Crompton's the man

If I was running the ASADA case, I would open by stating that I will present a large body of evidence (albeit mainly circumstantial) which should prove to the tribunal's comfortable satisfaction that the 34 players ingested a banned substance TB4. I would then make the point that the onus is on the players to provide a plausible alternative as to what occurred at their club in 2011/12 and ask where is the evidence and where are the witnesses? Where are the records of what the players were given? Where are the people who ran the programme, supplied the material billed to the club? Where is the chemist who compounded that material? Where are Dank? Robinson? Charter? Hamilton and Alavi? What steps did the players and their representatives take to ensure their appearance at the tribunal to give evidence to provide a plausible alternative explanation as to the substances with which they were injected? I would ask why, if as they claim they were given vitamins, are all these people so eager to hide what was inherently such an innocent project?

If the best the players' counsel can come up with is that there's no evidence in the absence of Charter and Alavi (incidentally, both have very good reasons why they should not appear - and you can add Dank et al to that), then I suggest he has some homework to do over the weekend. If those friends of yours were referring to our mate David Grace QC, then he should pack some warm clothes for his forthcoming trip to Switzerland.

This is very well argued

Can their strategy be to have an adverse finding, sanctions imposed and appeal against such finding that the standard of proof required while meeting the comfortable satisfaction of the tribunal, is not sustainable in the court of appeal as legal proof of wrongdoing and the penalties are unenforceable?

"Biffen always gets it right and is the most astute contributor to this site"

Never heard or read it before

Where did you get that?

Not just here but everywhere : " begs the question " is used interchangeably with "invites the question "

Alas, I went to school in the days when English was taught and to beg the question meant to assume the answer in the framing

( all knowledgeable football fans agree that ....)

I want to appeal that current use of terminology

Just another one, with your indulgence. "The proof is in the pudding."

And the proof is not in the pudding. The proof (i.e. the test) of the pudding is in the eating.

Don't get me started

(apologies if it's already gotten a guernsey )

I suspect it will be at minimum 1 year as of the tribunal

These idiots have fought all the way..no leniency. Having said that they ought to get 4 years . the new penalty. But may get 2y with benefit of......politics.... ( everything that goes into this pot )

Anything under a year and WADA go apeshlt...as they should...even that is light.

So hope you are right

but pragmatism ( mounted on a pedestal in the AFL foyer and worshiped with admirable fervour) suggests the lettuce leaf option much (MUCH) more likely ....

I really want to be wrong about this

LH I think you under estimate the thickness of his skin.

Hird and his cheer squad still think they are correct and I really believe they will go the grave with that belief.

Not entirely unlike the attitude of the american policeman that shot the unarmed teenager dead : through his lawyer - no apology will be forthcoming ( because he did nothing wrong)

One admires people who are totally convinced of their rightness .....

... "They dont know what they gave them" but whatever it is, they do know that it can cure cancer.

Riiiight

That would be the "placebo effect"

Are you positing that his eyes close at the same time?

Or

To, Too, Two

What’s the difference between to, too, and two? It’s not too difficult to use them, once you take the time to learn what they mean – and do some practicing, too.

To

To has two functions. First, as a preposition, in which case it always precedes a noun.

Secondly, to indicates an infinitive when it precedes a verb.

I’m going to the store

He went to Italy

This belongs to David

I need to study

We want to help

He’s going to eat

Too

Too also has two uses. First, as a synonym for "also":

Secondly, too means excessively when it precedes an adjective or adverb.

Can I go too?

He went to France too

I think that’s Paul’s book too

I’m too tired

He’s walking too quickly

I ate too much

Two

Two is a number.

One, two, three…

I have two cars

She ate two pieces of pie

Edit:- I had to fix the errors in the eLearn English paste !!!

Thanks for that ....

I, too, was wondering what all them words meant

The Medical Board / AHPRA are being as tardy and neglectful as are WorkSafe (or whatever they are called this week). He (appears to have ) failed in his primary duty, which is to to care for his patients and look after their welfare and instead put the employers' priorities first. E P I C F A I L !

Could be as simple as the possible fact that no one has made a complaint to the relevant body

Did the directors sign off on this annual report?

