old55

Really enjoyed Aaron Davey's game - great final note.

What does Garry think?

There's "AFL" logic in that idea. None of the other clubs could complain about being disadvantaged - just Melbourne advantaged. The AFL make stuff up as they go along - that would fit perfectly.

yeah right chip and ben cousins didnt use methamphetamines he used metamucil - all a big misunderstanding

The part that's the same is that both are taking action with the aim to win in the future - Freo sooner than Melbourne - I agree with that. The part that is substantially different is that Melbourne DELIBERATELY WANTS TO LOSE in the present to enable this, whereas Freo doesn't care if it wins or loses in the present. In the words of the great Robbo - I'd like to be "flabberbasted" people cannot see this difference, but really I'm unsurprised. I'm on record that I strongly supported the Melbourne approach - and I still don't have a personal moral problem with it. But I was wrong - I now believe it did have a substantial detrimental affect on our club's culture - greater detrimental affect than the benefit we have received in Tom Scully morphed into Jesse Hogan and Chris Dawes (or however you want to exactly cut it). The AFL however DOES have an understandable problem with teams deliberately losing - they even instituted a rule against teams deliberately scoring a behind for the opposition to gain advantage of possession.

Redleg, do you think the issue for Doc Reid is likely to be about medical indemnity insurance?

I'm not sure that Doc Reid's request for an open hearing is going to play out all that well for Jimmy. If Doc Reid insists he's completely innocent then surely it's going to make Jimmy look a bit guilty?

This thread is tempting me to start channeling Ben-Hur.

I already have. There's a difference between trying to lose and not trying to win.

There's a massive difference but it won't surprise me if many here can't see it.

Because tanking is trying to lose, it's not not trying to win.

You've been posting for 7 months how Essendon and the Essendon players are all going to get off!!!

Melbourne supporters: Wilson on Melbourne tanking investigation: muck-raking agenda-driven shrew persecuting the innocent Wilson on Essendon drug investigation: fearless investigative journalist pursuing the guilty Essendon supporters: Wilson on Melbourne tanking investigation: fearless investigative journalist pursuing the guilty Wilson on Essendon drug investigation: muck-raking agenda-driven shrew persecuting the innocent

Burnside on 3AW: Hird - so brave, a hero!

Didn't sound good at the time and doesn't sound better now.

Incredible brinkmanship by Hird - that guy has nerves of steel. Hird says in court that Demetriou is not fit to judge him because he has a pre-conceived bias, in evidence when AD warned DE by phone that Essendon was in trouble. Evans and Demetriou have denied this. He must believe Evans is going to say differently under oath. Just incredible. I can't see a happy ending here.

Essendon FC ordered, were supplied with, stored on-site and paid for PEDs - Thymosin Beta-4 and Hexarelin (there's no doubt in my mind that's the substances redacted in the AFL charge sheet - look at the alphabetic order). Apparently they don't have records of which substances were given to which players so on that basis individual players may escape penalty - but surely that doubles the penalty the FC should suffer?

Hird is 99% innocent but Thompson is only 80% innocent apparently.

Something similar is happening here. One of the reasons the AFL want to avoid this going to court is that Demetriou's and McLaughlin's advice to Essendon prior to them self-reporting may be revealed and may be more than embarrassing. It's some dirty tactics by the Hird camp - the relationship with the AFL is permanently broken

It has been made quite clear that it is entirely the athlete's responsibility to ensure they do not take banned substances. But Essendon players couldn't independently verify that the supplements the club wanted to give them were legal under WADA because they weren't allowed to talk to anyone about them. The only option open to them was to entirely refuse to be part of the program. And Hird wonders what the problem is? Really I have a huge amount of sympathy for the Essendon players in this saga and that is in inverse proportion to Essendon management.

BT: "huge breaking news on Hird". Mark Stevens: "something might happen on Monday".

Then the players sue the club.

I've got the information from the AFL charge sheet - that's sufficient for me to form an opinion. I think that EFC have done some terrible things and should be severely punished, but I also see that there's no winners and it's in everyone's interest to come up with a negotiated settlement. I think the origina 4 factor penalty (fine + picks + points + individuals) reported by Jake Niall is on the lenient side and therefore the 3 point penalty (fine + points + individuals) reported in the Oz is even lighter. But I recognise that a deal needs to be done and I can live with it - i HAVE been specific. You apparently can't - but you're unable to say what would be sufficient. It's typical of your fence-sitting posting.

Yes I agree. EFC will want to grab "lose 2013 points" while it still exists, because as you say soon only "lose picks" will remain or maybe even "lose 2014 points and picks". I reckon the sticking point is that Hird going down is non-negotiable from the AFL's pov and that's the thing EFC have to accept.

Yep more rhetoric. I asked you: "What's your alternative? Go to the Supreme Court and have the AFL end up de-registering Essendon? Be specific with your alternative plan of action." How bad? 2 Pi r times as bad.