binman

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.

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

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.

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

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

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.

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.”

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

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?

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 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.

Spot on

My predictions

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

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

I know we have to be patient but i hope we see a flag before then

And the fact that roos noted players who did come back underdone and praised that came back in good shape suggests he agrees. Also instructive is the words and phrases he used when praising those who had done the necessary work - professional, be the best they can be, afl standard, elite habits etc etc

I can confirm he most definetly said Smedts. To be fair immediately prior they had talked about tracs injury. By the by i quite like healy on the radio.