From memory the afl said that they couldnt directly trace the tb4 from the factory to the chemist to dank to the club so they said there wasnt enough evidence. Didnt get beyond that.

CAS went ok we cant trace it the whole way directly but everything else matches with it being tb4

7 minutes ago, iv'a worn smith said:

No, they were inept.

Acknowledging the formidable brief before it, the Tribunal is deeply critical of Essendon’s deplorable lack of record keeping regarding the injecting program, noting that had the club fulfilled its obligations as a responsible employer it’s highly unlikely these proceedings would have been necessary.

Those elements combined to ensure the prosecution couldn’t meet the threshold of comfortable satisfaction for a doping violation to be sustained.

Jones describes ASADA’s investigation as extensive and comprehensive and identifies the task of the tribunal as an intellectual and dispassionate function made more difficult by the absence of key witnesses.

“It follows from the conclusions the Tribunal reached, it is not comfortably satisfied that the first element or link in the chain of reasoning relied upon by the ASADA CEO to establish that a violation by each player has occurred has been made out. It follows that it cannot be comfortably satisfied that the second link has been established.”

From:-http://www.foxsports.com.au/breaking-news/asada-failed-to-prosecute-bombers-due-to-mystery-over-prohibited-drug-thymosin-beta-4/news-story/e276a27935c28da589084a9ab2c58ce6

They were then not able to proceed with examining further evidence, a problem with comfortable satisfaction as seen by the tribunal.

1 minute ago, ManDee said:

Acknowledging the formidable brief before it, the Tribunal is deeply critical of Essendon’s deplorable lack of record keeping regarding the injecting program, noting that had the club fulfilled its obligations as a responsible employer it’s highly unlikely these proceedings would have been necessary.

Those elements combined to ensure the prosecution couldn’t meet the threshold of comfortable satisfaction for a doping violation to be sustained.

Jones describes ASADA’s investigation as extensive and comprehensive and identifies the task of the tribunal as an intellectual and dispassionate function made more difficult by the absence of key witnesses.

“It follows from the conclusions the Tribunal reached, it is not comfortably satisfied that the first element or link in the chain of reasoning relied upon by the ASADA CEO to establish that a violation by each player has occurred has been made out. It follows that it cannot be comfortably satisfied that the second link has been established.”

From:-http://www.foxsports.com.au/breaking-news/asada-failed-to-prosecute-bombers-due-to-mystery-over-prohibited-drug-thymosin-beta-4/news-story/e276a27935c28da589084a9ab2c58ce6

They were then not able to proceed with examining further evidence, a problem with comfortable satisfaction as seen by the tribunal.

I rest my case.

8 minutes ago, iv'a worn smith said:

I rest my case.

Those quotes relate to the AFL tribunal which found them not guilty.

Bit like the argument that because the CAS decision was 2-1 that more judges (counting the AFL tribunal members) found them to be innocent.... (flawed logic)

Edited October 13, 20168 yr by Diamond_Jim

3 minutes ago, Diamond_Jim said:

Those quotes relate to the AFL tribunal which found them not guilty.

Bit like the argument that because the CAS decision was 2-1 that more judges (counting the AFL tribunal members) found them to be innocent.... (flawed logic)

Absolutely

9 minutes ago, iv'a worn smith said:

If the substantive basis of guilt is predicated on the players lying to ASADA about what they did or did not ingest, surely this is a fairly easy basis upon which ASADA could have prosecuted the case, through the agency of the peak sporting body, being the AFL.  Is there not a chasm of a lack of logic in that alone and why does it exist?

 

8 minutes ago, biggestred said:

From memory the afl said that they couldnt directly trace the tb4 from the factory to the chemist to dank to the club so they said there wasnt enough evidence. Didnt get beyond that.

CAS went ok we cant trace it the whole way directly but everything else matches with it being tb4

ASADA established that Charter ordered TB4, that the Chinese lab shipped stuff supposed to be TB4, that the Chinese believed it was in fact TB4, that Charter received the shipment thinking it was TB4, that the chemist mixed it up according to how you would prepare TB4, that Dank injected it in concordance with a regime of TB4. And there were these "consent forms" saying "I hereby give permission to be injected with thymosin". And the players did indeed receive injections.

Hardly a botched prosecution.

The AFL tribunal said, what if it WASN'T TB4!?!?

What if it was ...... SOMETHING ELSE and the vials just SAID TB4!? In effect, what if it was really icing sugar and engine coolant?

The only way to know would be to go back in time and have a lab analyse the exact batch of stuff sent from China.

That's not comfortable satisfaction.

That's not even reasonable doubt.

That's looking for absolute proof.

The tribunal said, if we can't know what was in that shipment, then there's no point going further. Case dismissed!

That's why the tribunal decision was scorned.

Even before the tribunal convened, there were warning signs. The members were hand picked by the AFL presumably because of a propensity for a certain way of thinking.

Enter Jones, the chairman and esteemed beak who some years before managed to find Barry Hall not guilty of striking so he could play in a grand final.

