Lucifers Hero

And this is a problem - more like poetic justice!

It seems that despite the DL excitement Demons supporters generally seem to be sitting back as our membership level (approx 25,000) is about the same as last year. Am somewhat surprised about that as we have had fantastic off-season press on new coaches, trades, drafts and training. This suggests some trepidation in our supporter base that perhaps it is another 'false dawn' rather than a 'new dawn'. I am wishing and hoping for the new dawn but still a touch fearful that we are in for a tough year again. (FWIW my 15 year continuous membership was renewed months ago) so I am not sitting back. Just keeping fingers crossed.

Just going on what I have read in the press dc eg http://www.smh.com.au/sport/athlete-support-staff-targeted-by-wada-20140510-zr91n.html%C2'> I don't know the ins and outs of it all so you could well be right. I just hope someone is able to pin something on him so he doesn't come out of it looking 'not guilty' while his players go down.

Yes, not smart enough at EFC to cut their losses! If I recall correctly ASADA/WADA powers to prosecute support staff only became effective Jan 01, 2015. My take is if their players are suspended, EFC can go down because of the '2 out all out' WADA rule and by implication Hird go down with them otherwise I'm pessimistic of anyone having the power or legal basis to suspend or sack Hird. He won't do the honourable thing and fall on his sword and it pains me to even think it but letting him coach till Aug 2016 is becoming a real possibility. Then be rid of him once and for all!

True but my statement was in the context or several earlier posts that: Hird isn't part of (so won't be found 'guilty') the player Tribunal process, is guilty of poor governance (for which he has served his suspension) and can't be sacked just because his Fed appeal failed. So there appears to be no basis to now 'sack' him for the supplements program/pharmalogical experiment up to when they self-reported. As for after self-reporting his sworn testimony reference in my post (IMHO) will protect him from EFC and Worksafe. So he is likely to keep his job. Morally, we all think he should go one way or the other. But unless there are watertight legal reasons to sack him, reasons that will stand up in court, the cleanest and cheapest way out for EFC/AFL is to let his contract expire (Aug 2016) and just not renew it. We may not like it but the EFC/AFL will take the 'path of least resistance'.

Totally agree Querty. Also, Hird swore under oath before Middleton that from day 1 he was 'just doing what he was asked/instructed to do and at times it was under threat and duress'. I'm beginning to think the only way that Hird will go down is if EFC get 'penalized' under the WADA code of '...if 2 players suspended, the whole team is suspended...' type of thing. As long as Hird claims he was 'just doing what he was instructed to do and at times it was under threat and duress' it will be very difficult for any entity to 'penalise' him. Not EFC, not AFL, not ASADA/WADA and not even Worksafe. He was very clever how he crafted that defense in court and it may just be his saviour. Any penalty by any of those entities will end up in court where Hird will just repeat his claim. Hmm not sure which entity would be prepared to take on that bag-of-worms.

Not sure how you draw this conclusion. Neither Federal Court case was about Hird's innocence. You may have inside knowledge that 'he isn't' innocent but as far as I can tell there are no court proceedings to test that. Don't wish to defend Hird but his established guilt so far is to have inefficiently managed a supplements program ie poor governance. Everything else is conjecture. Losing the appeal is not grounds for Hird to be sacked. His guilt will be implied (not proven as he is not on the charge sheet) if players are found guilty and suspended by the Tribunal. Even then the narrative will vary from 'Hird masterminded a systemic doping regime' to 'drugs administered to players on Hird's watch'. I doubt we will ever really know the extent of Hird's guilt. Like most others I would like to see him out of the game and out of sport but there will need to be watertight legal reasons that will stand up in court.

EFC seem to have written their own rules about payment while suspended when they gave Hird $1m to go play in France for a year. As a comparison Saad didn't get paid, (he was delisted). But players suspend for on-field misdemeanors by the AFL Tribunal get paid. So probably EFC will pay players while suspended. Can't see the players being silly enough to appeal if they can't play while it is in the pipeline and resolution may take longer than the suspensions themselves. Given what our far more learned (than me) DL posters have said law suits will start flying left, right and centre! But if the players take their medicine all that will be in the background and football can finally get back to being about football.

A technical view: A memorandum of understanding (MoU) describes a bilateral or multilateral agreement between two or more parties. It expresses a convergence of will between the parties, indicating an intended common line of action. A layman's view (1): Memoranda of understanding are useful documents to "kick- start' an agreement. They help lessen any discomfort that parties may feel where basic parameters are not written down before a proper agreement is drafted. A layman's view (2): A memorandum of understanding can be perfect in situations where a contract is too formal, but a handshake isn't enough In business a MOU usually leads to a formal contract or the parties go their own way.

