binman

Howled down because in real life conspiracies are fairy tales. But good to have one of the afl are corrupt zealots back on board. So much more fun seeing a not guilty verdict as evidence of afl corruption rather than the mundane reality that asada ballsed it up (eg by not getting sworn affadavits)and were unable to make their case

Oh please - judge him by his actions? And what might those actions be? Clearing Barry hall and efc players?

Some more intellectual brilliance form Slobbo (who writes as if he has been personally vindicated): 'Some will try to argue “insufficient evidence’’ doesn’t mean it didn’t happen. It is the defence of the desperate' Hilarious article (check the smug grin of Warner)

You can't countenance an argument they simply did their job and based on the evidence were unable to conclude, to their comfortable satisfaction, the players were administered a banned drug? Or perhaps you have seen all the evidence? Guilty people go free. It happens in courts and tribunals all over the world.

'A long-time friend and former housemate of Carlton's Tom Bell and Collingwood's Josh Thomas, Hickey in recent months has added about six kilograms to what was a relatively light 94-kilogram frame.' http://www.theage.com.au/afl/afl-news/thats-reality--saint-tom-hickey-prospers-from-london-calling-20141108-11j030.html

Well if a group of players bought their charlie (not brownlow) from the one source.......

Father-mutant rule?

I wasn't - though i hedged my bet

ASADas evidence wasn't compelling enough obviously. End of (this part of the) story. Now lets see if Dees2014 and BBs big bad WADA wolf enters the picture

Not guilty http://www.heraldsun.com.au/sport/afl/essendon-verdict-afl-anti-doping-tribunal-rules-on-supplement-saga/story-fni5f6kv-1227285913343

On Tim Watson i reckon more fool anyone that thinks he could be balanced - as opposed to knocking him for being unbalanced. Its his son after all. I listened to SEN this morning, which i rarely do. I find bizarre how on that station so many of their presenters argue that the media have shaped a perception that the EFC is guilty, something Watson and that other clown (not Gaze) ere banging on about again today. Crazy given most would say the opposite is true, given the relentless pro hird, EFC pap the Murdoch press has been pumping out for 2 years, not to mention the influential voices of Tracey Holmes and Gerard Whatley

That's an interesting thought and one i hadn't really considered. More than possible i guess.

I honestly reckon it's 50 50. A not guilty finding is very possible as whilst there seems to be circumstantial evidence no one outside the hearing (well almost no one and most likely no one on this site) has a clue as to what has actually been presented or argued. It funny though because both possibilities - guilty and not guilty - will lead the zealots on both sides to say this is clear evidence of an AFL conspiracy (even though one conspiracy disproves the other). The pro EFC Hird kool aid drinkers will argue a guilty verdict is proof positive of the AFL's vindictive conspiracy to get EFC and Hird. The feverish anti Hird camp will argue a not guilty verdict is proof the fix is in and the AFL has corrupted the independent tribunal and got the result it always wanted. If the verdict is guilty the penalties will be determined at some future date which when handed down will provide more opportunities for both camps to cry conspiracy.

I also did some googling. Clean also used with cocaine by at least one account. If it is ingestable, odourless and not toxic it would make a good packing agent

I tells ya i would remember a win!

On that i can agree

Because Crowley tested positive to a drug that falls into a different category (whose name i forget) than a PED. As i understand it the drug he tested positive for (contained in a pain killer he used) is only banned on match day. Provisional suspension does not kick in for this category until the b sample comes back, though the player can voluntarily take a suspension (as Crowley did after his last game) The CFC players tested positive to a PED . All PEDs are banned at all times and are in a different category. If an athlete test positive to a drug in this category that are immediately provisionally suspended.

They were in New Zealand on camp immediately prior to the positive tests

Again that's bollocks. The current 5 year TV rights for NRL is worth one billion dollars. One billon. There is talk of adding new clubs. The State of Origin does indeed play a big part in the strength of the NRL. All 3 games equal the ratings of the AFL grand final and are played at night in prime time Hanging in there? I don't think so

i largely agree however there was a period where they were ok. They should have stayed the course that Evans put them on. If they had this would all be done and dusted and like Cronulla their 2015 season would have gone ahead with minimal distraction.

I read an article (i can't remember where) on the weekend that said if the players are found guilty the Tribunal will take submissions on penalties, something i thought had occurred. The article said that in the event of a guilty findings penalties would almost certainly not be handed down tomorrow, which i have to say sounds crazy

All big sports would struggle without the TV rights so i'm not sure of your point. Tomorrow's result will have nothing to do with the size of Gills balls. It is an independent tribunal and in any case if they find the players guilt (and its a big if) they won't hand down the penalties tomorrow

There isn't much gloating going on here on DL as far as i can see

Bollocks pure and simple. NRL is thriving despite 2 decades of off field incidents, including drug use. MLB ditto. Athletics ticking along ok. NBA yet another example. Cycling probably the best example. In spite of the pervasive PED use 10 years ago it It has never been bigger. Do you have any examples where a popular sport has ceased to exist because of positive tests?

I'm with you BB. I'd legalize them all anyway.