16 minutes ago, iv'a worn smith said:

What I am saying DC is there are many on here who believe they know all of the facts, pertaining to this case.  No-one on here does know.  My point being that the entire issue had its genesis for entirely the wrong motivating factors.

If the substantive basis of guilt is predicated on the players lying to ASADA about what they did or did not ingest, surely this is a fairly easy basis upon which ASADA could have prosecuted the case, through the agency of the peak sporting body, being the AFL.  Is there not a chasm of a lack of logic in that alone and why does it exist?

 

i don't need to know all the facts (though i'd like to know more). does one ever know all the facts on anything?

i've seen enough to convince me of essendon's guilt within the wada framework, that the afl reluctantly work under and try to undermine when it doesn't suit them

we will never know all the facts because those closest to it will not provide the facts, nor evidence, nor testify under oath

asada have not done the best job but have laboured under inadequate funding, very limited investigative powers and other factors

For anyone who is fluent in German here is the link to website of the Swiss Federal Court.

I had a quick look at the English section but so far no luck. My understanding from the AFL site was that the judgement was in German and had been embargoed until the players were informed. That time has obviously passed.

http://www.bvger.ch/recht/00551/index.html?lang=en

 

On a lighter side... I found the Swiss court link  via an article (below) on a Swiss news site..... Has a heading .... "Not a G'Day" and features a picture of a Melbourne player being tackled by an Essendon player

http://www.swissinfo.ch/eng/not-a-g-day_swiss-court-rejects-appeal-by-banned-australian-rules-players/42508834

Edited October 13, 20168 yr by Diamond_Jim

50 minutes ago, biggestred said:

From memory the afl said that they couldnt directly trace the tb4 from the factory to the chemist to dank to the club so they said there wasnt enough evidence. Didnt get beyond that.

CAS went ok we cant trace it the whole way directly but everything else matches with it being tb4

The AFL went with the 'one link on the chain' theory, that is, if we can't prove one link then the whole case fails.

CAS went the other way and said there were strands in a cable and if one cannot be proved the whole case doesn't fall apart.

4 hours ago, Dees2014 said:

Frankly, this outcome was always going to happen. The squalking from Essendon reminds me of the self justification nonsense from Donald Trump. Both have nowhere to go except into long term mediocracy. The verdict is in. They have no choice but to try and manage the outcomes. 

I understand the EFC are budgeting for $17m in compensation. I would suggest they should triple that and more once add-on costs are taken into account, especially if they also pay the settlements which will be directed at Hird and some of their Directors which no doubt they will be silly enough to do.

This still has several years to run, but I am sure they will do everything they can to cover the consequences up.

For us, the outcome is a just one, and the one many of us have advocated. Justice has been done. 

Time to move on. 

Don't disagree, but there will be no moving on by "their contingent" if just one person becomes ill. By jingoes the sh## will hit the fan then

2 hours ago, iv'a worn smith said:

I rest my case.

I reckon your case is comatose rather than resting

The AFL was always going to fight it every step of the way, i reckon the plan was always for them to be not guilty at the tribunal making it extremely difficult to overrule that verdict.

 

6 hours ago, Lucifer's Hero said:

Gil washed his hands of it six months ago: http://www.heraldsun.com.au/sport/afl/teams/essendon/afl-boss-gillon-mclachlan-says-jobe-watsons-2012-brownlow-presents-afl-commission-with-its-most-difficult-decision-ever/news-story/f31c498b2bc4d7546ac6228df0f7a30c

Gil says: “I’ve made it clear to a number of people that I would not sit on that decision. Hopefully no one will think I’m trying to shirk that dreadful responsibility, but because to perform my function as the CEO in the lead-up and during I need to have conversations that would look like I wouldn’t necessarily come in with clean hands.”

What else would we think!  He is just totally incapable of making a decision and a strong need to be the 'good guy' and has hand balled it to the Commission.  No respect at all for him.

Sorry Gil.  Many people think just that.   Time to move on to a less demanding job.

4 hours ago, Dees2014 said:

Frankly, this outcome was always going to happen. The squalking from Essendon reminds me of the self justification nonsense from Donald Trump. Both have nowhere to go except into long term mediocracy. The verdict is in. They have no choice but to try and manage the outcomes. 

I understand the EFC are budgeting for $17m in compensation. I would suggest they should triple that and more once add-on costs are taken into account, especially if they also pay the settlements which will be directed at Hird and some of their Directors which no doubt they will be silly enough to do.

This still has several years to run, but I am sure they will do everything they can to cover the consequences up.

For us, the outcome is a just one, and the one many of us have advocated. Justice has been done. 

Time to move on. 

Compensation?  Compensation from whom, for what?

From the AFL for not protecting them as they had hoped?  And paid for by a ticket levy??

Maybe Denial Andrews will impose a "footy tax" like his "Uber tax" and mooted inner city motorist tax?

27 minutes ago, Abe said:

The AFL was always going to fight it every step of the way, i reckon the plan was always for them to be not guilty at the tribunal making it extremely difficult to overrule that verdict.

Wonder who is implicated?????

