Whispering_Jack

Thanks for that ringing endorsement of the immediately preceeding post

Seriously though, there is a large number of players throughout the competition who haven't advanced as well as thought throughout their junior careers and this is where having good resources at a club is important - you need to thoroughly research the players in question and find out what's gone wrong. I think that process should also take place internally. Why have so many of our own early picks gone pear shaped? Were they the wrong choices to start with? Did they go off the rails because of deficiencies within our own environment? Were there social factors outside our knowledge and/or control? Was it development? There must be reasons why the Swans seem to have such a high success rate with their recruiting despite not having early picks. If we combine that sort of approach with the fact that we should go into the next month with at least two top ten picks then our chances of dramatically improving our list gets enhanced immeasurably.

If we got Mullett, I would be stunned.

We all know full well that the Roos philosophy is about trading early draft picks and are mostly happy about the 2013 outcome although the final results won't really be apparent for some time yet. Assuming Frawley goes and we get pick 3 then there's a strong possibility that we would do the same again. However, it goes without saying the deal would have to be right. If the Saints take Petracca then Brayshaw and McCartin provide us with a good start to our list improvement based on some of the advice I've received from some sound judges.

There's a lot of emotion floating around this thread and clearly, many are hurt by the fact that Clark is seeking to play the rest of his career elsewhere. I must admit that when I first heard the news, I wasn't particularly impressed but I really believe we should follow the dictum of our coach on this and not look back. If the club acted with emotion on this particular issue, then it would be taking its eyes off the ball, earn a poor reputation on the important issue of player welfare which should always be paramount at a club and possibly miss out on future opportunities. I'm sure that if Clark is definitely and finally out of the equation, then Roosy is already looking at what we as a club will get in to replace him. You only have to look at what ego and emotions are doing to the Essendon Football Club at the moment. Little and Hird continue to ramble on about the players but their actions are all about themselves. They've shafted their players and in doing so are bringing down the entire club. Always act with your head, not your heart.

Not long. Two or three months perhaps.

1. The vibe 2. Mabo 3. The fairy at the bottom of the garden.

If they appeal it's an appeal in hope and to buy time more than anything else and it would be because they believe ASADA has the evidence to prove their case for infractions.

Titus O'Reilly takes a serious look at Middleton J's decision:- The people of Melbourne respond to Justice Middleton’s ruling

Hanneberry

I stand corrected. He was captain at the beginning of the season but had to relinquish the captaincy early in the season and finished up after six games. Nevertheless, it was his inspiration that led to the substantial cultural change that lifted the Swans from a basket case to premiers under Roos.

Yep, Roy is a rugby person through and through but he has connections. My understanding is that in order to qualify for a reduction in penalty, the requirement for co-operation is that the athlete's evidence needs to result in sanctions against others. The players gave evidence in April/May 2013 and there were no sanctions flowing from their co-operation at the time. They stayed out of the Federal Court case in that they refrained from being parties to the action but they were represented by Grace QC. Now, David Grace was very measured in his submissions but I'm not convinced that they would particularly be described as "co-operation". However, when framing a compromise between parties in any action, its possible for language to be used to give the impression that everybody co-operated with everybody else and even the most bitterly fought court battle was really a "love in".

Another recent player who was a prolific ballwinner on debut, got injured and never came remotely close to firing any bullets on comeback. He came from the west so might be amenable to transferring back in a low level trade.

Does anyone have any Federal Court rulings to celebrate today?

