binman

Good old social media:

http://beta.theage.com.au/afl/essendon-supplements-saga-social-media-mocks-james-hirds-explanation-20160114-gm6fib.html

By the by the age is updating its website. The beta test site doesn't have a pay wall

2 minutes ago, bing181 said:

Nailed it.

CAS made the point that you don't have to establish manufacture and supply chain details, and that it's basically irrelevant to the key question of use.

(also paraphrasing ...)

In a way its the exact opposite to the AFL tribunal who felt it didn't have to establish if the players took TB4 one they weren't satisfied with the manufacture and supply chains

43 minutes ago, jnrmac said:

If you use the links in a chain analagy, once one link is broken the entire argument fails. (this is what the AFL tribunal did with regards burden of proof))

Using the strands in a cable approach says that one strand by itself does not carry all the weight, nor does it being broken destroy the cable. The collective strands are enough to carry the weight of the argument. ie on the balance of probabilities or compfrtable satisfaction. This is what CAS used.

 

I might try the strands in the cable approach next time i have an argument with my wife

I posed a question on either this thread or the judgement one about the Melk taking a voluntary suspension.

Essentially my question was if the Melk took a voluntary suspension from the end of the last season if it would come off any penalty? It wasn't clear if they had already factored this off season in but it is clear now they didn't so i assume he could have chosen to take a voluntary suspension.

The start play then would have been the dees to advise the Melk to take a voluntary suspension from the end of last season (assuming we were planning then to take him, which i assume is the case). Before the suspension came into effect they could have devised a training program for him. He then doesn't come to the club at all during the suspension. If that had occurred he would have another 4 months shaved of his suspension meaning he would be eligible to train in May 2016 and play in July 2016.

If they ended up getting off then no harm done. Either way the dees look smart and prudent.

Obviously all the EFC players could have done the same thing. The writing was on the wall so why not? 

Not sure if this has been mentioned but the front page of the Hun is dominated by a picture of Hird and tag screaming EXCLUSIVE - James Hird my story. Why we statrded injections. How Dank came to Dons. Demitriou and The AFL

A two part story apparently starting tomorrow. 

Lord give me strength

I also love this bit: After years of confidentiality Hird will finally reflect on his departure from Essendon.....

I guess he doesn't think strategically leaking information to Slobbo and others as breaking confidentiality. And he is going to speak on ethics? Oh my lord this is just too absurd.

7 minutes ago, La Dee-vina Comedia said:

But the Holmes-Hird interview will be conducted in the Ethics Centre, so I'm sure it will be fair-minded and unbiased.

The Ethics Centre? Oh that is so brilliant. Kafke would be proud. By the by tickets are $33. I wonder if he'll take questions from the floor? (sarcasm alert).

This from the website linked above(I love that note that his intervview is on the AFL doping scandal and ethics in sport):

Doors open 7pm for 7.30pm start (doors lock 7.25pm). 

Former Essendon coach James Hird gives his one and only interview on the AFL doping scandal and ethics in sport.
 
While the AFL and ASADA found Essendon players innocent, an appeal by the World Anti-Doping Agency to the Court of Arbitration for Sport overturned that ruling today. It’s a controversial end to a bitter and painful saga.
 
The Ethics Centre has invited Hird to share his side of the story. After years of confidentiality, Hird will finally reflect on his departure from Essendon, the toll on the players, the investigation, speculation and what was going on at the club.
 
Join James Hird in conversation with ABC journalist Tracey Holmes at The Ethics Centre. This is an exclusive event. Seats strictly limited.

Doors open 7pm for 7.30pm sharp start. This interview will be broadcast live on ABC News 24. Doors will be locked at 7.25pm and latecomers will not be admitted

3 minutes ago, Dees2014 said:

Good question - one of life's great mysteries. Maybe she and Stan Grant are mad bomber supporters , but I thought she was from NSW. In any case, she ranks with Robbo as being the most biased in the media on this issue, and one of the most powerful because she is a senior producer with ABC Ness and Current Affairs and therefore control the choice of "expert" commentators on this issue on the ABC radio and television. That is why so often throughout this affair the ABC chooses one of Hird's tame academics to give a totally biased (and usually wrong) perspective in favour of Essendon. 

