La Dee-vina Comedia

I'd find it hard to believe that Melksham or his manager would have agreed to a contract with a suspension from pay clause in it.

I voted 9 -12. What I also expect is that we'll be in with a chance of making the 8 almost to the end of the home and away season.

I'll donate 100% of it to Demonland. That's the sort of guy I am.

I'll just be your pro bono business manager for a moment and suggest you move this to the top of your To Do list. Strike while the iron is hot.

I'll never cease to be amazed at how Demonland thought Caroline Wilson made something out nothing when it came to our 'tanking' story but is a gospel to be believed on this matter. Unfortunately her very first sentence adds to the confusion. Does she mean to say that the players didn't mention the injections? Or didn't mention Thymosin? If she meant the Thymosin, rather than the injections, then it is still possible that what 'troubled' the CAS members was the behaviour of Dank, and by extension, the club, by injecting the players something they did not know about. Nevertheless, Caro should be given credit for accessing information that no-one else in the media seems to have been able to find.

I have no idea who Swaab or Tom Johnston are. But pretty much everything in the article is what I've been hearing from a number of other senior lawyers for the last few months. That is, we shouldn't be surprised if WADA also fails to succeed in front of CAS. What the author doesn't mention, though, is whether WADA might appeal to the Swiss Federal Tribunal if it loses. I hope they don't. Not because I'm an Essendon Fanboy (just jumping in before BB accuses me!) but because by that time enough will have been enough. If the AFL Tribunal and CAS have decided that they cannot be comfortably satisfied, then I believe we should accept that position and all move on.

It's not adjustable at the moment. It's one of the things Andy still has to fix.

As good a time as any to test the auto-censor in the upgraded software... Do you remember when badminton used to be called shuttlecock?

Why? Because the odds are determined by the amount of money held by the bookies on each team, not by the bookies' own opinion. In effect, this means that right now more money has been bet on Essendon than on Melbourne.

I'm very grateful to all those behind the scenes for keeping Demonland going so I don't wish to create more work for you, but...is there an appropriate place we can mention any problems we have with the new version? Or where we can ask for help finding what used to be second nature? Or where we can make suggestions for improvements? For example, there used to be a helpful button to click on a thread which said something to the effect of "Go to first unread post". I can't find it now. Does it still exist, perhaps under a new description?

If he wants to kick Picket Fences', I say, let him.

Old dee, before you put any money on Gil's departure, perhaps have a look at what I posted in the other thread about the supposed investigation by the Commission of the AFL, repeated here: "Not quite. I've now read the article in the Herald Sun. (It was behind a paywall, so have read the print edition. If you have a subscription, you can find the article here). Mick Warner has extrapolated some nondescript comments from the gambling regulator which said, in effect, they might look to see whether possibly, there might be an off-chance that they could, conceivably, be interested in perhaps wondering whether there might, or might not be, anything that they could, possibly investigate...or not. That, apparently, passes for journalistic integrity and qualifies for the back page. Of course, by now the Commission may have made up its mind and decided to formally investigate. If that's the case, I'll look like a goose."

Not quite. I've now read the article in the Herald Sun. (It was behind a paywall, so have read the print edition. If you have a subscription, you can find the article here). Mick Warner has extrapolated some nondescript comments from the gambling regulator which said, in effect, they might look to see whether possibly, there might be an off-chance that they could, conceivably, be interested in perhaps wondering whether there might, or might not be, anything that they could, possibly investigate...or not. That, apparently, passes for journalistic integrity and qualifies for the back page. Of course, by now the Commission may have made up its mind and decided to formally investigate. If that's the case, I'll look like a goose.

Who's the gambling commission investigating? The AFL? Or the Talia brothers? And what for? Update: Just seen the other thread which states the Gambling Commission is investigating the AFL.

Are there many players who have had similar injuries whose comebacks can be compared with Trengove's? Each of the following had some sort of foot injury which might have been similar: Matthew Egan, James Hird, Colin Garland. Did they have the same initial problem? How does Jack's comeback trajectory compare?

You raise an interesting point with your last line. Could CAS take notice of today's court action after the CAS hearing has concluded? In other words, could the fact of the Bombers pleading guilty inform the CAS decision or is it too late given the CAS hearing concluded prior to today's Magistrates' Court matter? I would have thought it was too late.

I'm most interested in the line "without receiving proper consent from its players". I'm taking the Herald Sun story at face value, but I can see how that might also have been used by the club and the players in their arguments in front of CAS. I could see the players giving evidence that they consented to being injected with various things that they checked were legal and were never told about and therefore never consented to any illegal supplements. Whether they were given illegal supplements or not (I could see them arguing) was unknown to them because all they thought they were being given was what Dank told them he was injecting them with, which, they thought, was the stuff they had checked with ASADA and been told was legal. It's all supposition on my part, but I've believed all along that it is quite possible that if the players were injected with something illegal, it was without the players' and possibly the club's knowledge. It makes sense to me that any person providing the illegal injections wouldn't tell anyone that what he was using was illegal and that if he indeed did break the law, he did so to improve his own standing in the industry by "working miracles" with what he does. If that's the case, I still believe the provider of those illegal supplements should end up in gaol.

Today: Herald Sun ‏@theheraldsun 26m26 minutes ago .@EssendonFC pleads guilty to WorkSafe charges http://trib.al/1dmCVIj

BB, I'm a bit disappointed you didn't get all of nada, WADA and ASADA into the same post.

Just on that first line...the players have to be found guilty of something first. Then I'll agree. Without knowing all the facts it's impossible for any of us to know whether the players will be found guilty. Keep in mind that most legal processes err on the side of the defendants on the basis that it's better for a guilty person to be found innocent than an innocent person to be found guilty. Whether it's the same for a CAS process, I don't know.

I thought the same, particularly when he was in the similarly coloured jumper. I can't be bothered going through the clip again, but did he ever use his right foot to kick? If not, I wonder whether he kicks OK with that one, too.

Just a question: Could Fremantle be promising to redraft him because he's still contracted to them and therefore they are obliged to rather than any confidence they might have in his ability to get back?

I'd be stunned if Dank produces anything. However, I agree with the view that he appears capable of claiming he was doing one thing while in fact he was doing another.

"cutting edge dodgy times" Glorious expression.

Just to clarify, the article doesn't refer to an "employment contract" but "any contracts between Mr Dank and the club". I'm not sure it's that unusual not to have a contract for these types of services, though. There may have been an exchange of emails or an oral agreement that Dank be paid on an hourly rate or per service (ie, per injection, for example).