binman

I agree (obviously) but as you say who goes on the banner is dependent on what the selection criteria is. Current players only and Dunn is a lock now. However if it say players of the modern era (lets say for arguments sake from 1990 on), then no spot for Dunn (yet). Really only Jones would get a look in from the current side. if it was the latter criteria my banner would be: Neita, Farmer, Schwarz, Jones, Brett Lovett, Tingay, Brad Green, Whelan and Glen Lovett

Precisely. Further it is instructive that the efc and hird not once raised this issue until show cause notices were issued when it it immediately became their primary concern

Remarkable how disingenuous third has been through all of this. As wj points out the Middleton case and subsequent appeal was centred on whether asada acted in line with the law. Which they did apparently. The contract between the players, efc and the afl is related but ultimately not the issue. And now it is according to third. And not coincendally also for Matthew Hardie who kept on banging on about the contract in his interview with Tracey Holmes, who then started including that issue in the other interviews she then did on this topic. Look at the narrative that compliant media people have helped run - hird the heroic one, third fighting for the rights of players, third refusing to buckle against the evil Masada/afl ogre, third the tragic scapegoat, third the moral crusader. As I say disingenuous. On the contract discussion even there third and hardie s argument is weak. Whilst the players are compelled under the terms of their contract to cooperate and anwer questions I don't think they are under oath and in any case if they refuse to cooperate I would imagine it would be very unlikely they would, at least in the short term, face any suspension and even if they did would have legal options (during which the validity of the contracts could be argued)

Why Dunny BoB? Well for one i favour current players for the banner (though i love the repsoectful images of Robbie and Jim - keepers). If you include past players where do you stop? Yes Neita is a champ of MFC but so is Barass, Stu Spencer, Greg Wells, Stan Alves, Hardeman, Farmer and Schwarz. Of the current team in my view, outside of Jones Dunn has been the most consistent player over the the last 2-3 seasons. I love players - like Jones - who are able to bring their game to a new level and particularly love players who are able to change things that need changing, for example the faux tough guy stuff you mention. It also should be noted that until 2013 Dunn was never really given a chance to settle into a position and was moved from pillar to post. Not sure the relevance of the fact that he has played 130 odd games in 10 years. That's not bad is it (given we have not played many final in that time)? In any case when was the last time he was dropped? Dunn was terrific in 2013, in a year when the team was woeful. I rate players who stand up when the team is rubbish. He was better last season. Yes he tailed off near the end of the year (something he has acknowledged) but you damn him with faint praise. If he had not tailed off a bit he would have pushed for all Australian honors, or at least the squad. His numbers at round 14-15 or so supported that view. But above all he has become a real leader at the club. He is a committed Demon. He is vocal on field and according to training watchers at training as well. He works hard, trains hard. Has pulled his head in. He is one of our best 4-5 players. So should be on the banner. One other thing. He also apparently urged his teammates at the 3/4 time huddle to go all out to win against the tiges in that infamous match where we lost after the siren. I reckon it is harder to prosecute an argument as to why he shouldn't be on the banner than vice versa.

Dunn please

I might be wrong but I don't think birds appeal suppressed any evidence to the drug tribunal

Exactly WJ. Dr Jon, of course Hird is only - and in my opinion has always only - been acting in self interest. I wasn't suggesting otherwise. But losing the appeal is not grounds for dismissal. But lord running the supplement program should have been. EFC's own report should have been enough evidence for a breach of duty as should have the interim report.

Another thing. I don't understand the logic in suggestion Hird should or could now be sacked. I don't see how losing the appeal changes anything. He still flat out refused to tow the party line and processed with the appeal against EFCs wishes. Winning or losing the appeal does not change that. edit: posted this before reading Dees2014's post. Dees2014 what is the basis for your conviction Hird will be sacked?

Predicable result. I have heard a number of people in the media, well at least two (tom ryan - a film critic - who compared Hird to Lindy Chamberlain in terms of how he has been vilified unfairly and Tracey Holmes - who is very anti ASADA/WADA and the emphasis on players needing to prove innocence as opposed to ASADA proving guilt) say the treatment of Hird has been shameful and that some apologies may need to be made when things all wash up. Who knows perhaps they will be proven correct. I doubt it but let's see on that front. But i have not heard one journo suggest that perhaps ASADA and the AFL are owed an apology. Both were roundly criticised for the process they undertook however Middleton went out of his way to suggest that ASADA had implemented a very effective process and this appeal affirms Middleton's view that the legislation actually encourages ASADA to work in close collaboration with sporting bodies (best practice anyone?). I remember Demetriou being slammed for his comments that the approach used by ASADA and the AFL would be a template for other orgs to follow. Perhaps he was right after all. I wonder if he can expect an apology from Yobbo et al?

Fair enough. But perhaps he was doing the opposite to throwing away the dream. What if he determined that if he didn't retire and get treatment his AFL dream was going down in flames and his career was finished. Perhaps he determined that the best way to ensure he he did not throw away the dream was to retire and get help. Perhaps returning was always in his mind or at the least something to aim for if he could get well. Lets say for the sake of argument this hypothetical scenario is correct. If so, given he is back at an AFL club (a wildly successful one at that) you'd have to say MC made a very smart move.

