Outside fifty

We must walk down different streets Bob. From my experience the man in the street generally thinks we are being crucified for breaking a rule that does not exist.

Get em Trent.

My advice to the board. Deny everything and make the bastards prove it. This simple approach has been the cornerstone of legal defence for centuries and surprisingly effective.

A pathetic attempt by a truly awful Journalist to intimidate the AFL into action. Sadly what was once a fine newspaper has joined it's rival in a race to the bottom to capture the hearts and souls of the lowest common denominator.

The Australian Crime Commission would have embarked on this investigation independently of any Government. The investigation has nothing to do Gillard and co. The resulting press conference, well thats a different story.

Facts. You have got to be kidding. Never let facts get in the way of a good post. This is Demonland !

Bit of blue sky mining here but maybe the answer is to take medical care and welfare of the players away from the individual clubs and placing into the hands of the AFL. A pool of medico could rotate through the clubs on a rostered basis. Due to continuity the medicos would need to spend a reasonable time at each club, maybe a season at a time and then rotate. They would have no allegiance or obligation to the individual clubs and could operate entirely independantly of the club. They would be paid for by the AFL and answerable only to them. The players welfare would be their only concern and clubs would be unable to influence their decisions as to whether a player takes the field or not.

No old , save the young ones for the final victorious thrust. See you in the trenches. On my word, CHARGE !

To me Baghdad Bob epitomises an attitude that has been the core of our clubs demise. A soft underbelly and an unwillingness to fight when the going get tough. I have watched from the outer for more years than I'd like remember as a succession of Boards and administrators rolled over when required and adopted a survivalist attitude. Sorry Bob I don't want to survive for the sake of surviving. More than ever I want to fight.

You wouldn't believe it I rocked up on the bike around 10:30. Just as the boys were walking back to AAMI. Bugger.

Thanks Six. Look much bigger than i remember.

Great action sequence Six6Six. Went to training today but by the time I got there the main group had packed up and left. One question, who is number 32 in the initial shots?

Will the AFL be silly enough to let this go to court? Unfortunately I think they are Pantaloons. At the best of times the AFL decision making process is shambolic and ad hoc . In times of crisis like these I can't see that improving. They will want to be seen to standing firm in regard to the integrity of the competition. My gut feeling is that they are arrogant enough to try and bluff us into submission, even though they must know that have little or no chance of a favourable outcome in a court of law. More than ever I want my football club to stand firm and stare them down.

I take your point OD in regards to the perception some have of her on this forum. Personally I have no axe to grind with her other than I dislike the form of Journalism she practices. It's based on subjective viewpoint that I believe skews stories to suit agendas. I'm old school and simply want objective reporting that will allow me to form an opinion based on facts. I know i'm a dinosaur.

The Commission would also have to take into account the possibility of court action should it proceed with penalties against the MFC. At this juncture I assume they would consult their own legal team with regard to probability of a successful outcome of a legal challenge from the MFC. This could also go some way to determining whether charges are upheld or dismissed on the probability of a successful legal challenge. A long way to go in this saga I'm afraid folks.

I found her tone and language in reference to the MFC tonight derogatory. Her sniping of D.M was typically unwarranted. But having said that I don't read or listen to her that often and perhaps you know her nuances better than I.

Like you binman I thought that this was an exercise in her trying to exert influence. If she had any sort of handle on this she would have known the nature of the charges. Either way we will know how credible she is in the next couple of days. From the AFL's perspective I can't believe that they would be stupid enough to open a second front of battle in which they cannot influence the outcome of proceedings once commenced and are subjected to an arbitrary judgement, i.e the courts.

The barely concealed contempt that she projects was apparent for all to see. I must say that I'm dumbfounded that someone in her position could go on the public record and categorically state that we will be charged and then within nano seconds concede that she doesn't know with what. it makes a mockery of any credibility she once held. It beggars belief that a senior sports journalist would not have ascertained the nature of the proposed charges. Either Wilson is incompetent or not being honest in her assertions.

In the grand scheme of things your right. However it was Anderson who pressed the big red button with the sticky note attached saying,"Do Not Press". Up to that point Vlad had buried the issue.

I'm not sure of whether I want Vlad dumped or not at the moment. He could still be very influential in the Tanking saga. Remember the tanking fiasco was not of his making and his reputation is at stake as much as our own.

Your absolutely right rpfc. This whole episode has enormous ramifications. The deafening silence emanating from the AFL hierarchy also has me worried. The AFL is a powerful organisation used too determining outcomes that they can control. For the first time in my memory they are in a position of little or no influence. It would take some serious Machiavellian manouvering to appease both WADA and the AFP in order for Essendon to field a team for 2013 if the rumours are true.

There is nothing borderline about the drug involved. HGH is illegal unless prescribed by a medical practitioner for a prescribed treatment for a defined period. Without a prescription it is illegal to possess or administer the drug under Federal law. This isn't some wafer thin AFL policy, it's Federal law. Yes HGH can be purchased over seas but it is still illegal to import, possess and use the drug in Australia without the appropriate medical clearance .Unless each Essendon player has a legitimate prescription for HGH to treat a pre existing condition they have a massive problem. This is not an issue that the AFL can sweep under the carpet or in fact influence the outcome in any manner.

Technically if the drug was obtained illegally, the use and the possession of the drug is illegal, full stop. Those involved have at a minimum broken a federal law. WADA does consider this to be a prohibited substance if it's not been procured in a lawful manner and applied according to strict medical protocol, the method of administration is irrelevant if the drug was obtained illegally. It's incumbent on the athlete to be fully aware of any substance he or she may have taken. The responsibility lies with the athlete. I feel for the players involved but the law of the commonwealth and WADA's own policy is very clear on such matters.

If as the rumours are suggesting the issue is the use of the peptide hormone HGH {Human Growth hormone ) a whole new ball game opens up. HGH can only be used under the strict administration of a MEDICAL PRACTITIONER. A prescription must be issued with a specific quantity and daily dosage that does not exceed a period of 3 months. Without this it is a Federal offence to use and acquire the drug. Either a Medical Practitioner issued a prescription for each player that took part in the program or the drug was illegally obtained and used illegally. Interesting dayze indeed.

It just shows what a criminal genius CS truly is given that he was just a twinkle in his old mans eye when JFK copped it.