ManDee

H22, I think the opposite, I think he will be guilty or suing everyone.

One of the best examples of sabre rattling I have seen for some time. Well done WADA, excellent timing.

A bit awkward at times, took a while to work out where my feet were. The best bit was bumping into old school friends. WTF happened to you?

No, I was just a late developer. Not even shaving at 19.

At 17 I was 163cm and 80kg. At 20 I was 185cm and 85kg. Some people develop late.

Not bad but he had his money on the Dees. That will be the end of using live bait at the Whitten oval.

They made another bet at half time that the Doggies would lose by let than 10 points.

Interesting, upper case i's are undotted.

Sorry HT cannot go with the "vibe" defence. I am more a Dennis Denuto Mabo kind of guy, (as seen on TV)

Viv Michie 22 4 0 4 1 3 100 0 2 1 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 2 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 21 26 1Sam Frost 17 3 4 7 4 3 42.9 3 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 2 1 2 0 1 0 1 0 0 100 76 28 12 50 12 11 5 9 0 8 8 9 11 100 0 2 1 0 0 0 0 4 3 42.9 3 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 2 1 2 0 1 0 1 0 0 100 4 7 4 3 42.9 3 2 0 0 2 0 0 12 0 0 WTF ???????????????????????????? Some context please.

Pet hate. Sth Africa won by 9 wickets. How are wickets relevant in 1 day cricket? Surely they won within 18 overs. You can lose more wickets and win. You could score 9 for 200 and win against a side 1 for 199 is that a win by 1 wicket even though you lost 8 more wickets? Any mention of wickets when defining a victory in one day matches is anathema. Edit: You can win by runs - if they fall short chasing. Or you can win with balls remaining if successful in run chase or you can win on the last ball. You cannot win by wickets.

Anyone know how Essendon are fairing with salary cap breaching? Surely the AFL must have given them permission to pay overs and also extra players on list. Other clubs would be very interested in this I would imagine. The AFL has bent over backwards to help the cheats and yet the EFC keep blaming them.

If I engage staff that systematically breaks the law and I have no system in place to ensure ethical & legal practices are maintained, I am ultimately responsible. If my staff makes mistakes, I pay for the rectification. If my systems do not monitor that staff follow procedures and problems arise I am still responsible. If I discover my staff have made an error, I notify the affected person/company and discuss rectification immediately. EFC have a lesson or two to learn in ethics and legal responsibility. Or they chose to cheat and lie and the lessons would be wasted. Either way they are guilty.

At some levels I hope they were lied to and deceived. This adds to the guilt of the club.

Why not a mirror?

I checked early 2013 and it was available then. At that time I checked AOD9604 as that was the peptide most talked about, and there was plenty of info about peptides and illegal use with links to WADA and prohibited lists. Of note, reference was made to approved supplements and if a supplement was not listed it was NOT approved for use. Edit: Punctuation.

I have been reading and posting on this topic for some time now. What amazes me is that of the 34 adult men trained to be very aware of the substances that enter their bodies not one inquired with any governing body about the legality of the program. Not one of the 34 spent the 5 minutes required to check about their professional future. Less than one minute to find the relevant information on the ASADA site. Less than one minute to ask their manager, :Is this stuff OK? I cannot believe that all 34 players are that stupid. I would be very surprised if the ASADA site didn't keep a record of computers that inquire about illegal substances. I would expect ASADA to have a record of players and managers computers asking about Thymosin Beta 4 and others. Circumstantial evidence but at some point the circumstantial evidence becomes overwhelming.

Groucho it is simpler than that. Guilty of attempting to take a banned substance is all that is required.

I suggest a trust account with a board of managers to distribute funds, or you could pay up today.

So from what you are saying I can assume that you think there will be more pain and possibly from multiple sources but not the AFL. My contention is there will be more pain and from multiple sources including the AFL. So we are on. Don't leave town. NB. If the AFL recommends changes at the top or funding may be withheld, I call that pain. eg. Sack Hird or no $$$$ from the AFL

OD I am as sure that EFC have more pain to come as I am that the sun will come up tomorrow. I may be deluded, I may be misinformed but I bet you $1 that there is more pain in-store for EFC NB:- $1 is my maximum bet on anything. Bragging rights are more important than the money.

OD the sanctions to date refer to bringing the game into disrepute. If they are found guilty of systemic PED cheating you can be sure there is more pain to come.

In legal terminology, the situation where the liabilities of a person or firm exceed its assets. In practice, however, insolvency is the situation where an entity cannot raise enough cash to meet its obligations, or to pay debts as they become due for payment. Properly called technical insolvency, it may occur even when the value of an entity's total assets exceeds its total liabilities. Mere insolvency does not afford enough groundfor lenders to petition for involuntary bankruptcy of the borrower, or force a liquidation of his or her assets. Read more: http://www.businessdictionary.com/definition/insolvency.html#ixzz3U1lYnXnB If Little or some other benefactor offered to underwrite the club they would be fine. The main issue would be removal of franchise or ban from competition, in these cases they would fold fairly quickly, as future income would be slashed and potential liability could be massive.

Interesting, you don't get censored but when you are quoted it does.

What is the purpose of the restructure? If the answer is to limit liability or the ability of others to pursue damages then it would fail. I think any new entity needs to be a new entity and in my opinion that would entail new brand, new location and new personnel. Or I would think the only way to keep the brand would be if the AFL took over the club and guaranteed any current or future claims against the old club. Perhaps then to hand club over to members after a suitable period, perhaps 20 years.