iv'a worn smith

No, they were inept.

Then why did ASADA fall over with its prosecution of the case?

The relevance is this was to be a cause celebre from day one, for political expediency. Trot out the heads of the relevant sporting codes, including Demetriou to look even stronger. ASADA didn't have the bottle to prosecute properly; enter WADA. Demetriou thought it would dissipate as the political cycle turned.

Politics? A Federal Government on the nose in the electorate, which was desperate to get back some political capital. What better way of doing it than by portraying yourselves as the white knights being tough on drugs in sport? https://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=blackest+day+in+australian+sport&spfreload=10

What was the lie? How did the lie manifest itself on multiple occasions?

I reckon it would have the affect of driving people to the soccer. In the middle of this, more people might be interested in the Melbourne derby this weekend, than the dull machinations of the trade period.

I am not talking about that OD. It is pretty simple really. He's has been found guilty by the relevant jurisdiction, had an appeal which was not only not heard, but summarily dismissed. There is no choice but for him to lose the medal. It is the AFL that has botched that side if things. I have no issue with that. But to use epithets like "Jab" in place of Jobe, pillory the rest of players involved which includes Jake Melksham and pretend to know everything about what occurred regarding the injection regime is just juvenile.

Yep, makes sense .............. I think. There is quite a bit of 'legal' negotiation going on as we speak. I very much suspect that the rider on any settlement, as is most often the case, will be a confidentiality clause. In other words, you will never know what went on at mediation.

I have no argument with this point of view. The AFL is moribund on a lot of issues. But no-one on here is across all the facts.

I have absolute empathy with this position, but to put Watson in the same boat as Armstrong, who knowingly, systematically and was entirely complicit in the engineering of his own doping program, is drawing an extremely long bow. I'll say it again, it is my belief that the Essendon Football Club has got off extremely lightly in this saga, but the salivating and frothing at the mouth over Watson and the rest of the players involved is just not edifying at all. Many of these young men may never be the same again. To keep them in the stocks so that more offal can be thrown at them, serves no purpose whatsoever.

Agreed, but why should we be surprised as to how they handle anything. At the risk of raising the old chestnut once again. When the MFC were in the gun, Demetriou trotted out Gil, because Demetriou was on public record that he did not believe we had done anything wrong. So to safe face, he gets his then 2ic to fire the bullets. Not guilty, but fined. The Star Chamber is alive and well in the AFL

Has to be the most boring period on the footy calendar. Cut it down to 1 week and watch 'em scramble to get it done then.

Some on here clearly don't DC.

Dank has been banned for life from participation within any sporting organisation. From day one, this miscreant refused to co-operate with any investigation. Writs were issued, with the objecitve to compel him to give evidence and the Supreme Court dismissed the application. No doubt, the players failed to give account, on the required form, that they were being injected. That is their major source of guilt. However, the relevant sporting jurisdictions only needed to be reasonably satisfied of the breach, due to the circumstances which gave rise to this whole mess, but unlike a judicial court of law, there was no requirement for a burden proof which sustained a case beyond a reasonable doubt that performing enhancing drugs were being ingested.. Those frothing at the mouth and rabidly attacking the 34 players concerned, I'm sure will boycott any games in which Jake Melksham plays for the MFC. After all, a drug cheat is a drug cheat, n'est pas?

Woe is me!!!!! It is building Mr Fence, it is building.

Please excuse my lack of attention.

Can't access the link King, Takes you to the subscriber page.

Fearless in her stoush with Dermie on SEN a while back. She was great on the ABC's sports show the Fat with Tony Squires, Mikey Robbins and our own Dr. Turf years ago. Gone too soon thoughts are with the family

CPLCPPEC. Great acronym. You'll need a fair size business card to accommodate the moniker

Wore the number 1 jumper. I remember him as a kid, when we used to go into the change rooms after a game. Of course, in those days, there weren't many wins to celebrate. He always had time for the kids and I still have his autograph. A boy from Tassie. State and Test cricketer, VFL footballer, qualified Architect, media personality, public speaker and prolific author. Just an all round great bloke. Sadly missed Requiescat in Pace Tangles.

So without the imprimatur of WADA?

No I'm not, I am simply reading about it. http://www.cyclingnews.com/news/wiggins-tue-under-scrutiny-before-sunday-morning-interview/ So let me get this right, you're saying individual sporting bodies act independently and without the imprimatur of WADA?

Who authorises the exemptions? Under what code? Perhaps you may like to look at the relevant section of the WADA code, https://www.wada-ama.org/en/what-we-do/science-medical/therapeutic-use-exemptions.

That is my only argument. The sanctions placed on individual employees, far out weigh those suffered by the club. From my perspective, the club will be successful again, in the not too distant future and all of this will be consigned to the dustbin of history, as far as the EFC will be concerned. Their significant support base will be as feral as ever, with their overt displays of ignorant arrogance. Their wait, in comparison, to play finals football again, will be far shorter than what we at the MFC have had to endure. Not sure we can say the same for the EFC players. Decisions by CAS, under the auspices of WADA, are often more arbitrary, than the jurisdictions, governed by statutes. As late as this morning, we learned that Sir Bradley Wiggins was given exemptions for steroids due to the claim that the 'medication' was administered for his asthmatic condition. Before this came to light, he denied ever injecting himself or being injected, except for vaccinations. I wonder if things would have been different, if the salutation of "Sir" did not precede his name.

Plus the fact, the insurers know, if this went to litigation, the cost would be far greater to both them as the insurer and the club itself. If the EFC, given what it has already been through, in terms the costs that it has incurred and the incredible damage it has done to its brand, are silly enough to still try and circumvent the salary cap rules, then I say throw the book at 'em. My only point, in all of this, is that in my view, the club is guilty of gross negligence and should have been dealt with in a way that carried far more gravitas than a relative slap on the wrist. Whereas, the players - young men - lost a year out of what is an already short career, in relative terms, may never recover psychologically and may well find themselves receiving less money, rather than more, as a direct result of doing their job, going forward. My view is, by comparison, the club, as a body corporate, was far less punished than the players themselves. Not sure that is commensurate?