sue

I think this from that article is a wise move which I think we have now made: The sorry saga showed sports boards needed to conscript independent directors, rather than high-profile and powerful fans unlikely to topple a hero such as Hird.

It will be interesting to see if any of our AFL opinion 'leaders' have anything to say about this latest scummy behaviour of the AFL & EFC.

DITTO. Absolutely disgusted. This is the sort of story those Current Affair type TV programs would usually do hounding people to their front door. Will it happen - no.

I haven't followed this at all, but if the above is the compete story, why has the club fined him?

I agree with much of what you wrote, but not with the sentence above. It was more than not asking questions. Why did they not mention the perfectly 'legal' injections when ASADA made its regular inquiries if they had nothing to hide? There is no innocent answer to that as several posters have demonstrated,

I'm not going to waste my time either reading the HUN or watching that interview. But from the above accounts of Hird blaming everyone but himself I'd say he is paying with fire. If he alienates someone in the know, that person may blow the whistle and reveal all just to get back at him. Here's hoping.

I'm still totally bewildered about what the AFL Tribunal made of the fact that the players did not reveal the totally legal injections they 'thought' they were getting to ASADA's regular monitoring process. Has anyone in the media addressed this critical point which I think makes it clear the players knew they were up to no good. One of the players said to CAS we didn't want to reveal info that would be of use to our competitors. While that has a veneer of plausibility, it beggars belief.

As much as I wish Jamar well, I'd be much happier if no ex-MFC player helped Essendon out of their self-dug hole. Wil be hard to watch especially when they play us.

Players that go on to coach probably have a few brains. Those that go on to allegedly run the AFLPA were probably never the sharpest minds when they played. They probably rely on the brains at their owners at AFL..... hmmmmm.

The way I read it is that the AFL Tribunal was looking for any excuse to exonerate the players. I'm just amazed that they didn't give more weight to the fact that the players did not mention the supposedly legal injections when responding to the regular ASADA questionnaires. That screams GUILTY to me even if there was no other evidence. How are the EFC apologists in the media dealing with that? Ignoring it?

Agree, not the worst decision. Also, we can add the fact that although Melksham will not play in 2016, it is not likely that a Round 2 pick would do so either. So I reckon the rationale behind a lot of the hand-wringing boils down to the argument that Melksham does not look like an A Grader, but there is always hope than a new R2 pick will turn out to be one. Pretty weak reason to condemn the club.

If by completely cold you mean doing all the usual pre-season training, then yes. And do you really think that any serious player will not spend between now and Sept 2016 doing private training. I'm sure that could be programmed without breaking any WADA rules if sensibly and carefully organised. Well I would be sure except the brain-dead responses from the AFLPA people makes me wonder if there is anyone with the necessary intelligence to organise it. Of course it is a long time and some of the 34 still currently intending to play will fall through the cracks for various reasons.

FYI: https://theconversation.com/their-club-failed-them-but-essendon-players-cant-escape-blame-for-doping-ban-53097?utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=Latest%20from%20The%20Conversation%20for%20January%2014%202016%20-%204103&utm_content=Latest%20from%20The%20Conversation%20for%20January%2014%202016%20-%204103+CID_8f92c080d5db34ed65b7d5ee38e4b11d&utm_source=campaign_monitor&utm_term=Their%20club%20failed%20them%20but%20Essendon%20players%20cant%20escape%20blame%20for%20doping%20ban

I'd guess that a number of banned players will get together to train and even hire a few support staff (with money coming from unidentifiable sources). I'm sure that will happen for the blokes at EFC and maybe they'll welcome an old mate Melksam to join them. Those at Port may have to form a smaller group.

Not much of a union at all. I just looked at their webpage http://www.aflplayers.com.au and it looks more like an arm of the AFL than a union representing the interests of players. The stuff under 'About Us' is deplorable bumpf.

Didn't know that. Explains a lot.

Bloke on RN says that at least oen player has asked the AFLPA to fund action against the AFL. Will be interesting to see if this 'union' will actually take on the bosses rather than WADA.

Assuming there is one, what is the basis of the line rolled out endlessly that WADA doesn't suit team sports? What part of the code is supposedly so inappropriate? Has anyone ever detailed that rather than just floated it as an excuse?

For those so desperate for the club to state the bleeding obvious: http://www.melbournefc.com.au/news/2016-01-12/club-statement-on-jake-melksham

The Hardy book (and TV series) was Power Without Glory. Perhaps more appropriate, but title already taken.

and what could they say beyond the bleeding obvious?

As I understand what McDevitt said, the AFL Tribunal would have been aware of: “Of 30 ASADA testing missions during the period in question, none of the 18 players tested declared the injections, despite being asked each time whether they had taken any supplements. Leaving aside all the other reasons why they might have come to a different conclusion than CAS, what on earth did the Tribunal make of those 30 silences? Surely that should be enough to have tipped the balance even if they couldn't prove the stuff ordered had been injected etc. I'd love to hear a justification from the legal minds on here who had defended the integrity of the Tribunal. Looks to me like they bent over more than backwards to get the players off.

The AFLPA press conference was appalling. I hope the broad mass of players will sack the current 'leaders' and replace them with people keen to look after players rather than the AFL.

True, and in any case unions are meant to take on the employers on their members behalf. The AFLPA has no idea about what their role should be. They should be focussed on EFC and the AFL now, not WADA and CAS

Interesting comment from one of the Shark's lawyers: "The players would most definitely have a number of legal options available to them, as a result of Essendon failing to act in, and protect, their interests. The other clubs that have recruited ex-Essendon players that are now facing suspension, in our view, would also have strong prospects in pursuing Essendon for any losses they have suffered as a result of having to stand their players down for 12 months" Suing Essendon - what fun. Read more: http://www.theage.com.au/afl/afl-news/essendon-cas-verdict-bombers-34-definitely-have-legal-options-20160112-gm3x2k.html#ixzz3wzGKTKrj