Dr. Gonzo

Like those who have criticised Moloney said he plays well against poor sides and plays poorly against the competent sides. We are a poor side hence he played well today, no surprise. Really? What issue exactly did you have with the coaching today? I thought he should have started Watts forward but he did eventually make that move other than that there wasn't a lot more he could have done. The loss today was on the players heads today if they played the percentages more and made less stupid errors we would have won today.

Not only that but he rarely gets a chop out from a third man up or players filling the space for the forward to lead in to. He wasn't too happy with Terlich on one occasion today as he hadnt worked back to fill the hole allowing an easy lead-up cheat mark to Brown. There's times where he hasn't been up to scratch but today (and last week) he did his job. There's others I'd be looking at well before him (for instance McDonald who needs a run in the 2's).

Well clearly I meant their supplement program re: the use of prohibited substances was more systematic whereas JT's alleged use of the cream containing AOD-9604 looks like a one-off.

I meant it more in that Trengove's appears to have been a one off whereas Essendon's (possibly our) supplement program was systematic.

I don't make the rules, I am only explaining to you what the former head of ASADA stated and what the WADA code states.

Look I agree with you and there is clearly a difference between being given a cream and systematic injections of supplements/drugs to players as happened at Essendon and possibly us also. I'm just putting out the info I know and trying to get to the facts of the matter while still hoping we are left unaffected by this.

I don't disagree and I clearly don't want Trengove to be penalised (although I would query the doctor as to what it was I was being given) but I am just pointing out the official line. As Ings mentioned in the 3AW interview the players have resources available to check this stuff including the AFLPA & AFL medical commission and could have called ASADA themselves. The average person may not do that but then the average person's career isn't jeopardised by taking the wrong thing.

http://www.news.com.au/sport/afl/essendon-admit-to-drug-investigators-some-of-its-players-took-anti-obesity-drug-aod-9604-last-year/story-fndv8gad-1226628993513

They're not really "kids" they're adults who can vote, drive, drink, join the police force and fight in overseas invasions. They are ultimately responsible for what goes into their bodies and it's the same for all professional sports around the world who adopt WADA's code.

DC's only 26? I always envisaged him to be of an older vintage, no offense DC.

Yep that's the reaction you have to all my posts. I guess you're right, it is easier to just post that instead of wasting your time dribbling a bunch of long-winded crap.

Haha yeah right, irony - more like a way of trying to ridicule someone when you can't use facts or logic to create a coherent argument. It's the internet equivalent of "I know you are but what am I?" Now go and post more hypocritical rubbish about negative lynch-mobs looking to tear the club apart with their buzz-words while every other post you make is lobbying for the coach to be sacked.

Macca, do you agree that Moloney had severe deficiencies to his defensive game even before Neeld came to the club? Do you also agree that for a player whose game was built on attack he failed to hurt the opposition by impacting the scoreboard often enough?

Yeah that's being completely disingenuous, McLardy is part of the same admin that's been in charge since 2008.

No it doesn't. WADA/ASADA have continually stated the onus ultimately falls on the athlete to ensure anything they use or ingest is compliant with the relevant drug codes. Saying my doctor gave it to me is no defense.

Trying going back a little further mate.

How long has the current admin/President been in charge for? Now compare that to the current coach/FD. I agree that Neeld is skating on thin ice. You can't expect to be totally uncompetitive and there be no repercussions. However I think he deserves to at least be given until the second half of the season (and in my eyes until next year) to see if the team can improve its performance somewhat. On top of this I think the club would be mad to get rid of Neeld without having an experienced replacement (like Eade, Ratten, Williams, Clarkson, Roos etc) lined up. No point turfing out Neeld only to get in Scott Burns or some other inexperienced assistant who is going to need another 2-3 years to develop the team his way. At least with an experienced coach we know they have what it takes.

No what you intimated was that I was incapable of forming my own opinion based on my own observations but rather was just bagging out an ex-player because of some statements made by the coach. I treated your posts with the contempt they deserved because you were incapable of discussing the matter on its merits.

The links to the various newspaper articles in the thread as well as the none-too-subtle inferences made by some posters. Others have said they have seen her leaving prior to matches as well - you would think if she actually enjoyed football she would stick around and watch the matches, not just turn up to do her pre-game muckraking and [censored]-stirring and then run off before the matches even start. Whether she praised the supporters for turning up or not is irrelevant (one thing I will say though is that at least she stood up for the club when that moron Tony Shaw was saying we should be playing our home games at Punt Road).

A cream can definitely be classed as a drug - rubbing it on your skin so that it is introduced through your skin pores is the same as swallowing or injecting it.

I don't think thats the case though - as far as has been reported if a substance or drug is not specifically "approved" then athletes should not be using it whether it has been approved for human use or not.

This is the major issue for me now (aside from Trengove's potential use of a banned substance obviously) as well as why hasn't McLardy or anyone from the MFC come out to strongly clarify this?

It is certainly murky water. As far as I can gether there are 3 categories of drugs; 1. Approved 2. Banned 3, Yet to be approved If it has not specifically been approved then I would say it is still prohibited for athletes to take whether it is approved for pharmaceutical use or not.

So from this thread I think it's clear we can surmise ONE of the former employees white-anting the club and leaking to Caro/the media is Ian Flack. It seems he was the leak on the Mifsud/Davey affair as well as at least one of the leaks on the tanking saga. It begs the question, is he actually a "Melbourne" man or just someone who happens to be a former employee of the club? Either way we need to make sure he is not welcome back in any capacity regardless of who is in the admin at the time and any current board members/employees need to sever all ties with him immediately if they haven't done so already. I'd also like to concur on seeing Wilson leaving the ground before the game has started, she did so last week against GWS - I didn't see her bu my brother did if I do see her again I'm going to give her a serve, something about leaving before the game starts a d not actually giving a damn about the game itself only muckraking, running agendas and trying to get people sacked. How can the Chief football writer of a major newspaper know nothing about the actual game itself? Say what you will about Yobbo, sorry Robbo, at least he actually loves the game.

Good question - I guess it depends on who the "chemist" was. This link suggests it is still not approved so prohibited to take in any form. http://playtrue.wada-ama.org/news/wada-statement-on-substance-aod-9604/?utm_source=rss&utm_medium=rss&utm_campaign=wada-statement-on-substance-aod-9604