Leaderboard

Its neither about Leader nor Player. The context was as an example to follow. Unless you're also suitably freakish you could never emulate Ablett. You can however apply yourself in the manner of Jones. Thats the point.

Ruling on Dank seems inconsistent: how come he can be charged for trafficking a range of substances without any evidence/proof that the substances were what they were purported to be, while he and the players are cleared of TB4 because there's no proof it was what it purported to be? Have to confess to being somewhat gobsmacked by the Tribunal's decisions, and the only thing that will surprise me more is if WADA don't appeal to CAS. The outcome/conclusions just seem so at odds with the precedents set in any number of WADA cases.

This matter further demeans the club the competition and sport in general which is why WADA must take action. Jobe Watson admitted his club gave him injections the year he won the highest award in the competition. As an athlete he played in an international game. He did not know what the injected substances were which he is obliged to know. What part of comfortable do we need to refer to. He is tainted, the award is tainted, the game is tainted. It is so so sad

All the best to Alex Neal Bullen this weekend.

Red, are you embarrassed by your "mate"? I sure as hell would be. Absolutely reeks of a setup. They took the extra time, to decide how they could find the creep guilty, without needing to convict the drug cheats. Absolutely, totally sickening. 2014, where are you? I need some words of WADA comfort, before I go homicidal.

Law student Chris Kaias who has been following the saga closely has tweeted Rumour has it that the three tribunal members have been practicing for next year's Olympics in the sport of gymnastics.

An talented but injury prone ruckman from the Brisbane Lions? Haven't we gone down this path before with not too much success?

I am at a complete loss as to how the Tribunal has come up with this conclusion based upon the "comfortable satisfaction" standard of proof it needed to apply to the totality of the evidence. Perhaps, if they released the findings to the public, some light could be shed on their thinking but there are too many logical inconsistencies here for me to be comfortably satisfied that a fair and reasonable outcome has been achieved. Unless WADA is prepared to take this to CAS in Switzerland, it's unlikely that we'll ever know the full story but it's not good news for the Essendon players who have been given legal protection for technical reasons and will now have to wear the mantle of "drug cheats" possibly for the rest of their lives. For their sakes, let's hope that the concoctions injected into them aren't harmful to their long term health.

Felt he was a bit slow to change the direction of the conversation.

needs to be an investigation into the AFL tribunal The three judges are clearly not up to standard. This was always going to be a joke as long as was in AFL jurisdiction

you clearly didn't read the article properly.

and a gaytime was something you sucked....................oh wait

When Jones starts to bust open packs at will, get a couple of flags under his belt and a Brownlow on his resume, I might entertain the comparison.

Enter our time capsule and look at the other good movies from 1968. Barbarella - great movie - but has not aged well Chitty Chitty Bang Bang - enough said Once upon a time in the West - ? Planet of the Apes - looks old now. Bullitt - looks really dated The Party -? Night of the Living dead - really dated Funny Girl - still funny but very 60's The Love Bug - 60's kids movie Rosemary's Baby - must re watch this. Then watch 2001 it is magnificent by comparison. A benchmark in cinema.

