deanox

I'm not sure of the full legal ramifications, and someone who better understands politics and legalities may better comment but the AFL has signed to the WADA code, and so had the Australian government. If the AFL thumbs it's nose at WADA I would expect the Australian government would need to cut ties with the AFL lest WADA revoke Australia's membership or accreditation or whatever it is WADA provide. That could be significant funding cuts for both elite and grass roots football.

given that "intent" to use a banned PED is sufficient to be banned, is a signed consent form that names the substances not sufficient to prove intent?If there is a question regarding whether these substances were injected it would be a simple question to each player "did you receive any injections immediately after signing this form?" If the answer is yes it's pretty clear cut to me unfortunately. I'm not sure to what extent onus of proof is required under the ASADA act, given that players have been convicted without positive tests previously it appears that strong circumstantial evidence is sufficient. edit: sorry had been covered. But additionally, I think instead of trying to prove individuals took substances, I suspect ASADA will come down on all who signed forms and received injections based on balance of probabilities is that they received banned substances given what they signed.

WADA are internationally independent, if ASADA handed or infraction notices next week, and the AFL banned players for 6 months (preseason only, free to play round 1) the international community would be in an uproar such that WADA would be forces to step in. WADA have appealed against a Spanish Court who ordered destruction of possible evidence, they are active and are happy to take on individual countries. Weather they would ban Australia as a result of the failure of the AFL to take sufficient action I'm not sure.

again, we've got an interpretation difference: I understood Watson, saying "I consented to AOD because it is legal. I can't prove that is what was given to me but that's what I thought I was getting.", you seem to think he said "in hindsight I think I was probably given AOD but I have no actual idea or proof.", correct?I'd have to watch the interview to refresh my opinion RE Watsons comments. Also re the consent forms. I may be wrong, I'm not sure, but I understood the forms were meant to have the drugs listed so Dr Reid could could sign and say it was safe and legal and then the players would do the same. If it didn't have the drugs listed, what was the point of the doctors signature?

WADA can appeal to the Court of Arbitration of Sport, as happened to a VFL player whose ban was increased from 9 to 24 months. If WADA thought ASADA was politically corrupted in handing out penalties it would go much further; banning Australia from competing in other events.

My understanding is that the consent forms listed the substances that *may* be included. I may be wrong and would like clarification, I thought Watson mentioned that in his interview. Also regarding Watson saying "I thought that was what they were giving me but I'm not certain" the WADA code specifically states "intent" to take a banned substance is an offence. If he was being injected by something he thought was AOD but wasn't 100% sure then that is as good as taking it for the purposes of sanctions.

Maybe fitzpatrick can "come back" through casey next week? Can anyone confirm our deny if playing next week would count as one of the 6 games required?

Any ban or sanctions to hird or essendon on Monday will purely be regarding governance issues. If asada bring infraction notices, his and Essendon will be charged again. Coaches stand to get up to 4 years ban.

You are kidding aren't you? He is a beautiful kick and some handpasses yesterday were very smart directly or in front of a running player who didn't have to miss a step. Yes he floundered a couple of times but that isn't his disposal. If there isn't an option, he can't create one: he can't kick to a lead of no one is leading, he can't kick to advantage of we are outnumbered. If he looks up and there is only oposition players forward it makes sense that he will back pedal to retain possession rather than blaze away because that is the type of player he is. If a teammate doesn't shepherd and give him space he will be under pressure. Displaying good disposal is reliant on a bunch of other factors, but that doesn't change the inherent quality of his disposal. When the team plays better footy and gets in better positions and runs harder, you will see what good disposal is.

Yeah but if asada don't have enough evidence to concvict anyone, the person who comes forward would go from 0 months (No conviction) to 6 months (reduced sentence).

Can that apply in these cases? I thought guilty was still guilty to WADA. It might get reduced to 6 months, but if it is 0 before they blab it isn't really clemency is it?

We'll win next week, just for Jaded, and she'll miss it!

They won't do it because it will result in then getting banned and no one else. ASADA / WADA can issue sanctions against players, and coaches I believe. I believe WADA had the power to ban countries from events? Dies any one know if they can ban or sanction clubs?

All afl players can play for vfl next week, correct? And subsequently, afl players can keep playing at vfl, regardless of qualification until their afl side is knocked out, correct? At least we will have a full available squad next week for casey. Does anyone know of paying in the first final counts as one of the 6 required games?

Of the 11, 4 were in the first quarter, and I think 4 were in the last (2 or 3 in the last couple of minutes). That means we had 3 free kicks in the middle two quarters where we lost the ascendency. Some were there, some weren't but I reckon they could have paid another 10 to us that they didn't.

trip by face?

What was the free kick or 50 against Mcdonald for???? 24 to 9 with two 50 m penalties now.

What's the prediction kc? Who's favour is the wind, injuries, momentum in?

correct.

Haven't paid that to Dawes today.

Because there is no one free upfield. If they kicked out we'd say "why do we bomb it long to no one?"

What was wrong with the Toumpas handball? 19 - 8 another goal directly following a free kick.

A couple of goals to Melbourne so we better even up with a crap free kick to Adelaide which subsequently takes in a goal.

2 have been his fault but the other 2 he got sold into.

Howe just didn't want to kick that to watts in a one on one did he?