Are they mad? (rhetorical)

Just : bad

or maybe mad and bad

Good point. They even used to smoke cigarettes while riding, especially in preparation for the mountain stages. The theory was smoking opened up your lungs and increased your lung capacity. There was a great full size photo in a bike shop in Sydney of four riders riding in le Tour sharing cigarettes.

That theory must have come from the Herald-Sun

beyond laughable.... its plain embarrassing !!

Regard it as a portent of things to come

A pattern in the tealeaves

Auspices

Signs of benificent favour from the gods

Ordained by entities in the AFL who mortgaged their souls long long ago ...

Whatever it takes....?

The Appellant concludes its response by suggesting that ASADA’s argument that unlawfully obtained evidence should nonetheless be admissible, is essentially that “the end justifies the means” and that this cannot be right.

I get it :

Irony !!!

Good pickup

P.S.

The Social Litigator piece seems to only present each party's case but this time there is no evaluation of the merits; that would be interesting

His speech at the best and fairest was odd and his inability to let go of the coaching position when he said previously he didn't want it was a dramatic turn around. The Suns quickly withdrew their interest - some sort of alarm bells were ringing.

He has withdrawn from the Coaches association, put the AFL seriously offside and has not spoken to Hird for a month without making it clear if he will stay with the Dons or not. His Press conference performances were entertaining but eccentric.

He has really isolated himself and looks to have no chance of getting a football dept position anytime soon.

There is something not right.

Totally agree with that assembly of facts

your not old until you can remember Tassie Johnson kicking out mongrel drop kicks from fullback.

What about if you can remember John Lord doing battleship turns from 70 yards out and sinking it over the goal umpire's head?

Does that qualify?

Latest update:

Essendon supplements saga: McDevitt says Essendon players 'have a case to answer'

Sounding pretty ominous. They know what they're doing.

They must be as terrified as Vladimir Putin is of T. Abbot if that's all it's going to be.

Essendons is counting on the AFL blinking....and they might.

WADA wont.

then if that is the case ....

" In WADA We Trust "

They're very few parties seeking that the truth these events comes out.

The AFLPA must necessarily seek the minimum possible impact on the players' careers ; what they really think about the radical biochemical plan must remain hidden from public view because to lambast the administrators of the EFC necessarily entails the tacit admission of wrongdoing (which does not serve the purposes of the constituency and so will not happen)

The AFL is in a similar position to that of a State Government faced with the dilemma of curtailing the gaming industry - the symbiosis is beyond conflict of interest to the extent that it is sadly naive to expect a real outcome from that direction.

The EFC is not entirely unaware of this : hence the interminable blustering and delaying and creating various litigant parties all dedicated to trying to create confusion in the process with the aim of finding an exploitable chink. Quite a clever strategy really and inclined to move supporters to tears when the violins begin to play accompanying the refrain "Delay, delay - we never sought the delay"

Meanwhile back at headquarters the troops are kept in line with a series of wink wink nudge nudge internal briefings that say " well we can't publicly tell you what was in those injections but what we can assure you is that we would NEVER have approved anyithing unsafe"

The constant beating of lawyers' drums is eroding the will to do the right thing ......

What deal will ASADA agree to so the sad circus stops performing ?

He just got a kid. Surely he will knuckle down if he wants to support his family...

I truly respect a person who is an optimist

I would have in my innocence thought the time for an early plea was November 2012

I am starting a petition for the AFL to pay Essendon's legal bills so they stay strong.

More details to follow .....

Russian proverb :

If you live long enough, you will see the body of your enemy floating down the river

Surely this is no more of a no go zone than the whole sordid drug saga - IF it compromised one game, one season or multiple seasons it would be equally relevant.

Are you suggesting that this whole thread is "no go"?

Well what I really meant is that just like that zone in the Lord of the Rings where it was not possible to consider what lay north of a certain point, absolutely no one has the wit or the will to consider the implications of cheating and its ramifications.

It may have altered games and may have financial ramifications and people have been dudded.

Just don't think any of the various vested interests are going to walk down that path is all

i think the thing was that they effectively squeezed 2 or 3 pre-seasons of work into 1 pre-season, thus fast forwarding their development.

This is a strictly no go zone

There is the integrity of the AFL- betting system to consider

I strongly advise you to drop this line of discussion

That word " delusional " ,if it came out of Mark Robinson's word processor, seems huge.

Does it mean history is being reevaluated ?