A number of interesting things there. Im not actually personally 100% convinced that ASADA will/would appeal. Well not with the thinking it will actually get very far. It may need to as some sort of 'face' thing. who knows. It might be playing a clever counter ploy of 'protesting too much " in a fashion whilst all along knowing Uncle WADA will carry the can and call in the Cavalry.Either way WADA doesnt get its chance ASADAS 21 days is up The difference between how WADA/CAS might view something as opposed how the AFL tribunal dealt with the suppositions ASADA presented ought to go to whats accepted and whats not on the basis of the evidence. Keep in mind WADA can bring in new evidence etc The CAS might well give a different weight and hence outcome to particular aspects. Also what I thought interesting is that under the code only INTENT need be established but this for what ever reason was not the path the AFL took. Here in lays subtle differences. The AFL Tribunal , whilst under the guidance of ASADA in terms of adherence to codes actually ran do a difference one. it was run as per the AFL's own Anti Doping Code and the facility it gives for hearings. WADA will front the CAS where WADA code is spoken , understood and adhered to. Quoting the Social Litigator http://sociallitigator.com/2015/04/03/a-question-of-proof-might-an-asada-appeal-have-legs/ "What vexed the Tribunal apparently came down to this: Those involved thought they were buying, distributing, compounding and dispensing Thymosin Beta-4 (or ‘TB4’). However, the Tribunal could not be satisfied the substance was, in fact, TB4" they did however feel comfortable about : * Shane Charter bought what he believed to be TB4 and arranged to have it sent to chemist Nima Alavi; * Mr Alavi believed he then compounded TB4; * Mr Alavi dispensed 26 vials of a substance he believed to be TB4 to Stephen Dank; * Correspondence between Mr Alavi and Mr Dank regarding “thymosin” refers to TB4; * Mr Alavi’s lab technician compounded 15 vials of a substance she believed to be TB4 for Mr Dank; Required to prove this circumstantial case were the following matters: 1* TB4 was procured from sources in China; and 2* TB4 was obtained by Mr Alavi, compounded and provided to Mr Dank in his capacity as Sports Scientist at Essendon; and 3* TB4 was obtained by Mr Alavi, compounded and provided to Mr Dank in his capacity as Sports Scientist at Essendon; and 4* Mr Dank administered TB4 to each Player. The Tribunal reportedly did not consider 3.. This is because it was not comfortably satisfied by 1. and 2. For the Tribunal, belief did not translate into fact. What then was the substance administered to each player? Circumstantial cases rely on inference. Here, the Tribunal faced a fork in the road. The Tribunal could have inferred that because: the substance was not Thymousin A1; and it was satisfied the key protagonists involved in administering the product to players all thought they were using the prohibited substance TB4, then the substance was – to their comfortable satisfaction – TB4. Instead, rather than turning left, the Tribunal turned right, onto the road where belief does not offer sufficient proof. Presumably, the only sufficient proof would have been scientific proof. If on the other hand you are inclined to believe that the substance was indeed TB4 and that it was intended to inject the players with this as it matched the annecdoctal evidence of players ( some ) as well as known protocols for delivery of this substance together with the suggestion that it would not have been anything other than TB4 because Thymosin was always discussed and Thymodulin needs neither injection nor compounding then you would probably turn left not right as the Tribunal did. So it seems the tribunal applied one set of reasonings to part of the submission and another to other parts. Now what Red says is that they are entitled to do so. What some, like WJ, suggest is theres no consistency to this..its skewed. When things lack consistency theres often a reason. In judical land its imperative that all thigs seem squeaky clean. this is done by the separation of those judging from those with vested interests. The AFL is nothing if not an entirely self-interested beast. The Tribunal is and of the AFL. How can you possibly guarantee no contamination when its all done in-house, even with ring-ins !! Who set the rules of the Tribunal, who outlined the scope and who briefed the bench ? quack !

McCartin should buy Watts a beer. As should Patton, Boyd, Whitfield and probably a few others. Watts came in on the back of quite a few gun mids - Deledio and Murphy mainly who had great debut seasons. Plus Cooney, Goddard and Hodge were all looking the goods by then so people forgot their early career struggles. As well as Riewoldt who set the bar for key forwards. And Kreuzer who did really well for a young ruck. Since Watts there's only been Scully who dominated in the first year. The rest - Swallow, Patton, Whitfield and Boyd have all taken time to find their feet. Now McCartin gets the respectful treatment. I think we are stupid if we jump on his grave. Good luck to the young fella. He showed enough to suggest he'll be a good player tonight.

well that's amazing that Danks was prepared to give all of these essendon players all these other drugs and things and even ordered TB4 but kindly stopped short of actually giving it to them.... I cannot see WADA walking away from this, now that Danks farcical trial is over ASADA can now step aside and let its big brother come in and clip the AFL and Essendon over the ears for stupidity and find their own level of comfort.

