Dees2014

The Victorian State government is inevitably involved for several reasons. First, the AFL is based in Victoria and is a major industry here, and so the Vic Government has a justifiable interest in the health of the game, and the Essendon saga has the potential still to seriously wound the game to the detriment of the Victorian economy and people. It is interesting that when Hird was sacked apparently the first person who was told, well before the Press Conference, was Denial Andrews. Secondly, Andrews himself is a prominent Essendon supporter, and a senior member of the Essendon coterie, and the convener of the "Spring Street Bombers", which is the alliance group of Essendon supporters in Victorian politics across party lines, and a major lobby group, which has been very active throughout this saga. Thirdly, the state government cannot help but being involved because WorkSafe is a state government body and comes under control of the relevant state minister. Whilst there is no evidence of direct interference in this area that I know of, although there have been rumours about it from time to time, Andrews is on record as saying, immediately after the AFL Tribunal verdict was announced, words to the affect "let's now move on, enough is enough!". Apparently, there were moves to shut down the WorkSafe investigation after this, but the unions would not allow it for understandable reasons. Fourthly, the federal government is involved because the extreme right wing of the Liberal Party (eg Alan Jones, and the global CEO of News Limited) have very strong views about this aka the whole ASADA/WADA regime "should be shut down or ignored", and Jones has been publicly urging Abbott to do so. Given Abbott's weak political position and his tendency to follow his instructions from the right, political interference federally has always been a strong possibility, although so far it has not happened to my knowledge, at least publicly. Paul Little though has strong links to the Federal Liberals and has in the past been a major donor to them. His lobbyists apparently have been active in Canberra throughout this saga. Further, the ACC is a federal government body, and has been heavily involved in this (rightly) from the beginning.None of this implies impropriety or indeed corruption, it I think is no more than the cut and thrust of the political process, but it does not lessen the point that politics has always been involved in this, and for that we should all be vigilant. It also makes it all the more important that it now is outside the Australian political processes, at least at CAS, not of course at WorkSafe. And for that we should all be grateful.

There is, and it is not pretty. After all, Rupert Murdoch is in town with his Essendon fanatical, Hird worshiping CEO of global News Limited, so of course Abbott is heavily involved. What delights me is that they can have as many bitchy dinners as they like, plot their plots, rail against those ignorant and dangerous liberals, but it won't make a blind bit of difference.. In the end, their beloved Essendon and Hird will go down anyway!

I think the point here is they are unsigned and not under oath. It is equivalent of making claims in the Press, which no one can verify, but if everyone was in a court of law under oath there might be a very different outcome. Contempt of court makes you into a criminal, which most don't want to be, although i acknowledge that a number of hird's associates were already criminals mostly to do with their illegal drug running.

I said he is delusional if he thinks this AFL piece will make any difference to the outcome, as he has done many times before. It won't, but he seems to think it will which most do in Hird's camp, as he clearly is. I'm happy to take the insult of being delusional if you like. I know who i'd back as to the outcome, and it won't be the Essendon players getting off as a result of the AFL's pleading to CAS, although there may be some minor backdating according to my sources

Spare Bombers, AFL begs court For those of you who can't access this - from Chip LeGrand in the Australian at his delusional best: Good try, Chip, but it won't go anywhere. Like anyone breaking the law, you can ask for lenience, but it won't make the offence go away. The sheer naivety of this mob is staggering. Or is it the case of "you can't be shot for trying".Now the AFL are officially easily the wealthiest sports code in Australia, I guess they now think they can get away with anything. Thankfully, it is now out of Australian hands, and there is not a damn thing they can do about it.

According to several legal opinions I have read recently on this, there appears to be a consensus that this time (ie at CAS) the Supreme Court will compell witnesses to testify under oath. You can assume therefore that those witnesses ASADA applied to the Supreme Court to compulsorily testify under oath will be drafted into the witness box this time as apparently the technicality which got them off earlier in the year no longer applies. This mainly relates to Dank, the pharmacists, and those who imported and sold beta4. Can I suggest this will be like a pack of cards. Presuming these people tell the truth (which usually happens when you will be held in contempt if you don't), it will inevitably involve a number of accusations about others which may get those others to come forward to defend themselves, which may cause other to as well etc etc etc. With the skilled American counsel cross examining, silence or stone-walling would be difficult for anyone, this hopefully will lead to the truth. Under these circumstances, I can't see how much of the hierarchy at Essendon, the AFL, ASADA, possibly the ACC and even government will not be called. It may not happen so extensively at the players' hearing, but when the non players are charged and this also ends up also at CAS, the whole thing will inevitably open up, and truth will out. Let's hope so anyway.

