Chris

To me he was a great player, that can't really be questioned. My issue with Garry, which may well be an unfair one, is that he epitomises everything that was wrong with the club for so long. To me he is the face of the boys club that appointed their own and saved their own and very nearly bought about the downfall of this club. There are others but he is the first to mind whenever I think of the wrongs of that time and the reasons why.

So an arts law degree comes in your tenth pack of pop tarts then? Sounds about right.

Where do arts degrees come from then, I thought they had the rice bubbles market tied down?

Probably a mix of bomber blitz and the talking donkey!

Another Journo to add to the list of journos with no real understanding of what is going on. The penalty imposed on Essendon is crap It would be funny if it wasn't so blatantly wrong and apologetic.

I guess they probably do deserve a mention on top of just being part of the incompetent media, they are especially incompetent

The AFL code is relevant though as it is under that code that the players are charged. There is a link and it is that link that the lawyers are trying to explore. I to don't think they have a hope in hades but knowing the answers would be interesting.

I posted this in the last couple of pages of the last thread and thougth I would put it up here for anyone interested. It is the 2010 version of the AFL anti-doping code - AFL ANTI DOPING CODE This is the section relevant to appeals by WADA. 17.1 Decisions Subject to Appeal Decisions made under this Code may be appealed as set out below. Such decisions shall remain in effect while under appeal unless CAS or the Appeals Board orders otherwise. Before an appeal is commenced, any post-decision review authorised in the NAD Scheme must be exhausted. (a) WADA Not Required to Exhaust Internal Remedies Where WADA has a right to appeal under this Clause and no other party has appealed a final decision within the process set out in this Code, WADA may appeal such decision directly to CAS without having to exhaust other remedies set out in this Code. Where a decision has been rendered before the final stage of an Anti-Doping Organisation’s process (for example, a first hearing) and no party elects to appeal that decision to the next level of the Anti-Doping Organisation’s process (e.g., the Appeals tribunal), then WADA may bypass the remaining steps in the Anti-Doping Organisation’s internal process and appeal directly to CAS.) I have highlighted the bit I have a question over. No where within the code does it actually say you can only appeal on points of law, is it automatically assumed that this would be the case if it is not defined or does it need to be defined? If it isn't defined does it defer to the WADA code, the AFL tribunal rules, CAS rules, or Australian Law? Given the very clear statement here about what WADA can and can not do does it actually matter what the rest of the code says? Are the procedural things like the de novo hearing under what is referred to as remedies or are remedies considered the actual hearing/each step of the process? Chris Kaias has written about how the 2010 code doesn't actually matter as this is a procedural issue and the 2015 code actually clarifies a lot of the questions above, is he right? I am keen for one of the learned members of the forum to provide some enlightenment on this if they can. Thanks in advance. Thinking it through it seems what may well have happened in ASADA/WADA have met with the AFL to discuss what possible routes this will go down and the AFL have thought that an appeal to CAS would be on a point of law only to be clearly told that that isn't the way it works, and it never will work that way. The AFL then came through with a new code making it all clear about the fact it wont need to be on a point of law. If that is the case it is just another example of the people in AFL land who should know not actually having a clue at all.

Beveridge has just added his name to the list of AFL land people who simply have no understanding or concept of what the WADA code is and what it stands for. I am not surprised they don't seem to know but I am surprised at just how little they seem to know. It really is embarrassing! Here are the names I can remember The 34 players James Hird Paul Little Steven Dank The EFC board Many EFC supporters Andy D Gil Mc Paul Marsh Neil Balme Luke Beveridge Peter Gordon Bomber Thompson 90% of the media (the exceptions are Whateley and Wilson and maybe one or two others) AFL commission I am sure there are others. Appalling state of affairs.

As long as he doesn't try and teach them how to use their hands!

It is the whole football world and the fact they have been told for years they are leading the fight against drugs in sport while the entire time spruiking about the team culture that leads to things just like the EFC fiasco. That is why they were all so surprised, none of them truly understand the WADA code, and now they have been caught they are all on about how unfair and unjust it is and how it doesn't fit our culture. I hate to tell you AFL people, it is you that doesn't fit the culture expected from the rest of the world, not the other way around.

Not to mention that attitude goes against the players explicit training not to put their trust in anyone but ASADA.

