M_9

My retort was in response to the statement that there is a difference between being found not guilty, and being found innocent. JBP's trial (where he was charged with criminal offences) was aborted when the jury could not agree. JBP emerged from the courthouse claiming he had been found innocent. The EFC players may be found not guilty. That would not mean they are innocent. More likely the circumstantial evidence was not strong enough. FWIW I think ASADA has sufficient evidence to have only a percentage of the 34 found guilty. Evidence on BF that one player has named 6 or so that he knows were injected with TB4 (along with himself).

Joh Bjelke Petersen says 'Hi'.

I posted the other day that, according to the AFL Anti-doping Code, Provisional Suspension only prohibits players from competing. At least that's how I read it. I know it was mentioned that Saad didn't train, but that may have been self-imposed or imposed by the Saints. Why have him train if he may not be re-signed? The other point to note is that players Provisionally Suspend themselves ie they need to make that request to the AFL. It is conceivable that many didn't make that request if they were steadfast in their belief that nothing banned was taken. Again, that's the way I read the Code.

I haven't found the time to pore over Bruce Francis's ramblings on Bombertalk as yet. Francis claims to have spent 40 hours interviewing Dank. I find that surprising. When Dank was asked some time ago why he didn't defend the Cronulla players he said he didn't have the time as he had clients he had to serve. Strange that he found 40 hours for Francis. Given that Francis is house-bound in Tweed Heads, that's a heck of a lot of time to spend on the phone. Anyway, here's part of Francis's answer to the question 'did he think Dank was 'the genuine article - honest?' "I don't know enough to make such a judgment. Dank has given very plausible responses to my questions but it is still impossible to make a judgment. For example, prior to speaking to him, I thought as TB-4 helped soft tissue injuries, he must have used it at EFC. I asked him what he used and why. He said Thymomodulin because it boosts the immune system and consequently helps ward off colds, flu and coughs, which are the worst things that can happen to a football team. And here's me think that a navicular, ACL or sof tissue injuries were the worst things that could happen.

It appears to be up to the AFL. You would think that the AFL gave Watson and Fletcher the go ahead to compete in the IR series because they (the AFL) didn't consider that to be competition. Perhaps one rule for Saad, another for the EFC. Is an intra-club match competition?

Looking through the AFl Anti-doping Code, I cannot see anywhere that it states that a player cannot train whilst provisionally suspended: Competing is something different: Section 14.7 (d) If an (sic) Player voluntarily accepts a Provisional Suspension in writing from the AFL and thereafter refrains from competing, the Player shall receive a credit for such period of voluntary Provisional Suspension against any period of Ineligibility which may ultimately be imposed. The players, if they sought it, could have been Provisionally Suspended from the moment they received their IN's. If they compete I would assume any 'time served' would be wiped.

Geez bing, given that you re-posted here it seems an odd question to ask! It appears the mods here have deleted it (understandably). I had PM'd it to WJ, and can PM it to any other DLer I think. Posts deleted from BF still reside in the ether, as you well know. Anyway, to answer your question, the person who posted what appears to be paragraphs taken from ASADA's brief of evidence comes across as a 'educated' person. He professes to be a Blues supporter, and apparently early days posted on the Essendon forum on BF, which can get you carded if you upset anyone there. When questioned about the authenticity of the material he posted, he says that one of the 34 is a mate of his. It's certainly put the wind up many on the BF Ess forum.

From Bruce Francis on Bombertalk (this bloke is a crack-up): On another issue concern has been expressed that EFC could be without 18 players for the NAB Cup. I beg to differ. EFC has been at pains to protect the identity of the players who have been charged. If those 18 were omitted from the NAB Cup we would learn their identity. I therefore believe the club would leave out an additional dozen or so top players so no one would know the identity of the 18. Thus, EFC would field a third rate side in the NAB Cup. I suspect Fox and NAB wouldn't be too pleased with that scenario. Fielding a third rate side would be much more effective than Robbo's mythical boycott. A boycott would have brought penalties and ridicule. A third-rate team sticks it up the AFL.

The same poster added: I should also point out that being knowingly injected with TB4 does not necessarily mean that they were knowingly being injected with banned substances. In fact, my understanding is that they were not knowingly injected with illegal substances and believed that TB4 was not banned.

The following was posted around 1pm today on BF. From memory the poster has a very close connection to the person whose posts were deleted the other night by a BF mod. It turns out that ASADA do have a star witness. He plays or played for Essendon and testifies that he knowingly was injected with TB4. In addition there are a number of GL entries from the Essendon financial systems that exactly correlate to Alvari's own financial records. Further, the player in question lists a long list of players who also knowingly took TB4. Finally, it would appear that TB4 was not the only thing taken by players and there are much darker shadows there. So, this is one player who clearly has gone for the "substantial assistance" clause and who's testimony should not necessarily be taken as fact. Nonetheless, this is compelling and convincing stuff.

Re the post that appeared very briefly on the Bf HTB (Hot Topic Board) late last night before being removed by a Moderator; this from the Moderator: It was removed from the HTB as there are serious implications for the person involved. the information should not be available at this time. The person who made the post has been a regular poster (allegedly a Blues supporter) and his posts have been rational and well expressed. He appears to have gone to ground. Just to repeat myself, the post appeared to be part of ASADA's evidence to the current tribunal placing TB4 on the premises. You would assume that the players have received a copy of this evidence and the poster has a mate who is one of the 34 charged. He (the poster) received a copy - probably electronic as the post appeared to be a 'cut and paste'.