Then you won't get him. Why choose Melbourne unless they paid overs ?

So Dank got away with it.....are you for real My interest in professional sport is getting less and less..... Drugendon representing the diggers on ANZAC DAY F@#%*k That...How dare it be them using the MCG.

Absolutely disgusting

- Jones is an A-grade midfielder and an all-round A-grade human being from all available evidence. - Ablett is the only reason that Gold Coast was relevant, interesting or competitive in its first two years. But the thrust of the article, about Jones as a role-model, is absolutely true. Jones efforts to continuously improve, especially to minimise early weaknesses (eg. unreliable kicking, reckless attempts to barge through tackles) and systematically, deliberately add extra capabilities (side-stepping, peripheral awareness, leadership) are a living example of how an AFL player should go about their business. Throw in the healthy life attitude, and he is a gift to the Demons, outshining any other player in a decade. So, all in all, I think Nathan Burke has provided an excellent cover letter for his application to be midfield development coach at the Melbourne Football Club.

Interesting metaphorical allusions to team tactics, systems and breakdown of procedure. Especially the disjointed set of partially formed ideas. Hopefully our players are grasping these more refined intellectual juxtapositions and are able to increase the allegory quotient to deploy opposition incursions. Perhaps later using alliteration and onomatopoeia to completely stop them in their tracks. While engaging them in a discourse of cerebral ephemera some our more linguistically challenged can just go about the actual scoring part of the game. I just hope the rebuild and renewal will take less time to learn the the actual game of football that seems to have challenged many for some time now.

Are you on the drugs that killed River Pheonix?

There is more than one Greenaway fan on Demonland chap

Gee I went for the day and it turned into David and Margaret, haven't read through it all, kept getting stuck on the young lady wearing the light blue inflated life jacket, but somebody mentioned the film "the Party', great film starring Peter Sellers, helps watching it if you have smoked or are smoking those extra strong cigarettes (not that I ever inhaled)

This is the best training thread ever.

At my place we call these Thorpies.

I don't think they'd tell him what he needs to do - to be better than Wines. But rather what he needs to do - to be the best player he can be. We have our own Ollie Wines in Angus Brayshaw. If Adelaide or Port wanted in on Toumpas for a late first rounder, I'd jump at it.

That just reminded me of something from my dim darl past. I used to do salaries for the repat hospital at Heidelberg back in the 70's and on the list there were the following three names: Hardstaff, Kink and Kong. (I guess you had to be there). Sorry, I just thought I would provide a distraction from the training element in this thread.

Honestly i think Dawes is a victim of stagnation through the midfield and of the half back line. He isn't a string one on one contested mark and needs to be on a lead. We didn't move the ball well last week which meant he was rarely in good position when wet kicked it to him. He needs to help the side by running and leading and presenting repeatedly. That's the only way he gets the ball. It may be more work but standing still and calling for it won't help him. If we move it quickly to him his value improves. Simple. I agree though that he can work on softer hands and timing his jump.

Another one to add to the list: Last time a Demonland training thread was not derailed: About 2008

Not sure that the last six words of that post belong in this thread.

Further exposes the Tribunal as a crock. I may seem rather biased in this but I cant for the life of me understand how in a situation whereby the only drug actually mentioned or sourced ( or even attempted to be if you want to take the wowsers stance ) was TB4. That this is accepted by the member of the tribunal as being the one sought, indeed in all likelihood the one compounded. That we know the players were injected with something that followed the protocols of TB4 that players exhibited reactions/results as one would having taken TB4 that you can then come out and say...well we're not comfortable it was TB4..cat say what else it was or even could have been ...but...but...but. The learned wise ones seem less learned and short on wisdom. Hope they enjoy the money.

he's a sook - should run it off.

The logic would be they can't prove it. And if they can't prove it Dank would sue the pants off them. Much easier to ban him for bringing the game into disrespute etc, running a drug regime with no records....

