Diamond_Jim

The reports speak of a "negotiated penalty" Perhaps a counselling or education program is my bet on the afl repsonse. Maybe a fine on top but anymore from the AFL would surprise me given their track record. Of course if he were only a bit player at a lesser club they might thorw the book at them all. (O such cynicism)

On the salary issue.... let's be real. I would be happy at anywhere over 60% as I gather it is only for one year. In the meantime we get to have a real look at a late draft pick a rookie whatever that can possibly make our team in 2018. 60% of Dunn's salary will cover that cost well and truly. We know Dunn is not going to be part of the future and that he is only there for insurance at best. Love or hate Hawthorn and for that matter the Dogs of a few years ago but there is little benefit in carrying senior players to the end of their days. (And yes we did not treat Junior well.)

If true I am happy for Lynden. He is obviously not part of the present MFC game plan and he deserves a chance elsewhere. (Just wish it was somewhere other than Collingwood !!!)

Very happy about the move 3 year contract, age 31 at start of next season and from what I understand a decent salary. A risk but in the absence of any comparative senior talent on our list a risk worth taking. Cannot help but think about all the other players who have crossed to the Dees at similar stages of their careers. Few have really succeeded. I look forward to this being one of those successes.

Like most years on this site.......... we always enjoy the pre-season until the reality hits Hopefully next year is different .............but

The name given to a great movie about the failed WWII Operation Market Garden. If successful it might have ended the war by Christmas 1944.... the Allies would probably have beaten the Russians to Berlin.... the Cold War would have been very different from a geographical standpoint. Relevance to the Dees landing Lewis..... probably none but a nice diversion !!

I made this point a few weeks back. If true it is an enormous loophole...... why limit it to coaching.... the job could be anything Surely you cannot commit to a job after football and it is outside the salary cap. For example we want to get Garland out of our salary cap so we offer him his existing salary plus a one year sweetener to retire from the MFC list and be an "on field mentor" at Casey. It cannot be that easy.

For anyone who is fluent in German here is the link to website of the Swiss Federal Court. I had a quick look at the English section but so far no luck. My understanding from the AFL site was that the judgement was in German and had been embargoed until the players were informed. That time has obviously passed. http://www.bvger.ch/recht/00551/index.html?lang=en On a lighter side... I found the Swiss court link via an article (below) on a Swiss news site..... Has a heading .... "Not a G'Day" and features a picture of a Melbourne player being tackled by an Essendon player http://www.swissinfo.ch/eng/not-a-g-day_swiss-court-rejects-appeal-by-banned-australian-rules-players/42508834

Those quotes relate to the AFL tribunal which found them not guilty. Bit like the argument that because the CAS decision was 2-1 that more judges (counting the AFL tribunal members) found them to be innocent.... (flawed logic)

Main reason is that the AFL tribunal applied the burden of proof argument in a completely different way to CAS (chain vs string) To extend that statement: AFL tribunal looked for proof that what the players were given was Drug X CAS said Danks ordered it.... Drug X was in the fridge..... players were given drugs.... reasonable to assume it included Drug X (Simplistic but the AFL Tribunal looked for direct evidence whereas CAS was happy to rely on circumstantial evidence)

http://www.tas-cas.org/fileadmin/user_upload/Arbitral_Award_WADA_ESSENDON.pdf

I think the Court of Appeal decision is required reading for every fan who is interested in this subject. It is not that long and as far as legal judgements go it is in relatively plain English. The Court deals with each argument and then dismisses it with unequivocal logic. (They even look at the youth argument.)

ah... you are getting it... that was the question they were asked...... are you taking any supplements..... and they answered.............. NO !!!!!!!!!!!!!! (Actually they left the section blank) Here's the link to the form .... you will find the relevant question in the large white box under Section 3 headed "Information for Analysis" https://wada-main-prod.s3.amazonaws.com/wada_doping_control_form_v6.pdf Then have a read of the Appeal Court's judgment at paragraphs 161 and 162 http://www.tas-cas.org/fileadmin/user_upload/Arbitral_Award_WADA_ESSENDON.pdf Sorry Saty but the evidence against them was damning

Love these deals..... guarantees the player the money notwithstanding form and injury but under current practice the player can walk to his preferred club at any time. A real win/lose deal..... time for some balance away from the players. Don't begrudge the player getting long term security but it has to cut both ways.

