Lucifers Hero

15 minutes ago, La Dee-vina Comedia said:

Although I don't agree, I think I can see where Balme is coming from. The AFL is a purely local competition. There is no international competition at all. Therefore, in the mind of people like Balme, the AFL should make its own rules because whatever happens within the AFL competition doesn't affect anyone else. It's not like a club from, say, Spain, misses out on winning an AFL Premiership flag or someone from Japan missing out on a Brownlow medal because someone within Australia was doped up. Before I get jumped on, I repeat, I don't agree with the view.

Like you I disagree with the view as the vast majority of players in the AFL would not 'cheat' and they would be affected if other players/teams en masse break the anti-doping code be it AFL's or WADA's.  And we know the AFL Tribunal is a joke when it comes to penalising well known players for on-field misdemeanors so it is reasonable to assume its inconsistency would continue if the AFL separated from WADA. 

Breaking away from WADA (which won't happen) would be a free-for-all as the AFL and its Tribunal are too weak/inconsistent to enforce its own rules and values. 

Does anyone else think our talented young men players have overstepped the mark with their outspokenness?

Hewitt was brash, at times obnoxious but he always showed great respect for the game and usually for other players, especially the greats of the game. 

Kyrios and Tomic have potential galore but Kyrios' on court behaviour and the media comments of both, make me cringe.  Their latest antics: 

Kyrios answers mobile on court: http://www.theage.com.au/sport/tennis/australian-open-2016-nick-kyrgios-in-hot-water-after-answering-his-phone-on-court-20160123-gmcphj.html

Tomic puts down Federer (rightly or wrongly I don't know but not very smart): http://www.theage.com.au/sport/tennis/australian-open-2016-bernard-tomic-takes-aim-at-roger-federer-20160123-gmcptn.html

Maybe they should let their racquets do the talking until they actually achieve something!

I think Hardie, the author of the Crikey article, is the guy who likened the Fed Court case to cricket scores eg ASADA all out for 55, EFC 0/300.  He is a sports lawyer but didn't read the score board at the Fed Court case very well: ASADA thrashed EFC!  However, you would think he is sufficiently aware of the laws of libel to not write something that is incorrect about Evans...I won't quote Hardie here, just in case.  To me Hardie is drawing a long bow on Evans.  Hardie was hired by EFC to help them in the days of the Fed court case so one wonders why he would now drop Evans in the you know what. 

An interesting part of the article is:  I’ve never really bought the lack of governance line -- from what I had already learnt and what I have learnt since, the program, which appeared to me to be legal, was pretty well documented for a performance-enhancement program in sport. To be clear, performance enhancement is not banned in sport, only some forms, methods and substances. To talk about the use of performance-enhancing substances misses the point; it’s better to talk about prohibited substances and others that are not. What Essendon had done was better documented than what I had seen in cycling, I had seen the records of a few doping programs in Europe and used some in my PhD thesis. The Essendon program had much better-informed and consenting athletes compared to what I had seen in cycling and to things I had learnt recently about programs run within swimming in Australia."

Unfortunately, he doesn't question nor explain where the records have gone and why EFC continually say there weren't any.  If the substances were not prohibited why would the records go missing, Mr Hardie??  It seems CAS found the answer. 

Hardie has not done the EFC nor the players any favours here...in fact the opposite.

At the end of the day, CAS got it right.  Everything else is grandstanding!  Or sour grapes.

1 hour ago, dazzledavey36 said:

Qld Preseason Camp: Day 8 Gallery

By all accounts Jones and Brayshaw adore each other in a big bro, little bro way. 

So its fascinating to see them wrestling as if their lives depended on it!  No quarter given!

The serious, snarly expression on their faces in pic 7 is priceless!

Jones - C

Dunn - need the experienced hand but not sure about VC - that honour may go to Bernie

Lumumba - had a tough year but deserves another go to show the way

Vince - wants it, has earned it. 

McD - ready to step up

Gawn - my smokey

I don't have Viney.  It seems, last year he really listened to coaches and improved various aspects of his game.  I would give him a bit more time to further  this.     

