the case of the ioc they just ignore this anomoly and simply remove the miscreant from the final result. ..............just saying

  • Quote
    •  
    8 minutes ago, daisycutter said:

    ok, understand (and i suspect this will be the result today, even if i disagree)

    btw your footrace analogy is not always so simple. generally to get to a final you must qualify through heats, semis, prelims etc before the final. in all these races someone has been eliminated and denied the chance to progress to the finals thus complicating the theoretical result just as in the afl example. In the case of the ioc they just ignore this anomoly and simply remove the miscreant from the final result. ..............just saying

    Understand, but in the case of Jared Tallent, he also went through heats and semi's, but come the final, he was 'beaten' by a Russian drug cheat.  In contrast, Lance Armstrong's Tour de France trophies were not passed down the line, as it was discovered that the majority of the peloton were also affected by performance enhancing drugs.

     

  • Quote

    29 minutes ago, daisycutter said:

    i wonder how d'landers would feel if cotchin was nate jones?

    actually  I would be the same

  • Quote
    • Like 3

    Titus must read DLand...for sure ;)

  • Quote
    • Like 1
    42 minutes ago, iv'a worn smith said:

    Understand, but in the case of Jared Tallent, he also went through heats and semi's, but come the final, he was 'beaten' by a Russian drug cheat.  In contrast, Lance Armstrong's Tour de France trophies were not passed down the line, as it was discovered that the majority of the peloton were also affected by performance enhancing drugs.

     

    true. but the tour de france and other cycling events you would have to agree were quite exceptional given the rampant use of peds in that industry. it would not be fair to use  their treatment of retrospective race results as a yardstick for other sports, especially without proof of similar excesses. retrospectivity always has its problems i know.

    i do accept there is a reasonable case for no result, even though in this case it's not my preferred option 

  • Quote

    41 minutes ago, daisycutter said:

    true. but the tour de france and other cycling events you would have to agree were quite exceptional given the rampant use of peds in that industry. it would not be fair to use  their treatment of retrospective race results as a yardstick for other sports, especially without proof of similar excesses. retrospectivity always has its problems i know.

    i do accept there is a reasonable case for no result, even though in this case it's not my preferred option 

    I previously thought the preferred option should be to award it to Cotchin and Mitchell, but I've changed my mind for the following reasons:

    • the decision has to set a precedent for the future. It becomes messy if future testing of past winners shows other players who should be ineligible
    • what happens if Watson is subsequently cleared because of new evidence? I know it's most unlikely, but if it happened would the AFL then have to strip the medals from Cotchin and Mitchell and re-award it to Watson? 
    • combining the above two points, what happens if in a completely new set of circumstances a player is deemed ineligible only later to be cleared?
  • Quote
    • Like 1
    17 minutes ago, La Dee-vina Comedia said:

    I previously thought the preferred option should be to award it to Cotchin and Mitchell, but I've changed my mind for the following reasons:

    • the decision has to set a precedent for the future. It becomes messy if future testing of past winners shows other players who should be ineligible
    • what happens if Watson is subsequently cleared because of new evidence? I know it's most unlikely, but if it happened would the AFL then have to strip the medals from Cotchin and Mitchell and re-award it to Watson? 
    • combining the above two points, what happens if in a completely new set of circumstances a player is deemed ineligible only later to be cleared?

    Excellent points

  • Quote
    13 minutes ago, La Dee-vina Comedia said:

    I previously thought the preferred option should be to award it to Cotchin and Mitchell, but I've changed my mind for the following reasons:

    • the decision has to set a precedent for the future. It becomes messy if future testing of past winners shows other players who should be ineligible
    • what happens if Watson is subsequently cleared because of new evidence? I know it's most unlikely, but if it happened would the AFL then have to strip the medals from Cotchin and Mitchell and re-award it to Watson? 
    • combining the above two points, what happens if in a completely new set of circumstances a player is deemed ineligible only later to be cleared?

    You are over thinking this LDC.

    If a player is suspended in the last match of the year when the votes are counted the winner is then the next highest vote scorer.

    That is what should happen here.

    What may or may not  happen in the future is irrelevant IMO.

  • Quote
    • Like 5
    40 minutes ago, old dee said:

    You are over thinking this LDC.

    If a player is suspended in the last match of the year when the votes are counted the winner is then the next highest vote scorer.

    That is what should happen here.

    What may or may not  happen in the future is irrelevant IMO.

    Certainly a validity to this thinking I concede.

  • Quote
    • Like 2
    On 11/11/2016 at 4:20 PM, 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

    Agree, wish it would go away and we hear no more about Watson and his lost Brownlow. Opinions on this are always going to be divided due to ignorance, biases or beliefs. 

    I disagree with your last sentence. For effective enforcement, WADA and ASADA need the cooperation of sporting bodies. Unfortunately, this does not happen because the sporting bodies don't like any interference from those outside the sport. Its about power and the sporting bodies protecting the business and the brand. 

    For WADA and ASADA to do their job effectively they need to be working in a cooperative environment. 

    There needs to be agreement on the  principles surrounding the use of performance enhancing drugs and the methods used to enforce those principles.  The enforcement authorities are not clowns, they are folk trying to do a job in a difficult environment without obstacles being placed in their way.They need adequate funding and total support from Government and the sporting bodies. Blame the latter two for messy processes and outcomes.