1 hour ago, monoccular said:

 

Sorry Gil.  Many people think just that.   Time to move on to a less demanding job.

Compensation?  Compensation from whom, for what?

From the AFL for not protecting them as they had hoped?  And paid for by a ticket levy??

Maybe Denial Andrews will impose a "footy tax" like his "Uber tax" and mooted inner city motorist tax?

if there would ever be a reason to despise that worm even more !!

On 12/10/2016 at 3:15 PM, old dee said:

That's how long it will take to try and come up with excuses to not take it away.

What about renaming the award to the best player award (remove the word fairest as it just gets in the way).

39 minutes ago, DemonFrog said:

What about renaming the award to the best player award (remove the word fairest as it just gets in the way).

It is fairest and best player. 

Neil Roberts winner in 1958 said he would hand back his medal if fairness was removed.

You could have a separate award for the most drugged up player and give it to Jobe, Benny & Dane on alternate years.

51 minutes ago, DemonFrog said:

What about renaming the award to the best player award (remove the word fairest as it just gets in the way).

still wouldn't matter. wada rules are that guilty players should lose awards and prizes for period of offence.

jobe should lose brownlow not because of "fairest and best" afl rules but because of wada guilty rules. if it was "best" only he would still have brownlow stripped

On 13 October 2016 at 7:45 PM, monoccular said:

 

Sorry Gil.  Many people think just that.   Time to move on to a less demanding job.

Compensation?  Compensation from whom, for what?

From the AFL for not protecting them as they had hoped?  And paid for by a ticket levy??

Maybe Denial Andrews will impose a "footy tax" like his "Uber tax" and mooted inner city motorist tax?

Presumably from the Bombers' insurers. Sure it'll cost them a fortune in the long run, what with extra premiums etc. Amazes me that the players are going to be massively compensated for taking drugs and lying about it every week.

 

Doesn't amaze me, but pees me off that the team is going to be compensated as well (the no. 1 draft pick ). Not so much for the drugs -I presume that was mainly the mad scientist - but for their disgraceful efforts to deflect, deny, obfuscate, nit-pick, point fingers everywhere else, all of which set a shocking example for our children.

Graham Cornes is an absolute dropkick who has supported the Bombers all the way through the saga. In today's Herald Sun he displays a total lack of understanding of the way the prosecution of the players was carried out - Prove, undoubtedly, that Jobe did it.

What he doesn't understand is that CAS decided that Jobe did it in accordance with the legal standard of proof required in anti doping rule violation cases. The Swiss Federal Court has upheld that decision and dismissed the players' appeal. Watson is guilty of an ADRV committed in the same year that he gained the highest number of votes in the Brownlow Medal. Unfortunately for him, that means he should hand it back because he did not win the award for fairest and best player in the competition.

Let's analyze Jobe's Brownlow votes by each year of his career:

2015	7
2014	8
2013	17
2012	30
2011	15
2010	16
2009	10
2008	5
2007	5

So he polled almost twice as many Brownlow votes in the year he is accused of doping than any other year of his career. Of course, I'm sure that's just a stunning coincidence, right Gil? 

Likewise that his polling plummeted in half two years running once the doping program ceased. 

Edited October 15, 20168 yr by SaberFang

On 10/13/2016 at 4:43 PM, iv'a worn smith said:

The relevance is this was to be a cause celebre from day one, for political expediency.  Trot out the heads of the relevant sporting codes, including Demetriou to look even stronger. ASADA didn't have the bottle to prosecute properly; enter WADA.  Demetriou thought it would dissipate as the political cycle turned.

Its been said before but it was 2 weeks before Gillard called the election, Jason Clare and Kate Lundy were new ministers looking for a big statement and Eddie Obeid was on the front page of the papers every day wth his corruption trial.

They were trying to clear the decks of Labor scandal so they could call an election.

I am not into conspiracy theories except when it involves Labor politicians.

 

Lets be honest, if you want to become the laughing stock of sport around the world this is a good way to do it

 

Hey guys, our 2012 league best and FAIREST is also a convicted drug cheat in the same year. 

 

it's embarrassing that the AFL didn't tell Jobe if the appeal failed he'd have to hand it back, this situation is black and white, it's Jobes job to prove he is innocent not the other way around.

http://www.theage.com.au/afl/afl-news/afl-victoria-hire-former-essendon-football-manager-paul-hamilton-as-state-talent-manager-20161015-gs335g.html

Now the VFL has hired the Bommers football manager from 2012 Paul Hamilton. The saga  gets worse. 

What a shocking signal and a joke. Should be banned for life.

 

37 minutes ago, jnrmac said:

http://www.theage.com.au/afl/afl-news/afl-victoria-hire-former-essendon-football-manager-paul-hamilton-as-state-talent-manager-20161015-gs335g.html

Now the VFL has hired the Bommers football manager from 2012 Paul Hamilton. The saga  gets worse. 

What a shocking signal and a joke. Should be banned for life.

 

Keep quiet and get rewarded

RObinson got at job at afl auditors I recall