The man behind this circus, and whose honest co-operation with the doping investigators could have avoided much of the pain it has brought to the football world, was in court yesterday. Stephen Dank sat with Deakin University law lecturer and Bomber apologist Martin Hardie behind the Essendon camp. It was reported by one observer that he was "talking with him through the verdict". Dank's view of the outcome:- "This is an extremely disappointing result for the players. They haven't taken banned or illegal substances. The players' rights have been simply thrown to the side of the road in an inept display of legal jurisdiction by the AFL and ASADA, and this ineptitude has been fully supported by the decision handed down today. However, the fight rolls on and Essendon should have little trouble winning the appeal." Stephen Dank says the fight rolls on after Federal Court ruling Dank was displaying as much knowledge of law as he was of banned substances when he told Age investigative reporters Baker and McKenzie in April 2013 that TB4 was legal under the WADA Code. This case was not about whether or not the players took illegal substances. It was about whether, in investigating the Essendon doping programme of 2011/2, ASADA had acted beyond its powers. Middleton made a number of findings of fact and law that led him to decide ASADA had acted lawfully in conducting a joint investigation (until August 2013) with the AFL. He found as fact that the Essendon camp's attempt to impugn the testimony of ASADA CEO Aurora Andraska was unfounded and that she was a truthful witness. He also found that the co-operation given by Hird and the Essendon players to the AFL was based on their contractual obligations to the AFL, they gave their evidence freely without objection and with the knowledge of their legal rights. He acknowledged as valid the interim report of August 2013 which led to the sanctions against Essendon on governance grounds. He even went as far as adding that even had he made a ruling in Essendon's favour on its claims about the nature of the joint venture he would have exercised his judicial discretion in such matters and would have been disinclined to make orders ruling out some or all of the evidence gathered by ASADA during the course of the investigation. In short, he agreed with ASADA's counsel that Essendon and Hird's case was "nonsense on stilts" and dismissed it outright. Middleton J covered virtually every base in the Essendon arsenal making it extremely difficult for a Full Court appeal to succeed but whether or not the Bombers and Hird do appeal after sending millions down the toilet in legal costs is another matter. Despite the cost, Essendon might claim to have achieved some minor victories by resorting to the Federal Court to head off the show cause notices which were issued on 12 June, 2014 on the eve of Round 13 (they lost to Melbourne by 1 point on 15 June) when there were still ten rounds to go. The players could have taken the six month deal offered by ASADA at the time which would have meant missing half a season (including a finals game as it turned out). Some are now suggesting on the strength of the NRL deals that new ASADA CEO McDevitt will do a deal that would be backdated in time to see them back playing at the start of 2015. That would be a travesty and would turn Essendon's loss into a victory (albeit a costly one in terms of money spent) by giving the players a bonus of 10/11 games off thanks to their court challenge. But Roy Masters doesn't believe the Bomber players will be so lucky - EssendonBombers could face 12 month bans following Federal Court ruling. In any event, I don't believe a strategic appeal to a higher court would be vindicated. The players are jack of the situation and one of them (Paddy Ryder) has already indicated he wants out. Others are likely to follow and the Bombers may well have to go into damage control to prevent the bleeding in terms of loss of players and threats of upheaval from the membership. They need to resolve board, coaching and staff issues (Little, Hird and Reid surely must go) as well as the status of players because the current uncertainty must have an effect on the issue of evaluating players if trades are to be done. Their entire recruiting strategy is at risk at a time when they still have to contend with draft penalties. And if the sanctions against players are as tough as Masters believes, the Bombers might have to go to the AFL for some sort of draft assistance to help them form a viable team in 2015 - and we know what the football world thinks about that subject in the case of first time applicants . Essendon is in a mess today and only has itself, its employees like Dank, Robinson, Hird etc to blame. As one observer stated a little while ago in The Footy Almanac, this was "the work of a club that not only has its head up its own arse but thinks that the view is spectacular."

Permit me to take a little poke at my own profession: The media is always on the lookout for legal eagles to give opinions on prominent court cases. One of the most outspoken rent a lawyers has been barrister, Deakin University lecturer and social media commentator who has apparently carried out some legal work for the Bombers: Court ruling could shape James Hird's future at Essendon, says lawyer

A round up of the media ... James Hirds time at Essendon is over Legal shirtfront flattens Hird, Bombers Essendon verdict judge exposes the club's weak and frivolous case James Hirds fate in hands of players after Federal Court failure ASADA trumps Essendon in Federal Court battle ... and no coverage of the doping saga would be complete without Caro Essendon pays for misguided approach

Carlton definitely the frontrunner here and we appear to be lagging well behind. What do we have to offer that could better Carlton? Not a great deal and if anyone thinks offering pick 2 or 3 for this player would surely be wrong. All three of McCartin, Petracca and Brayshaw would be what we need and at least at present they run well ahead of Mtchell alone

Sports reporting fail of the year goes to Essendon's media cheerleader Chip Le Grand ASADA case against Essendon Bombers at risk of collapse

OK but the last VFL game that really meant anything.

Here's some analysis from a lawyer whose views I've quoted previously. The Social Litigator

Middleton J's decision. Justice John Middletons full ruling against Essendon and James Hird in the Federal Court Brilliantly put together and a very difficult finding to appeal against. Of course, the Bombers won some time and will win more time in the unlikely event that they appeal but it's as damaging a defeat as you can get. An innings and 350 runs.

At about this moment fifty years ago ... THE 1964 PREMIERSHIP IS OURS

Good night.

Not looking good for the Bombers. Andruska a truthful witness.