On the 'boycott' thing do the AFL have the power to guarantee backdating...wouldn't it be up to ASADA to negotiate not the AFL. I suspect that ASADA would be in no mood to play that game given the merry-go-round EFC have given them. I'm gobsmacked at how arrogant and brazen the 'boycott' threat is. Any respect or sympathy I had for EFC players has now gone out the window. Man up guys and take your medicine (if found guilty that is)

Yes, a better interpretation. Given the article this morning that players will 'boycott NAB cup if AFL do not guarantee suspensions are not backdated to September' strongly suggests they expect suspension as penalties. So they either: - wear them and cannot play for suspension duration, or - appeal and they cannot play while under appeal If suspended I reckon the players won't appeal (sorry Dees2014) as the appeal may take longer than the suspension time. So, expect a depleted bombers team for some time in 2015!! Justice will finally be done (and seen to be done) I hope.

I believe the decision is being handed down at 2.15 tomorrow Jack Nial from the Age has reported that players remain on suspension while appeal is in process regardless of who appeals. No idea if that is right - just what he reported: "The prospect of appeals from either ASADA or the players if they lose is another complication. Under the rules, the players would be unable to play during an appeal period if they were challenging suspensions."

Not sure of date for cap/co-cap and LG announcements but club said after the GC camp so i'm guessing it isn't too far away.

Wondering whether we should wait a few days/week and see who is in the leadership group. An LG person doesn't have to be on the banner but it would be good if their name was in the list of 20. eg HL not in list but may well be in LG

The most important position I guess means the one that is integral to the game and to winning. Many coaches hold the view to win a GF you need to have an excellent ruckman. So on the basis of the most 'important position' (rather than the 'best player' ala GA in Lynch's article...best players change over time) I go with ruckman.

1. Are you implying the tribunal of Chairman Mr David Jones, a former County Court Judge, Mr John Nixon, a former County Court Judge and Mr Wayne Henwood, a barrister and former VFL player are AFL stooges? I would hope these learned gentleman would put a higher value on their personal and professional integrity. 2. A 'reprimand' implies a penalty for 'guilty' to charges. So, surely they can't just say: 'yes, based on 'comfortable satisfaction' you took the illegal gear (ie guilty) but we will let you off with a slap over the wrist (a reprimand).' Its either 'Guilty': penalise according to ASADA/WADA rules; or 'Innocent': let them go. 3. A 'reprimand' looks like a 50/50 each way bet.

Except the map is of 'Casey Fields'! Might be a case of: 'watch this space' as it might get updated again before Monday.

Love your training reports Saty but the sarcasm is wearing a bit thin...just put Moonie and other detractors on 'ignore'. Or follow 'Bruisers' example - do your reports the let others have their say and leave it at that. That should help stop the sparring that goes on in training reports.

They don't have to: Several footy fields and sporting facilities surrounded by acres of parkland...enough to keep all but the most ardent fan at a safe distance!

Last year's leadership group was: Jones, Grimes, Dawes, Dunn, Garland, Cross and Frawley. For the sake of stability I would like to see minimal changes: we now have a stable off-field, stable coaching so I would like a stable LG. Would also like the same 'rules' to players getting a game apply to LG. ie you need to earn your spot and do so well enough to dislodge an incumbent. While there are other players I would like in LG and there are plenty of potential leaders among the young brigade for mine no-one has really stood out and 'passed' this 'test'. Lets give the young guys a year or two to just enjoy their footy. Their day will come. I'm not sure we need 7 in the LG so Frawley going leaves 6. Garland may opt to drop out as this is free agent year and concentrate on his game.

Jack took captaincy very seriously and there is every chance that he took the loses and set-backs of the last few years personally...not it being his fault but that he couldn't lead his team our of the mire, either by his own performance or motivating his team. I would like to see him in the LG. Different times and people, I know but I didn't like it when Green went from captain to no-where. I just feel we need to give the right message through behaviour and treating our ex-captains with more respect is one such way. We didn't do it with Junior and Green; we are somewhat doing it with Trengove and I hope we do so with Grimes. So hope to see him in the LG.

'Constellation'...this gave me a good ole laugh...I was imagining him seeing stars!

Hang in there Bruiser. In the home stretch now. We really enjoy your work.

From the outside Mick seems to have favourites ala Daisy and outsiders ala Garlett. Roos on the other hand seems to not let his personal feelings affect his assessment of a player and will work hard to get the best out of them. Having said that I would bet Roos told Garlett to pull his head in or he will be in the VFL again and may have put some 'behaviour' clauses in his contract.

To Roosy's Bruisers, Deemfc, Mega Watts and Demon Ox. Thanks for really informative and entertaining reports! Really insightful as well...just telling it as you see it without any humbug. Like it! Live bayside so will try to get to Casey when we start training there...hope I can do half as good a report as you guys have.