sue

Of course you are right binman - it is possible that the players are innocent (in at least some sense) and it is even just possible that the club is innocent. But what are the odds, and on the latter especially? I'm not sure that I can type that may zeros after the first digit.

Although I almost put crime in quotes, thinking you'd make that cheap response, I refrained because surely it is criminal to inject someone with an 'unknown' substance, which being unknown may have serious health implications. And even so if the substance is 'known' but its long-term effects are not known. Regardless if permission has been given in ignorance. You have a firm grasp of straws LU. I hope you can hold on tight.

Actually without making that clear, the impact of Hogan's remark is pretty much lost on those who were not aware.

"A fair chance a line was crossed"! Makes it sound like the line is somewhat arbitrary and maybe not a serious crime to cross it. I think most of us, even those with 'open minds' would say "the line" instead of "a line".

Sir Launcelot is not only wrong as you say but he raised a point which smacks of desperation. While it may not have been against any specific rule (as he stated) to 'vanish' records, or not keep them during a pharmaceutical experiment, their absence 9or inability to produce them) is evidence (a fact) which together with other evidence may even lead to a beyond reasonable doubt verdict, let alone the weaker level of proof required in this case. I await a reasonable explanation of why there are no records, especially since they would prove the program was kosher.

Do you have a suggested solution to that? Personally I think the fear of a single whistle-blower dobbing in the doctor would be an excellent incentive in keeping docs and their employing admins on the straight and narrow.

Although the average humidity in June is the max it is for the year, I think it is still less than Melbourne's.

Nice to hear.

When Hogan took that mark right at the start of the match LM delivered a short lecture on how he used his low body weight' to push his opponent away as he took the mark over his oppo's head. I had a good look at the replay and I don't think he touched him - just read the ball better (which is what LM said initially before he decided to rattle on after the ad break). He just rattles off old cliches. But then, what else is a commentator for.

yes. One of us had better stop.... Just saw the replay and I'm even happier to keep going. Happier to agree to differ.

That's no excuse <insert hairy-chested remarks here>.... oh wait, we aren't talking about the Demons. (I think you have summed it up well OD),

Sorry to keep flogging an old dee, but you have tried to defend your wobbly position twice by quoting hindsight, both times inappropriately. There is a very good chance that Bail would have known the siren was going to go very soon - that's what all those guys with loud voices on the bench are for. Now it has all been said.....

So OD, you think that a player unlikely to kick a goal from straight in front is more likely to lob a quick pass successfully to a player in the goal square? I can imagine what you would have said if the pass was not right and there was a fumble but the ball was still in our possession and the siren went.

Obviously Hogan was also too scared to play against the Hawks....

DLSS

I care because the AFL have handed them a free ride at the expense of the old clubs which were unfortunate enough to be near the bottom in recent years and which may within a few years eliminate the club I barrack for as well as a couple of others I have sympathy for. Couple that with the sycophantic commentary they get on TV (in the NSW region free TV doesn't miss a GWS game) and the absolutely annoying spruiker at their home games who blasts your ears geeing up GWS in a nauseating fashion - I hate them with a passion. Almost as much as I hate the AFL's corrupt admin.

I am just staggered by all the talk in the media about the AFL withdrawing from WADA. We are told the code is not suitable for team sports, but no one details why. And that is in some way unfair to EFC and its payers But it seems to me that it is the other way around - it fails team sports in that it is too focussed on individual behaviour and not systematic club-wide cheating such as EFC (allegedly) has done.

The madmen are running the asylum.

Don't worry BB. I'm sure EFC will find a way to shoe-horn Justice Bombardier onto the CAS list in time. But you are absolutely right - if EFC want to appear lily-white, they shouldn't want to appoint someone who has a hint of a conflict of interest, no matter how upright the judge may be.

I think WADA had to take on this case even if it isn't 100% watertight. Otherwise all a cheating team/country has to do is choose the appropriate drugs and not 'keep' records. (By appropriate I mean ones for which there isn't an immediate test)

Does anyone know the time scale for this? By when do the 3 have to be appointed for a start?

The OP gives a number of reasons why things may not be that gloomy but most of those who then indulged in more gloom did not rebut those reasons. We have a thin list, suffered some crucial injuries and played 3 top teams in a row. There is no guarantee that that is the only reason we are crap, but it just might be. Try to be at least a glass 1/4 full guys.

Does anyone know what happens if EFC delay/refuse to nominate a CAS judge? Can they veto the Chairman?

Don't underestimate the xenophobic line the local media will roll out when things look bad for EFC in a dastardly foreign court. I can't eat that much popcorn.

If gamblers are carefully watching form etc in making their bets, they should be capable of adding into their wise deliberations of odds that a club may be tanking in a particular match or season.