From the AFL site: "Those still hopeful Watson will retain his medal point to the AFL Anti-Doping Tribunal verdict in March 2015 that cleared the players. The AFL Commission must decide if it sides with the rules governing world sport it has signed up for, or if there are extenuating circumstances for Watson and he proves to be an exception." They are kidding aren't they !!!!

Dank's defence would have been informed consent on the part of either or the club and the players. No way would they sue him as he would have said who knew what and when. The importation and use of the various drugs was in no way illegal as I understand it. The taking of the drugs violated the contractual provisions of the WADA code. The only way that it would come out to the benefit of the club is if he was contracted to provided drug A (allowed) and he administered drug B (banned). The absence of records makes a mockery of this argument. On the issue of blame the players have done their time and should be allowed back. No need for them to be treated as heroes. What is badly missing is contrition and acceptance of responsibility by EFC, the Coach, the relevant staff and yes.... the players. Each had fault and each bears responsibility albeit in differing ways and to differing degrees. Looking forward to reading the judgment when available.

no joy in this waiting for the EFC apology.... (yeah we now what they will say.... it now allows us to draw a line and move on) with a number one draft pick. Did anyone learn a lesson ???

Did not realise we had this rule. Well and truly agree that it should go. Many US companies have as part of their terms of employment that you will agree to relocate. Have not seen it with an Australian company but perhaps professional sportspeople should see it as part of their business.

Another possible example of systemic manipulation by Collingwood which following on the Treloar operation could do with some transparency. The AfL does have an ethics section. I would expect young Daicos to present " independent" medical evidence as to why he was unable to participate. Not a big thing but another example of something that "smells."

I think they were meaning that one could make a nominal offer (say 4th round pick or the like)

Funny you mention this. The Essendon bomberblitz forum suggested this trade on the basis that we then on trade 19/20 to Essendon for Hibberd. I suppose we would say "they were dreamin" and in fact the follow up comment on bomberblitz was that no one would pay for Dunn when he could be had for free!! Wonderful how different people see the world.

Ah but the comp is so even...... Gil told me so

Hi just found this part of the Board. Most of my favourites have been mentioned but I will add two more: Ballers..... season 2 just finished. Made by the team who made Entourage but is based against the background of NFL. Season 2 was not as strong as season 1 in my view. There are some good blogs out of the US where they compare it with the real world of the NFL. Like Entourage it has cameos from real NFL players. Halt and Catch Fire... Season 3 now showing... about the early world of computers. Was originally compared to Mad Men but did not rate anywhere near as well. Great show for binge watching. And yes..... Man in the High Castle and the Night Manager are compulsive viewing along with the Politician's Husband and the Honourable Woman Looking forward to following your recommendations.... (don't forget the foreign dramas.. The Spiral is a great series.... top rated French crime drama now in fifth season.)

Why..... it got the result everyone including the AFL wanted and moreover it keeps the game flowing which is the "cardinal rule." The " overhead out the back handball" together with the "palm off" is here to stay.... or until Collingwood complain !!!

At a sale price of $200M it looks like the current owner did not do too well...... (in reality with the $30 buy out clause operable in 2025 it was more a limited income stream deal as compared to a land deal for the present owner.) More importantly under that form of ownership there was little if any incentive for the present owner to improve the stadium. "The stadium was announced on 31 October 1996 as a replacement for the much larger Waverley Park as a headquarters for the Australian Football League.[6] Originally developed by the Docklands Stadium Consortium and thereafter controlled by the Seven Network, the remaining leasehold interest in the stadium was sold to James Fielding Funds Management on 21 June 2006 for A$330 million.[7] Under the terms of the agreement governing construction and operation of the venue, in 2025 the AFL were to win ownership of the stadium for a $30 fee." Full article here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Docklands_Stadium