     

  • Quote
    • Like 4

    3 minutes ago, Dr evil said:

    Mitchell and Cotchin are now the joint 2012 brownlow medal winners.

    A great decision!  No way could Watson stay as the notional winner, with or without an asterisk!!

    The integrity of the Brownlow 'Best and Fairest' has been restored.

    Edited by Lucifer's Hero

  • Quote
    • Like 1
     

    seems the afl preferred my opinion to that of slobbo.......for a change

    now......about the clash jumper rule...........

  • Quote
    • Like 2

    Join the conversation

    You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

    Guest
    Unfortunately, your content contains terms that we do not allow. Please edit your content to remove the highlighted words below.
    Reply to this topic...
    Go to topic listing

    Featured Content

    • GAMEDAY: Essendon

      It’s Game Day, and the Demons are staring down the barrel of an 0-5 start for the first time since 2012 as they take on Essendon at Adelaide Oval for Gather Round. In that forgettable season, Melbourne finally broke their drought by toppling the Bombers. Can lightning strike twice? Will the Dees turn their nightmare start around and breathe life back into 2025?

      • 23 replies
      Demonland
      Demonland

    • PREVIEW: Essendon

      As the focus of the AFL moves exclusively to South Australia for Gather Round, the question is raised as to what are we going to get from the  Melbourne Football Club this weekend? Will it be a repeat of the slop fest of the last three weeks that have seen the team score a measly 174 points and concede 310 or will a return to the City of Churches and the scene where they performed at their best in 2024 act as a wakeup call and bring them out of their early season reverie?  Or will the sleepy Dees treat their fans to a reenactment of their lazy effort from the first Gather Round of two years ago when they allowed the Bombers to trample all over them on a soggy and wet Adelaide Oval? The two examples from above tell us how fickle form can be in football. Last year, a committed group of players turned up in Adelaide with a businesslike mindset. They had a plan, went in confidently and hard for the football and kicked winning scores against both home teams in a difficult environment for visitors. And they repeated that sort of effort later in the season when they played Essendon at the MCG.

      • 0 replies
      Demonland
      Demonland

    • PREGAME: Essendon

      Facing the very real and daunting prospect of starting the season with five straight losses, the Demons head to South Australia for the annual Gather Round, where they’ll take on the Bombers in search of their first win of the year. Who comes in, and who comes out?

        • Like
      • 489 replies
      Demonland
      Demonland

    • NON-MFC: Round 05

      Gather Round is here, kicking off with a Thursday night blockbuster as Adelaide faces Geelong. The Crows will be out for redemption after a controversial loss last week. Saturday starts with the Magpies taking on the Swans. Collingwood will be eager to cement their spot in the top eight, while Sydney is hot on their heels. In the Barossa Valley, two rising sides go head-to-head in a fascinating battle to prove they're the real deal. Later, Carlton and West Coast face off at Adelaide Oval, both desperate to notch their first win of the season. The action then shifts to Norwood, where the undefeated Lions will aim to keep their streak alive against the Bulldogs. Sunday’s games begin in the Barossa with Richmond up against Fremantle. In Norwood, the Saints will be looking to take a scalp when they come up against the Giants. The round concludes with a fiery rematch of last year's semi-final, as the Hawks seek revenge for their narrow loss to Port Adelaide. Who are you tipping this week and what are the best results for the Demons besides us winning?

      • 189 replies
      Demonland
      Demonland

    • CASEY: Geelong

      There was a time in the second quarter of the game at the Cattery on Friday afternoon when the Casey Demons threatened to take the game apart against the Cats. The Demons had been well on top early but were struggling to convert their ascendancy over the ground until Tom Fullarton’s burst of three goals in the space of eight minutes on the way to a five goal haul and his best game for the club since arriving from Brisbane at the end of 2023. He was leading, marking and otherwise giving his opponents a merry dance as Casey grabbed a three goal lead in the blink of an eye. Fullarton has now kicked ten goals in Casey’s three matches and, with Melbourne’s forward conversion woes, he is definitely in with a chance to get his first game with the club in next week’s Gather Round in Adelaide. Despite the tall forward’s efforts - he finished with 19 disposals and eight marks and had four hit outs as back up to Will Verrall in the second half - it wasn’t enough as Geelong reigned in the lead through persistent attacks and eventually clawed their way to the lead early in the last and held it till they achieved the end aim of victory.

      • 0 replies
      Demonland
      Demonland

    • REPORT: Geelong

      I was disappointed to hear Goody say at his post match presser after the team’s 39 point defeat against Geelong that "we're getting high quality entry, just poor execution" because Melbourne’s problems extend far beyond that after its 0 - 4 start to the 2025 football season. There are clearly problems with poor execution, some of which were evident well before the current season and were in play when the Demons met the Cats in early May last year and beat them in a near top-of-the-table clash that saw both sides sitting comfortably in the top four after round eight. Since that game, the Demons’ performances have been positively Third World with only five wins in 19 games with a no longer majestic midfield and a dysfunctional forward line that has become too easy for opposing coaches to counter. This is an area of their game that is currently being played out as if they were all completely panic-stricken.

      • 0 replies
      Demonland
      Demonland
    View All