The poster, when asked, said the info he posted came from 'a current or former player'. I suspect there'd be ramifications for someone. The Bf mod had all traces removed pretty quickly. They'd know exactly what can and cannot be posted with well over six million posts to the forums.

Now the players say they will boycott the NAB games unless any backdating goes to last Sept. Just one hurdle - they first have to be cleared to play before they can institute a boycott. http://www.news.com.au/sport/afl/essendon-players-could-boycott-nab-challenge-games-if-afl-backdates-anti-doping-bans/story-fndv8gad-1227201050379

Gee. I was just gobsmacked. It was on page 117 of the Bruce Francis thread (now back to p116) with numerous posts deleted. The original poster had deleted their post but needed the mod to delete posts that had quoted him. From memory it was 4 or 5 paragraphs, each numbered (4 digits) that I guess was an 'evidence sheet' for want of the correct term. It detailed where the TB4 was sourced, who sourced it, who injected it and into which players it was injected. I think all names were redacted (xxxxxx sort of thing). Like all other posters I couldn't believe what I was reading. I could not have posted it here anyway.

Re my post above: From the Bf mod:Cleaned up a little chaps. Carry on, nothing to see here From another poster: You couldn't have just waited till the GG got a little glimpse (GG is Bruce Francis who is a certifiable looney) And from another poster: Well, I saw it. If that was genuine, then let's just say that ASADA's case isn't as weak as some would suggest. That was pretty rock solid.

Just read a damning (for players) post on Bigfooty that detailed the injection program (TB4). The poster, when questioned, said it was part of ASADA's evidence to the tribunal that he had obtained from a player (present at the hearing I assume). The poster realised what he had published and requested the mods remove it, which they promptly did, (before I could copy). It may go viral (as predicted on Bf), but no forum could risk publishing it (contempt of court?)

I'm pretty sure I posted some time ago that I heard from a senior AFL employee last December that the payout figure Hird negotiated when he signed on was $6 mil.

My understanding is that they have sought and been granted permission to train, but it's only matches that 'count' in regard to sanctions. There was some debate as to whether or not the IR game was in effect an AFL game.

Players issued with infraction notices will generally step away from competition as part of provisional suspensions, however the sporting bodies involved have discretion which allows them to play. Essentially it is the player's choice, although I understand they need the AFL's permission. Hence EFC small forward Cory Dell'Olio, and former Bomber Nathan Lovett-Murray were cleared to play in the NTFL. However this could be an issue if a ban is imposed as the player gets credit for time served under provisional suspension. Watson and Fletcher played in the International Rules gave, and if they cop a ban they could be out a month or so longer than others.

Hunt. You heard it from me (after Ralph narrowed it down to two). I think I mentioned previously that Jayden is the nephew of former Dee Andy Moir.

On the Notice of Charge filed by the AFL against the EFC the AFL allege that 16 substances, including Thymosin, were administered to the players. I'd be interested to know if ASADA found any of the substances on the premises (you'd expect so), if Thymosin was one of them, and if so was it tested (HPLC or chromatograpphy test).

From page 30 of the AFl Anti-doping Code: 'If a Player voluntarily accepts a Provisional Suspension in writing from the AFL and thereafter refrains from competing, the Player shall receive a credit for such period of voluntary Provisional Suspension against any period of Ineligibility which may ultimately be imposed.' So I'd take that to mean that if a player chose to compete in the pre-season comp and were subsequently found guilty they could not backdate their period of suspension as a 'non competitor' might.

Met an AFL Regional Manager two weeks ago. Said the payout figure for Hird (to sack him) was $6 mil.

On the AFL Notice of Charge it is alleged that the EFC caused 16 substances to be administered to the players. The substances are listed and include TB4. You would assume the AFL made this allegation on the basis of finding these substances on the premises. Unless Dank used every mL of Thymosin (I doubt it) it would just be a matter of running the Thymosin through a mass spectrometer to see what variant it was. Furthermore, why was 'Thymosin' listed on the consent forms that 38 players signed? Why wasn't it listed as Thymomodulin to avoid any ambiguity? I don't think Dank knew there was variants of Thymosin until the Nick MacKenzie interview. According to Chip Le Grand in his interview with Alavi, Alavi said he told Dank to have the Thymosin tested as he (Alavi) did not know whether he had compounded Thymosin alpha 1, Thymomodulin or TB4. Apologies for duplicating material that has been previously posted.

I think Doc Reid has a hell of a lot to answer for. A simple phone call or two to ASADA and they would have told him that AOD9604 and Thymosin beta 4 were both banned. He knew that the former was being administered to the players, expressed his doubt about it in his letters to Hird (lost in the mail?) and Hamilton, but failed to follow it up. He was at the meeting where the protocol and consent forms were discussed, and the consent forms, as we know, listed Thymosin. I do understand that the Mad Scientist was running amok, but Reid was too much in awe of The Golden Child to act on his doubts.