I don't understand how you can think that the fact that MC has got himself well enough to recommence an AFL career makes your assertion (bolded above) correct. I would have thought the opposite is true if anything. That's to say there is every chance that if he simply, in true Aussie bloke fashion, tried to 'tough it out' and stayed put his mental health might have got much worse, any other issues in his life might have got worse and he may have ended up quitting (or being fired) and never return to footy. I am guessing, contrary to your views that he would rethink his decision to retire, that MC and those who care about him most likely think he made exactly the right call. Supposition of course but he presumably got professional advice that retiring was the best thing he could for his mental health. I very much doubt that outside of forum posters he would have received any advice from trained professional to 'tough it out'. A quick glance at the Beyondblue website linked above would demonstrate that such strategies are likely in fact to make things much worse. Toughing it out is the very reason so many Australian men suffer from depression. And of course the less said the better about characterizing him retiring from footy to get treatment as running away from his problem (as opposed to actually addressing it which is what he has done). The fact he has chosen to recommence his career at GFC is completely irrelevant to the any discussion about his choice to retire.

An unfair characterization of psychologists and psychiatrists

Amazing how a small typo can change meaning

I agree. Though i would say that they are more likely to be remembered as "the naive, possibly stupid players caught up in the Essendon supplements scandal who seemed to have disregarded or not understood the clear message that under the WADA code athletes are fully responsible for what goes into their body and that being part of a cult like football environment where independent thought is aggressively discouraged is not an excuse for taking a banned substance" The idea that the main driver for the EFC to so vigorously fight the process in their appeal (and Tirds) is their concern for the player's reputation is the classic furphy. They should - and probably are - be more concerned with their own reputation and dragging things out to minimise the numbers of EFC players who are suspended

Yep, very much. Thanks for such a considered reply. My main interest in this matter is the duplicity of the media and how much the gun in particular has been a participant in the drama. Sports journalism has taken a big hit. If players are found guilty it will be fascinating to see if they appeal. It will be their call though no doubt etc will try and exert their will

I'm a huge Garlo fan also. he was terrific in 2013. I really rate players who play well in poor teams. That said whilst i acknowledge he had an interrupted preseason last year and never got to peak fitness something still seem NQR in the second half of the season. His body language often seemed iffy and he did not play with the same verve. He also butchered the ball a lot more often. I might be wrong and perhaps it was all about his fitness. Either way if he returns to his best form he represents almost a new recruit for Roos and could be a key player down back for us.

Dees2014, a query. You have made many comments about the EFC supplement saga and you seem to speak with a deal of authority on the matter. Also whilst the above quote is not an example, on many occasions you have said or implied that you have good mail on this and have made a number of clear predictions on what might be going on or what might happen in the future. Can i ask what the basis is for your views and can you give a clue as to your sources. Please note, I don't mean any disrespect nor am i questioning your veracity, just curious and would like to get a sense of how accurate your predictions/views might be. For context with WJ's comments i know he is a lawyer and has good contacts in the legal world which helps me frame his comments. Similarly with GNF he has said he has contacts at the club which assists me to assess his comments and Webber clearly has some foot doctor mumbo jumbo thing going on which helps me frame his comments about injuries such as the one Trenners has suffered.

God forbid they uphold the appeal whilst the doping tribunal is sitting.

Thanks RB. Top job. The best back handed compliment ever?: * Get the feeling Garlett does his best work in games.

Incredible how quiet the media is about this story atm, given this is the denouement (well not really a denouement - there is bound to be an appeal) of what has been the most over analysed and certainly longest running football story ever. Also the media seems to have forgotten about the turd appeal. WJ any idea when that is going to land? Surely they must be close to having a decision?

Fuel, fuel - i need fuel

I reckon we should have Saty thread where people can argue about him to their hearts content for surely he must be the most discussed issue on DL. It would also enable Saty to continue to enjoy the baiting he has admitted n many occasions that he enjoys so much. It might also help the training threads not being derailed. But life is short. I reckon a good option is to use Ignore or as suggested above by Tim filter out the flotsam and read the bits you like. But Saty can i make a suggestion. If you film your player interviews and post them on DL you will exponentially grow the number of posters you annoy and fuel untold Saty related debate. Imagine DL posters dissecting your interviews, analyzing body language (are the players genuine or do they really want to run away?) and playing backwards to check for hidden messages. Hours of fun.

My thoughts exactly. Couldn't care less to be honest

Very quiet isn't it. Are the players in the court?

Call me stupid but i think WJ was being ironic. Perhaps he could have been more explicit, eg: 'In this session we are talking about why it is crucial that players are fully aware of - and take full responsibility for - the status of any drug they ingest, inject, inhale, smear or allow to permeate their skin through osmosis (eg in the club spa). We will give an example of one Victorian football club, that shall remain nameless, but for today's purposes we shall call the jets, whose players were pretty naive and to be truthful very, very stupid. For they did not heed our warning. They put their blind faith in their club and their messianic coach. Now thus far the players haven't been found guilty of anything - but will be - but none the less they have endured unprecedented scrutiny and stress. So learn from these trusting man children and check with your own doctor (not you club doctor), google the drugs your club have suggested you use, discuss with your manager - hell even call ASADA if you have any queries. Clear?'