Have never heard of this bloke writing a column in the Age before but here is the link to Leaping Larry's take on the whole affair. "The employment of tools is one of the things that separate humans from animals. Another is awards shows. However, use of tools is more in our favour. In practical applications, it's not just having tools that is important. It's using the right ones. Colonel Sherman T. Potter (vale Harry Morgan) encapsulated this sentiment with crystalline clarity when, on a MASH episode, he thundered down the phone line to an errant supply quartermaster: "We keep ordering rectal thermometers and you keep sending us spark plugs. Both useful items, but hardly interchangeable!" Take the World Anti-Doping Authority. Theoretically WADA is the authority regarding the use of illegal substances in all world sport. Just ask them. Advertisement However, the majority of WADA's experience is based in individual sports, such as cycling, track and field, swimming and weightlifting. In such contexts, WADA operates on the assumption that if a substance is proven present, even if in a "cold remedy taken in ignorance", the individual is guilty. Ignorance is considered no excuse. An area WADA doesn't know so thoroughly – and seemingly was less than fanatical about correcting the omission – is the traditional environment within an Australian sporting club. A situation in which when you're told something is good for the team, it's the overwhelming expectation of both club and its young players that you do that very thing. And if you are told supplements being administered are not illegal, you'd very likely believe that too. Without considering that context, it's arguably impossible to understand the Essendon player mindset. Not that this slowed anybody down. Thirty-four players were convicted as drug cheats and lost a year off their careers. Do we know that any of them tested positive? No. Do we know that they were culpably negligent in not avoiding that possibility? WADA and the Court of Arbitration for Sport uttered a unilateral "yes". But a scant few of us might have lingering suspicions that the WADA/CAS combo were the proverbial spark plugs in this scenario. For the Essendon supplements job, maybe they were simply the wrong tools. Send feedback to [email protected] Read more: http://www.theage.com.au/afl/essendon-bombers/wada-square-peg-inserted-in-questionable-hole-20160113-gm5j5y#ixzz3zjVeRLou Follow us: @theage on Twitter | theageAustralia on Facebook Seems everything in AFL land is as it should be and the rest of the world need to change. Sounds about right. Really don't know how tripe like this actually gets published!

They do come in handy at times!

I think you are correct, there were also texts about various injection to, including thymomodulin, although thankfully it was that and not thymosin mentioned. The players sailed far too close to the wind and are lucky not be on the sidelines with the bomber boys at the minute. A matter of another month or so of the program and I think they would be.

If the mix up hadn't occurred then I would agree whole heatedly. With the mix up though there is a realistic chance of confusion.

As far as I understand there was a mix up between ASADA and the ACC. Allegedly the ACC asked ASADA if AOD was banned under S2, ASADA correctly replied that it wasn't. The ACC took this to mean it wasn't banned and published in their report that it wasn't banned, even though it was banned under S0, but ASADA didn't provide that clarification. This would give the players an out as it is published in a document by a government organisation, who reference ASADA, that AOD was not banned. This mix up also saved a couple of our boys.

Just read most of the Francis article, not only is he wrong on some points of law he makes some incredible claims about misconduct by ASADA and WADA which may well find him in trouble. If anyone cared about his opinion he would be in a world of pain from the public with his sexist and demeaning comments about Rita. Such a pity he sounds like he knows what he is talking about as the gullibles will believe him!

It would need to be revenue based on bums on seats regardless of membership status. In terms of the GWS argument that all comesdown to who you play twice

It isnt so much about when you play, it is about who you have home games against. The small Melbourne clubs generally only get home games against each other and interstate sides while the big ckubs get home games against each other far more. This makes it far easier for them to make money. Add to that the high profile TV slots and lufe all of a sudden gets a lot easier. I say split the gate on every game 50/50 and things instantly get a lot fairer

His handling of the mess has been appalling though, as has Essendon's, Dimetriou's, The Commission's, the AFLPA's, most of the media's (due to accreditation issues), the former federal government, and most of all the EFC and players legal teams! The only people who come out of this with any credibility are Andruska, McDevitt, the team at ASADA, and the team at WADA. Might just be because they are the only ones who have bothered to understand what is actually going on!

We are a big factor in the QB games crowd, maybe not telly but we would go close to matching the Collingwood numbers there.

It is the cahnges to the AFL code they are referring to not the WADA code, although one may reflect the other, i haven't bothered looking

This whole thing about 2010 vs 2015 seems misguided. The only cahnge i can find gives the players the right to appeal to CAS which they previously didn't have, there is no change as per what WADA could and couldn't do that i could find. Maybe i am missing something or it is all a red herring.

Sure they have, the problem is that the sentence finished with words along the line of 'this is clearly a giant conspiracy involved the federal government, the AFL, ASADA, WADA, international courts, the swiss, the Canadians, Kim Jon Un, the UN, and all intergalctic organisations. They clearly all have it in for you and the EFC because they dont like the fact we have won 16 flags and are on the verge of another. They will do anything to stop it happening and you are all inocent victims and must keep fighting'