They will all talk at CAS - under oath! Now that should be interesting.

I agree penalties are in the hands of the AFL Tribunal initially at least, but they will be heavily influenced by the findings at CAS and CAS can over rule them, and has frequently if they are inadequate. The basis of the judgement will be critical

R Of course he did, such an honourable man. What's a beacon of integrity!

Chris, basically I think we are furiously agreement with one proviso.The Essendon mob are delusional on this. Either they get off (I can tell you it won't happen - WADA believes this is one of the most open and shut case they have dealt with), or it is a question of how severe the penalties, and that does not mean 2-3 weeks, it means 2 or 4 years. Their main aim is the perpetrators. Hird, because of his willingness to lie and cheat - and importantly litigate at the drop of a hat, remind them very much of Armstrong, with the same sort of delusional behaviour. As I have said many times on here, they see this as a test case. If they win this, they have a case against the NFL the U.S, which is not currently covered can by the WADA. They see that as the holy grail. It does not make, I hasten to add, an unfair process - simply one where the behaviour is so outrageous they simply have to act, but in so doing they make a case internationally. WADA will not drop this ball. They see their case as watertight, and as a beacon as to how team sports will be required to operate in future. In these circumstances, does anyone seriously believe CAS will hand down, if they are found guilty, 2-3 weeks?

There is not a way, short of finding the players not guilty, that there could be a sentence of "3-4 weeks". WADA has rules re sentencing and at the moment the minimum sentence is 2 years, and soon to go to 4 years. Whilst there is room for backdating, it is in my view unlikely given WADA's current attitude, and if there were some it would be minimal eg back to the date the infraction notices were issued which would mean the players would serve about 18 months.

The CAS hearing will ago ahead no matter what happens to Hird, and I am expecting as a result of that there will be a number of infraction notices issued to people inside and outside Essendon (from 2011-2014) including Hird. Then the writs will fly, and given the Hird's litigious ways he would probably expect him to takes his life ban to the highest court. Just because he no longer coaches, does not mean we will be rid of him (unfortunately).

World Government? Childhood inoculations?

If anyone has doubts about the quality of McDevitt at ASADA they should read this. We are so so lucky to have such quality people who generally serve us with such integrity in the Public Service, in contrast to those incompetent fools who pretend to be our leaders in the political class in Canberra. What an embarrassment they are, and making us the laughing stock of the world. The Age: Cheat Buster - http://tinyurl.com/nhq5axx

I really think our outrage against Robbo is a wasted effort. Nothing he does will make a blind bit of difference to Essendon's fate, and that is surely to be celebrated and appreciated. The rest from him is hot air...

In my view it is imperative that Hird tells everything he knows, but the problem with him it would be so slanted by his sociopathic personality, that it would be impossible to tell the truth from fiction. Maybe when it all gets to the civil courts which it must in some form or other, that some form of plea bargain may put some quality control on the information forthcoming. It is definitely time after the CAS hearing and its aftermath that all the major actors: Hird, Evans, Vlad, Little, Reid, Thompson, Dank, McLaughlin, Watson, Charter tell everything they know - and truthfully. Unfortunately, pigs might fly!

USADA is the local offshoot of WADA in the U.S., just as ASADA is in Australia. In my book that makes them involved as both are operating under WADA protocols. I'm sure you may differ. I'm happy to concede your point. For me, it is the process and the outcomes that are important.

Destruction of records is a clear breach of the WADA code, and that in itself should be sufficient to find them guilty. Since when has destroying evidence allowed people to get off a crime in any legal system? That is effectively what the tribunal judged on. CAS will take a very very dim view of this, let alone WorkSafe. WADA have rubbed people out in the past simply for failing to turn up for scheduled drug tests, or making themselves absent - a much less serious crime than destroying evidence.

Can I suggest this is a classic strategy in PR. When you are under the pump, you try to move to another subject.Tony Abbott uses it all the time, this is just another version of it. Given the Hird's campaign tactics last time in nobbling key witnesses to the AFL Tribunal hearing, it would not surprise me at all if Hird has done a deal with Dank along the lines of in return for going soft on Hird at CAS (and telling half truths), Essendon's CAS evidence falls in line with Dank's. Part of this deal could be for Dank in the meantime to "spread the blame" to Melbourne and Geelong on the basis that "everyone's doing it" which was Hird's original rationale way back in 2011 when he first dreamt up this disastrous journey.By the way, WADA are well aware of these sorts of tactics and have the experience and the will to combat them (unlike the AFL Tribunal). Look at the very effective tactics WADA used in the Armstrong case if you don't believe me. The ultimate sanction of course are the laws against purgery which I'm sure they will be very much using with all witnesses called under oath at the November hearing. Given the severity of these, you would think that even Dank would think twice about purgering himself with this sort of deal.