Some clubs have a 'Leaders In Waiting' group.  I don't know that we need to formerly create/announce one but I can see that within the club, Viney leads a group with the likes of Brayshaw, Hogan, ANB being his L.I.W. team.  Set them up for when they take over from the first 4 in my list above! 

Look for Bernie to be in the Leadership Team:  http://www.afl.com.au/news/2016-01-22/vince-wants-to-step-up-further-after-taking-ownership-of-the-footy-club-in-2015?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=RSS+feed%3A+AFL+Latest+News

I really like the frank interviews we are getting from the players this year - very few, if any platitudes.

I particularly liked this comment from him for both the confidence and the intent:  "With less rotations this year we'll (midfielders) have to spend a bit more time forward and back so we'll kick more goals now because of that"

8 minutes ago, stuie said:

But he also loves playing footy and is a leader at the club. Would be hurting if he can't play. You can doubt his hands, but not his heart.

That may be true but it won't help us if he can't be a regular 22 just as it won't help Grimes or other players who may be on the fringe. 

It isn't personal to think he won't be missed on game day - just the way it is at a professional club when there is competition for those 22 spots each week.  

I don't think we will ask for a top-up but it would a chance to give Jake Lovett a run with the squad for a year.

Gordon is just another who has a conflict of interest in this saga!  The few who don't seem to have a conflict are the players!

BTW, Bulldogs and Saints are going to join Port to ask AFL for the option of a top-up player. 

I can see their point - they have lost KPP and a rookie isn't going to help in the ruck or FF.

If he is it will be described as a little 'hiccup' - the new preseason malaise!

Frost is coming along fine so he can step in.  We now have depth!

Anyway, round 1 is still 9 weeks away and Tommy has a lot of preseasons under his belt so he can come into the side when cleared to play.

19 minutes ago, Demanding Success said:

I checked. They can do it. I Heard the AFLPA state it. Also on this article.

https://au.news.yahoo.com/thewest/sport/afl/a/30566332/banned-bombers-can-walk-out-on-club/

Thanks DS.  I must have missed that in the press on the east cost.

In some respects I prefer they aren't DFA's.  DFA's will hurt EFC but also another club gets a 'free' player and it is probably going to be a top 4 team.  This makes the strong clubs, stronger and IMHO is just as bad for the game and any semblance of equalisation.  

Edit:  Heaven forbid that if EFC lose a few good players to DFA the AFL may deem 'unique circumstances' and give them a priority pick or 2.  I put nothing past the AFL. 

I prefer they leave it alone and players who want to go get traded.  Clubs can now trade future picks so EFC can get market value for them.  But at least it doesn't distort the draft or give other clubs 'free' players. 

I'm mot sure if the AFL have announced what will happen re the 12 at eos.  As I see it there are several options:

1. AFL allow Delisted FA status and players walk with no compensation to EFC  (Can't see the AFL letting this happen.).

2. AFL allow FA status and EFC will get AFL determined compensation (which you can bet the AFL will err on the generous side).

3. AFL do not allow any FA status and players request trades and EFC get picks/players (as determined by the 'market').

I prefer option 3 - the AFL do nothing - it is the fairest to the rest of the comp especially in terms of the draft. Also any club taking an FA/DFA doesn't get a player for free.

However, I fear it will be option 2.  It is by far the best outcome for EFC.  I would be willing to bet EFC will do a deal with the AFL to make this happen.  If they lose the likes of Hurley, Hooker, Watson you could easily see them all getting band 1 compo picks.  That is a lot of high end round 1 picks. 

There is no doubt in my mind there is no limit to what the AFL will do to help EFC.  It is wrong but as we know the AFL is a law unto itself.

Just now, rjay said:

I heard the interview with Roos this morning and the impression I got was that Petracca will be no different to Bradshaw last year. If he performs in the preseason games and knocks the door down like Bradshaw did then he will play AFL round 1.

Just goes to show how the journos selective quotes can slant a story. 

Did Roos sound peeved that CP had injured his toe or is that also the way he was quoted? 

Thanks for the clarification 'rjay'

http://www.foxsports.com.au/afl/christian-petracca-injury-melbourne-demons-youngster-could-still-make-early-season-debut/news-story/2d54dd1e8a11921b2a3ae286a0f6f9fb

Roos clearly isn't happy with Petracca's toe! “It was a learning thing for him and we were obviously really disappointed in what he did because he was going really well prior to Christmas,” Roos told SEN... his knee was coming along really nicely, but it set him back 4-6 weeks.

