Redleg

They may not be able to prove banned substances, but signed agreements outside the playing contract, prabably as a result of coercion, injecting players and in the stomach as well, (by non club personnel) and knowing about the above for at least a year, before contacting the AFL, will land the Bombers in a heavy penalty zone, even if there is no guilty finding on the substances injected.

Just read Sam Edmunds report on the game and either he knows nothing or some on here watched the game with Demon glasses on. There was not a single mention of Flash in the whole article.

Little article in the Sun on us this morning about the tanking investigation. We will very soon know the outcome of the AFL's view on the report. With the Essendon and drugs dramas holding centre stage and with inquiries taking off everywhere, about the Bombers and drugs, the Bombers and their handling of players, the Cats ( at a time when they won 2 flags), the Lions etc and new procedures being investigated and adopted, it is interesting that the latest articles keep mentioning how we will fight this to the death. It just makes you wonder if the AFL see our issue as a distraction to more pressing issues. That may or may not help us I don't know, but I just can't see the AFL wanting to open up a whole new front to deal with, if we go to Court and then involve other clubs. It would just be a nightmare for the AFL and a terrific strain on their resources. If CC was truly at AFL house all day, one day this week, that may lead to a deal, ending the saga, without a finding of cheating. Then again the AFL may throw the book at us and say damn the consequences, though personally I can't see that happening. I spoke to a senior footy journo yesterday and he said that he had absolutely no idea what would happen or how the latest dramas would affect us. He was familiar with the views expressed on Demonland and personally expressed sympathy for our position.He asked my opinion, if I thought we would go all the way if corruption was found against us by the AFL and I told him that if we wanted to continue as a proud club, that was the only choice and given the effect on our income streams and our standing in the community and our history, we would be forced to defend ourselves to our last dollar.

Now there is a good post, with a sentiment I endorse completely.

To be honest I think I am sick to death of AGM's. I learn nothing.

They are certainly concerned as it is a serious matter.

No food at all. Spoke to a Director and CC and CS after the meeting and then left.

I don't follow.

Can't say that I have.

Maybe suppositories would be better.

I'll go just to hear Howcroft's comedy lines in the Financial Report.

Don't forget the threatening and intimidating gathering of information. Hope they also talk to ex-sponsors and supporters in pubs. BTW Sandy has denied he is leaving 7 and says he has not received any offer from Fox Footy.

What some might see as meddling others would call doing their job. If Craig and Misson turned him down, they would be acting well and would seem as far as that issue goes and judged solely on that, good appointments.

Hey Buddy give me a clue.

Any Footy news lately?

Interesting sideline for those complaining about CS meddling in footy matters. In todays press on the Bombers, the media and the AFL, have stated that the CEO should have intimate knowledge of the whole footy area of the club and know pretty much exactly what is going on. Seems maybe CS was only trying to do his job. I note we knocked back "the Pharmacist" for a job last year after he left the Bombers. Seems our admin got that right too. C'mon CS haters, you too Caro, lets bash CS again.

You are not Robinson Crusoe, I am just as sick of it. Can't we talk about drugs for a change?

The statements might not be worth a pinch of sh-t if received in an illegal manner. I would have thought evidence would be led in front of the tribunal and submissions made and then a decision given which could then be appealed to a Court by either side if unhappy. Witnesses might say statements were obtained by threats and intimidation for example or might say that the person recording them did so incorrectly or left parts out. I would think a Tribunal would act on evidence on oath or affirmation given before it and tested, rather than statements that may be completely wrong. .

My question as well and it would have to be a body that can administer the rules of Natural Justice, so may be some form of tribunal that the AFL has already or can constitute to hear the matter.

If people and/or the club are charged, then there must be a hearing, if they want to contest the charges. Maybe the AFL wants us to defend ourselves and if we beat the charges, all is sweet. Then there would be no need for Court intervention.

Major club, President son of former AFL Commission Chairman, poster boy Coach, yes this will be interesting. IF they were prohibited substances and Bomber players used them, unlike Wade Lees who never actually used anything but got 18 months, one would expect a harsher penalty, for each player who used the substances. You can bet London to a brick that Bomber players won't be suspended, nor will Caroline Wilson call for the Chairman, CEO or Coach's sacking. The rich club will be fined, which won't mean a thing to it and some Official or Officials will cop a penalty. BTW a disgruntled ex-player in Reimers has added salt to the wound, in an interview with Damien Barrett. Possibly more ex players or officials to follow. Where have we seen that happen before?

Wilson has called for CS to be sacked. He was seen walking past a Bombers membership tent last year.

Amen again.

Amen.

Not quite Maurie, its actually more like 5 identical crimes are committed but the Police choose to investigate only one. Do you think that would go down well with the Public? It's not about others not getting caught it's about selective investigating. If the AFL was serious why wasn't there a general inquiry into tanking by the AFL clubs, no one could have argued unfairness in that scenario.