And more importantly Doc Reid, and we followed WADA protocols and kept complete records which were made available to the authorities, and were cleared of all wrong-doing. There is no comparison between the two situations. They are desperately trying to deflect blame - including Dank. Can't wait to see what he says under oath, and be cross examined by a skilled, fully briefed counsel with high levels of expertise in this field. He (the barrister) will have a field day. The only danger is if he is silly enough, or desperate enough, to lie under oath, in which case he could be in even greater trouble than he is at the moment if that were possible

I know WJ, but it does fit into the delusional behaviour of the Hird tribe in general, of which the international MD of News Limited is a senior member. Fortunately it will not make a blind bit of difference. The whole edifice of the Hird regime is rapidly collapsing, and the messiah is getting even more delusional, which will only get more severe as we move towards November. You never know, Little might even notice!

Whilst I have no direct knowledge of this, my guess is that the connections are more Australia to the rest of the world than the other way around. WADA clearly has a very close relationship with ASADA, which is only right and proper, and much of WADA's views on their initial reaction to the Australian football codes behaviour would be formed by that connection. ASADA would also have made them aware of the role of the ACC, but whether there are any direct introductions I am not sure.but, much of this changed when the Federal Government, ASADA, THE ACC, and all the major sporting codes fronted for the news conference in 2011, and the headline "the blackest day in Australia sport" got extensive coverage worldwide. Put it this way - it could have been handled better. What they should have said was "the blackest day for all the Australian professional football codes". It has caused Australian Olympic sports no end of embarrassment, and created considerable anger. There is no doubt that event alerted the international regulatory bodies to the issues in team sports in general, and because of Australia's up until then squeaky clean reputation, it sounded alarm bells about domestic team sports, which the AFL and NRL essentially are. The AFL and NRL do not have the clout that for instance the NFL have in the U.S., who to this day remain outside the WADA code, and you can see why when you look at almost daily scandals to do with drugs and bad behaviour. The AFL and the NRL are only signatories to the WADA code because successive governments have made it clear they would withdraw the financial support for the codes (particularly through the billions that has been put into stadium development) if they were not. This very much [censored] off the NRL and AFL, perhaps because they could foresee what was to come. Where we are now, is that WADA has taken a very keen interest in what has gone on here, and this has been magnified after McDevitt's appointment - they are immensely impressed with him, and the professional team built around him. They are also outraged ( to put it mildly) about how their local offshoot has been treated by the local media, the Codes and the Federal and State governments. They are determined to ensure they do not get away with it, hence they see the EFC saga, as a test case to ensure that local affiliates around the world cannot be bullied and corrupted by powerful local vested interests and beholden local governments. Does this answer your question?

Reality bites as Hird becomes more and more irrational as he becomes more and more desperate. He is being exposed for what he is - a lying and desperate man, and even the most rusted on will see it more and more as we moved towards the November hearings.

The power last at the AFL Tribunal was not granted last time on essentially a technicality which is not there this time. I have read a number of legal opinions on this and most are saying they believe this time the Supreme Court will grant the subpoena powers. Again we shall have to see. Certainly WADA believes they will be granted this time.

We shall see I guess.My understanding is that WADA see this as effectively a "retrial" (as they regard the AFL Tribunal Hearing as a joke), and like many royal commissions no one knows where this might go. What did, I think, Paul Keating say; "never call a royal commission unless you know the outcome". Not that this is a Royal Conission, but it has some of the opened ended nature to it which will make it unpredictable, particularly as much of the truth is yet to come out as all the previous enquiries were very closely defined in order for the vested interests to control the damage. Further, with the AFL being asleep at the wheel through much of this saga, and their wish to repress the truth, and allowing Hird and Essendon to get away with outrageous behaviour in so many areas, WADA are determined to uncover these practices and expose them once and for all. In so doing, make the price of them so high that no one will dare try them again. This means very severe consequences for Essendon and Hird, but it also means "looking under rocks" which have been known only by rumour. This will be far more extensive than everyone believes, which I would suggest includes grilling all the major players at Essendon and the AFL. I can't see how that would not include the list I posted before, particularly Demitriou and GM. It will also include the outside players who were muzzled by Hird's henchmen just before the AFL Tribunal hearings, plus some further afield such as the Chinese suppliers who sold the drugs. I have no doubt some of the Essendon players who are the subject of the hearings will be asked to testify and be cross-examined.