It sounds like Petracca wasn't following rehab rules to me.

Roos goes on to say:  “He’ll be playing somewhere in that period ... If he trains really, really well and he starts to play well at whatever level, then he’s certainly entitled to a game...“That’s the process he’ll need to go through in order to do that.”

There is a slight hint there that no matter how ready he is he will not be allowed to play in the seniors in rnd 1.  A penalty perhaps?  He is going to be made to earn that first game and I like that.  Its really important that the club sets certain behaviour standards and if it means a player misses a game to do that so be it. 

Methinks that Petracca owes the coaches and his teammates!  

A really frank assessment of where he is at from Jack:  http://www.melbournefc.com.au/news/2016-01-21/camp-one-of-the-best-trengove

He is highly motivated to get back and play with the guys and to 'prove a few people wrong'.  Says when he joins the main group for training will be a significant day in his recovery.  But this comment left me a little uncertain as to whether he will play again: “I figure now that I’m playing on borrowed time, so anything I achieve now is a real bonus,” 

In another article on our website Jack says: “It’s just a matter of getting comfortable kicking the footy, running around the ground, pushing off the foot and getting tackled. I’ve got to tick them off over the next couple of weeks, but it’s all going to plan at this stage.”  Some big things to tick off by the sound of it before he can join the main group for training.

I know it is a different injury but I think of Daniel Menzel's comeback rnd 22 last year after 3 years out so it makes me optimistic that Jack can come back as he is still young and time is on his side...borrowed or otherwise.

It will be a very emotional day when Jack runs out in the red and blue thru our banner again.   

18 minutes ago, Sir Why You Little said:

This was Essendon's "Whatever it Takes" program.

They can pay for it.

If the AFL bails them out then i will not be spending money on an AFL product again..i have believed Essendrug has been guilty since day 1. 

They can get $$ from the local Essendrug Masonic Hall to bail them out. 

That is why I would like to see one of the strong AFL clubs eg Hawthorn speak up loudly, as Eddie has gone all quiet!

Otherwise the AFL will just steam roll their way thru'.

5 minutes ago, Sir Why You Little said:

I certainly don't want my clubs money to pay for this. If it does then there will be no financial assistance given by me next year

THIS IS AN ESSENDRUG PROBLEM..Not a collective AFL one...

I was wondering why Eddie hasn't come out and vigorously condemned the Kelty statement.  Eddie would go ballistic if a penny of AFL money was to go to the Swans!

...then I remembered that Kelty is the Chairman of the Board of David Evans' company of which Eddie is a Board member.  

So, hard to separate Essendon from the AFL swyl especially when all the other relationships between key players are considered.

So with Eddie gone quiet, which AFL Club Chairman is going to speak up for the other 17 16 clubs and lobby strongly for their interests...just to keep everyone 'honest'...yes, I know that is an oxymoron in current circumstances. 

It needs a strong club to go in to bat...Hawthorn would be a good one to step up to the plate. 

Viney claims another victim...sort of   "The star midfielder then broke the little finger in his right hand when it connected with teammate Jack Viney's elbow in a training drill in early December."

http://www.afl.com.au/news/2016-01-20/vince-set-to-resume-full-training-after-injury-woes?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=RSS+feed%3A+AFL+Latest+News

Vince's comment about gymnastics was insightful: "Vince said a key benefit of gymnastics was practising the art of falling gracefully to reduce the risk of injury when landing".

The preseason footy (and other) skills work must be much more fun than straight fitness work and hopefully it pays off in less turnovers for in season games! 

I suspect that any of the 12 that sue EFC are flagging they won't be playing for the bombers when their suspension ends.  A fellow on bf has started a thread cleverly called the 'Dirty Dozen'...it asks posters to vote on who they think will stay at EFC.   

That Jobe is one to 'throw down the gauntlet' is significant as he has been the glue that has kept the 34 unified throughout.  Really feel for the guy.  He has been a stalwart for three years now seems to have had enough.  

