beelzebub

Please note..ASADA dont backdate as such. The media has invented this notion of backdating and run with it. what WADA/ASADA does do is take note of any provisional suspensions served and take that OFF the overall period of ban. its a similar effect but I repeat there is NO backdating

Dear Mick....youre an idiot !!...or a stooge...or both

会徽为你，为我

Its a grand Old Flag I'm guessing

and yet its not an excuse

he is dead to me...no interest

funny really....to all those dum dum bummers out there in la la land.. Put 3 words into search..ASADA, LOOK UP thats all they had to do...time taken....no more than 10 secs....and all is revealed !!! They've simply tried to be too clever by half....and now come a cropper. Lions...Crucifixion.... Lions.....Crucifixion !!

not just essendon folk that dont understand !!

The AFL are somewhat bound currently to keep mum until the tribunal hands down a decision. What they do then,,,will be telling.

The drums are beating louder !!!

and as they haven't co-operated one bit that ban can be extended...just saying

Its Time. Logic suggests that a non defence from the players effectively accomplishes the goal of ASADAs quest to establish Guilt. No plausible alternative with corroborated paperwork effectively reverts to the default, that being cooked.

It reads that way.Much of whats transpired to date would indicate the endgame being the current tribunal. Maybe some tactic has been to accommodate the inevitable inquiry from Worksafe ?

soory. Not wishing to be glib but where particularly in that article does it actually show how EFC inc players Hird etc are absolved or advantaged. In reality a beat up fluff piece and all it really says is ASADA will have to abide its own rules (of engagement ). The supposed notion of having its work cut out suggests a more than difficult position. Reality is there was indeed a lot to cOver but nothing beyond the possible. Or I might have missed something. ..possible

sorry thats wrong edit I'll rephrase. As I understand it I believe you are wrong in this comment

Sue.. I dont see how they can. Its drummed into them TO know. They are by extension signatories to the WADA code. Theres nowhere to run, its not permitted. No excuses. it take all of about 30 secs t get to the relevant page on the ASADA look up to understand whether or not they should have allowed themselves to be jabbed. Its up to them ( the player ) to ask. if they dont , they're culpable. Were the players lied to Sue ? Seems to me many knew there was something dodgy and just went along.

Im sure there's a few lining up

Sue..its , for me I acknowledge, not a stretch to include the players. They signed waivers.They indicated Thymosin ( amongst other things ) The rule still says all things stop with the athlete. If ASADA can put TB4 at the club and noone can provide anything substantial to suggest ( indeed prove ) another supplement was injected then they are cooked. there is NO benefit of a doubt here. Thats where so many are misunderstanding the situation. EFC, Hird, the players CAN NOT hide behind a veil of " we dont know" ASADA are pretty sure they do. Whilst the burden of substantiation may lay at ASADAS feet the ONUS is well and truly upon the players ultimately ( as they are the ones to be banned ) to show they took something else. No one is arguing they took something after all.

Maybe its time to remind some of the what we're talking about here regards what constitutes a "naughty" Banned VFL player Wade Lees warns ASADA will look to hit Essendon for sixHere we have a guy who suggests he only attempted to get a supplement and wasnt actually aware of any banned ingredients. Maybe he did, maybe he didnt but he never actually took ANYTHING.....and still got 18 months thankyou very much !! Essendon have admitted a program of supplements , just want us to believe in the easter Bunny and such about what it was. It wasnt a once off. Id was systemic. It wasnt a player, or two, it was the better part of the whole list. it wasnt approved by its own medical dept it was clandestine ( that ought to raise a flag on its own ) They didnt come willingly or cleanly to the table they fought tooth and nail to get off on a technicality ( and still do ) They admit no guilt, show no remorse and seemingly couldnt really give a rats about anything let alone the health of its guinea pigs and have obvious contempt for the League So lets keep this in mind: Scale of the offense, repeated nature of the offense as well as the culpability of it all. You dont obfuscate and hide amongst the shadows if youve done nothing untoward. If they had done nothing wrong it ought to be the easiest thing to show such. quack quack QUACK !!

Is it that hard either. No one disputes the players were injected with something, never been in question. Essendon cant show any supply of an approved substance having been sought and purchased. Essendon cant show a supplements schedule that would match a benign substance. ASADA CAN portray a protocol for a banned substance and a pathway to the club , indeed actions by the club and or its agents to procure. essendon actually have to show to the comfort of the Tribunal they they did INDEED use something else , that this is what it is/was , and this is proof of how and when. i.e records/ invoices etc So far it seems ASADA have a mountain of circumstantial evidence and can tie it together with many and detailed messaging between the main culprits. Essendon keep moving the goalposts in some hope to confuse people. The tribunal wont be had by this incredulous toying .

Part of that burden of proof referenced towards ASADA is also the response from the players to the SCN...they arent actually separate things. ASADA asks, having shown a likely scenario to the players as per the SCN, that the players show that they DIDNT in fact take TB4 as surmised and that they took something else, possibly Thymomosin. If the players cant show this then that in itself goes towards the case that ASADA require to satisfy ' comfortably' to the tribunal that the players/club/coach have been naughty boys. Its not of itself the only thing or all thats required but its part and parcel thereof We're dealing with the two ends of the same piece of string. Many a commentator ( moreso those with agendas ) wish to portray this as two different beasts. All ASADA need to show is all roads lead to Rome and ask the players to show that they werent in Rome. If they cant...theyre cooked

still got a long way to go obviously before it all becomes second nature, but its progress

They dont need blood tests. They can show probabilities They can show intent They can show waivers which list amongst items, Thymosin They can show quantities They can describe the routine of injections and can establish the protocol for use. Its is like describing a hole. There may be nothing actually in the hole but its size, its location and intended use can. In actuality there are contents to that hole. 34 players, a coach and a despicable club. And they put themselves in it !!!

in reality id suggest they actually have no argument , only a statement of position