One of the few times I can remember ABC News being so consistently wrong and lacking in integrity. It is a very poor reflection on its senior management. 

I agree wholeheartedly.

Tracey Holmes presents (and produces i think) The ticket, a sport show (with a sports politics focus) on on ABC news radio Sunday mornings. The show has a sports politics focus and usually has a key topic or focus.

I have listened sporadically to the show for the last 3 years and it is remarkable how often one of the lead topics (and even sub stories) is about drugs in sports. Even more remarkable is how strong the anti WADA agenda is, of both the show in general but in particular Tracey Holmes who does all the interviews.

The show is sometimes interesting but so incredibly unbalanced, with Tracey Holmes clearly holding the view that athletes are puppets and get a really, really poor deal from a corrupt system.  I suspect it goes unchecked because it is buried away on Sunday mornings and is about sport and perhaps none cares.

I think she has such a pro Hird bias because his narrative fits so neatly with her own broader narrative and anti WADA agenda that she has been pushing for years. It comes as no surprise that Hird has chosen her (as opposed to say Tony Jones or Gerard Wheatley) to do the interview.

10 minutes ago, Ted Fidge said:

 the players no longer cuts any ice. 

They were using ice as well? And not pure ice at that?

26 minutes ago, H_T said:

I think he was referring to the Essendon bubble he lives in. Surely...

 

 

Indeed. Perhaps he meant 'FEW of the people i regularly drink and share texts with predicted today’s guilty outcome'

14 minutes ago, Seraph said:

Exactly. From page 13 of the verdict:

"As to sanction, the Players cannot show lack of significant fault or negligence in committing the anti-doping rule violations because, inter alia, they signed the consent form to receive the prohibited substance, receiving the injections and failed to disclose the injections on doping control forms."

In other words, TB4 was listed on the consent form, then they failed to disclose it.

In all sincerity, what a terrible irony for the players. They're rightfully concerned about taking prohibited and seek assurances from the club and ask for those assurances to be put in writing. Which they are given and they then sign the form. And this becomes a factor in not being to able to argue no significant fault or negligence. Ouch

Slobbo says ' FEW people would have predicted today’s guilty outcome".

Really? He mustn't read Demonland. 

3 minutes ago, Ted Fidge said:

AFLPA press conference. AFLPA can't understand how CAS could get it so wrong. Didn't they read the AFL tribunal decision???

You see, it seems the players were duped and did everything in their power to find out what they were given and whether it was prohibited.

Oh, and the AFL should divorce themselves from WADA.

I found this interesting from McDevitt: 

“The players had received anti-doping education through the AFL and ASADA, and were well aware that they are personally responsible for all substances that entered their body.”

“Unfortunately, despite their education, they agreed to be injected with a number of substances they had little knowledge of, made no enquiries about the substance and kept the injections from their team doctor and ASADA.”

“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.”

“At best, the players did not ask the questions, or the people, they should have. At worst, they were complicit in a culture of secrecy and concealment.”

7 minutes ago, H_T said:

You're sweating the small stuff on Melksham, for the elephant in the room may well be the coach in waiting for the club.

This from McDeviit:

“The CAS result brings this matter to a close and ASADA looks forward to continuing to work with all sporting codes to promote a clean and fair sporting environment.”

I can't see them pursuing anyone else. 

Really interesting presser actually. It can be read in full here: https://www.asada.gov.au/news/court-arbitration-sport-decision-essendon-players

Just now, H_T said:

Melksham can start training as early as September in 9 months time.

 

 

Whilst disappointing it's more important that justice is done. Good that MFC  is not allowed to pay this year, and we can elevate a rookie like Michie. Then we have Melksham for 3 years and onwards at the cost of a second round pick.

Back in training in September means he will be cherry ripe for 2017 and won't have had a season of wear and tear. 

I heard John Fahey on the radio earlier (SEN). He was asked about the unexpectedly harsh penalty (a line being run by the station it appears - one apparently based on the prediction of Chump Le Grand). 