8 hours ago, Middymalt said:

Yeah and a dozen players the club can't contact until September that's along time for a player to get bitter especially when the season starts , my guess is out of the dozen there will be 4 players that stay because there coming to the end but the younger ones like Heppel and Hurley will seek trades .

Apparently, EFC have offered all 12 players a one year extension to existing contracts.  Probably gives the fringe players a chance for another go and ensures the younger ones don't go elsewhere.  Yet to see how many take up the offer.

But it could backfire if they have list management issues, having to keep players at the end of the year they would otherwise have retired or delisted.

Ahmed Saad also wants to play for the bombers!

http://www.theage.com.au/afl/afl-news/ahmed-saad-keen-to-play-for-bombers-brian-lake-rules-it-out-20160113-gm5atf.html

Go figure!  Surreal if they take him.

27 minutes ago, sue said:

Gotta love Hird's choice of words in his latest foray into blame everyone but himself. In the Age he is quoted saying:

"There was no directive from the club and I think you read - I think that was a mistake by some of the players. If you read the CAS report, it says the 34 players didn't disclose," he said.

"Well, 34 players weren't tested in that year. Only 21 of the players were tested. That absolves - there's 13 that weren't tested. "

I dimly recall the CAS judgement did not say 34 didn't disclose, just those who were asked. Is that right?  And what does Hird think the 13 are absolved of?

http://www.theage.com.au/afl/afl-news/essendon-34-james-hird-says-players-made-a-mistake-in-keeping-quiet-20160119-gm8vrf.html

He went on to say there was no direction from the club to keep the supplement regime a secret or not to put the supplements on declaration forms for ASADA testing.  You have to wonder what the players made of those comments!!  I guess he has thrown everyone else under the bus, why not the players! 

That article and comments are based on a Q&A by the audience after the Holmes interview.  http://www.abc.net.au/news/2016-01-18/james-hird-answers-questions-from-the-audience/7096276  One question was about why the 13 players who didn't participate.  He waffled before saying 'it was optional'!  Hmmmm...

Its interesting, during the Holmes interview Hird's body language and eye contact were statuesque like.  Both waivered a number of times during the (unscripted) Q&A...he even squirmed a little.   The audience asked smarter questions than Holmes did! 

Just now, daisycutter said:

nothing

as long as they are not funded by essendon, the afl or the aflpa (which is 100% funded by the afl).if supporters or independent benefactors wish to fund them so be it.

spot on dc and as long as the training is not associated with any afl related or associated club ie they cannot coach the little league for example.  I also heard kb say that players can for example use Melbourne storm facilities but can't train with the club.

Just now, jackaub said:

So there effectively wont be any penalty right?

That is what AFLPA appears to be aiming for. 

However, they will never get their integrity back.  I think this is why they are smarting.  Bearing in mind the CAS suspension was 2 years, less 1 year (to the date of AFL Tribunal), less 4 months (for provisional suspension served).  Net result 11 months.

I think the players could accept a guilty verdict and 11 months suspension if they had been given a 1 year (50%) discount for 'no significant fault' (say instead of the 1 year backdating) as it would exonerate them from any fault ie support their 'we were doped and duped' line so they could walk away saying they it wasn't their fault.  If that happened they would not have to wear the 'drug cheat' label.

Whether AFLPA succeed in any of their 'get around WADA rules' plans is yet to be seen.

I suspect WADA will be watching carefully, certainly the 17 still playing AFL and especially the EFC 12.

10 minutes ago, binman said:

Who would foot the bill for all of that? It would cost a small fortune

Yes, a small fortune.

I wish I knew what the WADA do's/don'ts were for players under suspension.  I think it is something along the lines of not being able to do anything/anywhere associated with or sponsored by the AFL.

I have posted earlier that I expect a very early 'out of court settlement' with EFC/AFL to get money to players asap (especially for those with families).  I also posted that EFC coterie's might fund a non-afl related training program.  The AFL fully funds AFLPA so I doubt it can directly pay for player training etc.

So I would imagine the funding would be some combination of these.  Only problem for me is that a fair chunk of the 'out of court settlement' would come from the AFL.  If it is a court settlement I doubt it would constitute payment by the AFL so probably would not contravene WADA rules.

I should emphasize, I am only hypothesing.