For everyone's information, I'm in adelaide with work and it has bucketed down here overnight and is forecast to throughout the rest of the day. Tomorrow is also looking quite ordinary. Wonder if that factors in with the final team.

Well luckily Viney will be back in 4-6 weeks and Petracca will be back next year. This injury sucks, it sucks badly, because we are such an average team with such a horrible midfield and we can't afford to lose anyone with any sort of talent. But I look at other clubs and their injury lists and I feel like we have been relatively lucky.

We had Brad Miller who i rate alot higher then Dawes for 2 years in Wattsy career. We got rid of him too early as well considering our next Key Forward was Watts.

Just to put the Tribunal's decision in context, here's a case that emerged today: hearing on May 7. Concerns a Belgian rider, Greg Van Avermaet who rides for BMC, Cadel Evans' old team. No positive test, the whole case rests on an email exchange. According to the AFL Tribunal, this would prove nothing, because though he was prescribed Diprophos, and took Diprophos, we can't be sure it was actually Diprophos. "... according to reports in the Belgian media, the Royale Ligue vélocipédique Belge accusations against Van Avermaet focus on the use of two medicines: the corticoid Diprophos, which is only banned in competition but can be used with a medical certificate, and Vaminolact, a fortifying baby food that helps improve recovery. This is banned if injected. Van Avermaet's defence claimed he was given a prescription for the substance but never took it to a pharmacy. A report by Sporza suggests that the case against Van Avermaet is based on an email exchange between Dr. Mertens and Van Avermaet. It appears Van Avermaet was treated with Diprophos, under medical supervision, for a heel problem that still causes him problems. His lawyer insisted that he used the corticoid for treatment, not to boost his performance in races."

Salem could be the "man" for us in 2-3 years. He has already become important.

Let's just be clear. The guy broke his leg and kept playing. If opposition midfielders aren't scared by now, they're idiots.

WIN BACK TO BACK!!!! 27 points up at half time on the weekend, OPPORTUNITY BLOWN. Yes i'm still [censored] off about it.

Don't pikeout, log-in and join the mayhem. it will lighten your day, widen your horizons, give you a better idea of the vagaries of human nature, better understand the nature of conflict, sharpen your [censored] antenna, allow you to talk about any subject under the sun, appreciate the sexual inclinations of certain posters (I did not say BBO did I?) and occasionally read about football. And stop you from taking out your frustrations with family or friends. Escape from the real world and enjoy the virtual world. We are all shadows, pretenders, and we delude ourselves into thinking that our opinion is important and matters to others. Of course no one can give a stuff for your opinion. They just want to use your comments as a means of being heard themselves. Remember despite the ratbags and egos we all have one binding mad crazy devotion that binds us (I did not say ties us BBO) together.

agreed, but like I said earlier, it seems like he is never, repeat never, served it on a platter.. it is always floated above him and he is getting close attention from at least one KPD. Why can't we try to use him in a traditional full-forward way, play him out of the goal square with instructions to charge on a lead at the ball carrier, have the midfielders looking for him and make sure that JKH/Gartlett/Kent is at his ankles 100% of the time to mop up the ones that don't work, anything but what seems to be the current strategy of having him be spoiled and fall to ground 70 metres from goal, it's just not working

Agreed. He is on big money because that's what we were required to pay at the time, or else he would be in another jumper. It's completely irrelevant now.

Who in the comp at the moment has two big forwards working well together.....Clark & Hawkins ......Cloke & Jessie smith......tippet & franklin.......even Roughead & Gunston ( though gunston not really a big) ....one is generally doing ok but not both ....however you would be a brave person to say that it won't eventually click & then become effective. Dawes has had one game with hogan.....hogan has had two afl games .....why do we have to make such damming statements so early in the season. I for one remember the many games last season where Dawes was our only forward & rag dolled & harrassed opponents with often 3 hanging of him. Can't we at least wait till rnds 5 or 6 onwards to make such definitive statements!!

Chris Flaws?