I liked - and agreed - with his response. Basically said they were lucky to only miss one season as the penalty was two years and they were being pretty generous allowing for such a significant backdate given they ruled out no significant fault and there was no reduction for helping.

It is worth noting that its less than 12 months (as it has been widely reported as) actually as they can return in November meaning its actually 10 months out.

I wonder if the players had of sat out all training from the end of the last season (ie chosen to take a voluntary suspension as is possible i understand) they could have shaved three months off the sentence. Or is that period already factored in given it is out of competition? 

14 minutes ago, Bimbo said:

For the MFC this decision means both Michie and White are likely to be able to be upgraded (one can be upgraded at the start of the season automatically).  I note in his "list update" Roos made reference to Michie being in a position to make the round 1 team.  Making Michie a rookie seems to me to be part of whatever back-up plan the administration had.

If they don't have to pay Melksham this year but have him available for pre-season next year (and thereafter) and two ready made players to come up, the risk was worth the potential loss.

 

Exactly my view. Back on deck for the start (or close to), fit and healthy and raring to go, for the next pre season. How many times does a club pick up a player and then lose them for a big chunk or all of a season?  I'm fine wit the decision to draft the Melk. 

Website holding up well!

I wonder what Warner has as his cricket score now!

Just now, beelzebub said:

Surprised he's compus mentus !!

Just getting home

From the age:

Jake Niall reports current and former Essendon players have been found guilty of doping offences and will miss the entire 2016 season

They did not receive the major discount for ''no significant fault, no significant negligence'' which can cut a sentence drastically.

1 minute ago, jnrmac said:

Richard ings: decision to shock. 

 

Fmd that guy suffers from spotlight deprivation......

 

Spot on

On 12/16/2015 at 9:57 AM, binman said:

Correct me if i'm wrong but haven't your 'sources' indicated the book will be thrown at them, that WADA will go after Hird and other high ups and that the players will get long sentences (two years IIRC)?

You seem to be softening your predictions.

To avoid post announcement spin perhaps you can provide succinct answers to the following questions , based of course on your intel from sources. Note that i am assuming they will be found guilty.

1. How long will the penalties be for the players?
2. How many games will the players actually miss after backdating and other considerations are taken into account?
3. Will WADA go after Hird, the board etc as you have previously forecast?
4. If your answer is to number 3 yes (and i'd be surprised if it wasn't) will they announce their intention to do so when handing down the findings on players (which would seem the logical time)?

For balance my answers to these questions are as follows:

1. 18 months
2. 10 (available to play from round 11)
3. No
4. Thye will be asked their intentions, suggest they will look into it and drop it thereafter

 

My predictions

19 minutes ago, nutbean said:

You can search my threads and you'll find I am far from a JW hater but seriously - I couldn't give a rat's tossbag who the best trainer is - I would prefer the quote to read "if you ask any of the boys who the best player on game day is, Wattsy would be right up there". Training is not played for premiership points.

Well so would i but none the less its great to hear Wattsy is training so well. 

29 minutes ago, Roger Mellie said:

Slowly but surely:

http://www.news.com.au/sport/afl/melbourne-demons/jack-trengove-ready-to-take-next-step-in-return-from-serious-foot-injury/news-story/ac0aeb9f1dc517187bc00eb221ee9f78

I want him to successfully come back just as much as I want team success.

Loved this bit:

Based on what he’s observed on the training track this pre-season, Trengove expects the Demons to continue their improvement on the field with the often-maligned Jack Watts to be leading the charge.
“This pre-season’s been tremendous. I’ve seen a lot of improvement, a lot of the guys that have been around for a bit have really taken that next step,” he said.
“A prime example is Jack Watts. He’s copped a lot of stick over the time but if you ask any of the boys at the moment who the best trainer is, Wattsy would be right up there.

Of course the haters will find a way to make that comment into a negative (eg 'well he's coming from so far back....', 'should have been happening years ago', 'says more about his previous standards...'etc etc) but the haters gonna hate.

The quote from Trenners aligns with the obsevations some DL track watchers have made about Watss' voice and leadership in training. 

Good onya both Jacks