Ash35

For what it's worth, Richard Ings tweeted this on April 19 after the Dank findings.

"If ASADA cant even prove "administration" by SD how can ASADA expect WADA to prove "use" by players.

A WADA appeal would surprise me."

They were very lucky. Gold Coast were wasteful and missing Ablett

GC were wasteful, but Geelong showed tremendous heart today.

Hawkins didn't play, Bartel subbed in the first quarter, Stokes off at half time, Lonergan at 3/4 time, one on the bench in the last quarter and held on.

A great win for a team that doesn't know how to lie down.

Actually all jokes and pings aside Id be very interested in the view of an informed Essendon supporter..

Calling Ash....... thoughts??

I think it's obvious he was out of his depth as a Senior AFL coach, but as a few have already posted here, the work he did at Collingwood was exceptional by all reports.

The reality is that Essendon is currently a club that has a lot of uncertainty about it.

I was surprised Cooney chose us over North Melb and Giles picked us over Adelaide.

I don't imagine Neeld was getting a heap of job offers, so I understand how it looks to some.

'Desperate Essendon clutching at straws'.

I don't think it's quite like that.

Time will tell if it's a poor or good appointment.

Ash....are you a parent ?

If you are, what's you view , as one, towards the actions and seemingly spellbound co-operation that the players parent are affording the club.

I ask not as entrapment but with genuine interest because I can't ( as a parent of a 20yo Boy ) understand it for a second.

Yes, I have children. So like all parents, our natural reaction is to be outraged and do what we can to protect our children and their interests.

But I don't know what is being told to them by the club.

I'm certain that concerns have been raised during the many meetings the club has had with the parents and partners.

But as to how those concerns are being answered, your guess is as good as mine.

I'm sure if the information given by the club was not satisfactory, the families would be taking action.

This is one aspect of the saga that doesn't get a lot of publicity, unless it's the "Essendon mother" ringing up radio stations.

But behind closed doors, you would think the families must have concerns, but for whatever reason, they are keeping those concerns private for the time being.

Ash...and please don't take this personally. but your club is already bankrupt, morally so

As long as Hird and Little represent the two sides to the overseeing of football at the EFC you will be ostracised from those that think what was, and continues to be, abhorrent.

That we might want to stick our collective size 10's into you lot is not surprising given the treatment over the years to our club at times by your clubs management etc.

Give, and you better be prepared to take.

That aside I ask, seriously, as an Essendon supporter ( and I presume Member ? ) will you be attending the next AGM and along with others with a better regard for whats right , incorrupt and scrupulous be demanding the instant removal of Hird and the purging of the current board ?

You seem a decent bloke, where does decency stand at Essendon ?

Yep, I'm a member, have been for about 20 years.

Do I wish things have been handled differently? Yes

Do I think turning up to the AGM and demanding change will help? Maybe

But realistically, unless someone puts their hand up to replace the board, all the protests about the place won't help.

I'm amazed at how few "rumblings" have come from outside the inner sanctum of the club in relations to board challenges etc

Maybe the club is so [censored] at the moment, no one wants to jump into the crap storm that is being involved with the EFC.

Yes I want change. At board level and in relation to Hird.

When I get the chance to elect board members as my right as a member, I will vote accordingly.

But I have said all along, I don't believe Hird should be involved in the club.

I struggle at times to see why so many supporters still back him.

As for Paul Little, I'm undecided.

He has come in half way through, and he has gone about things completely differently to the way Evans was handling things.

From what I know about him, that's his style.

He has had to deal with an incredibly unique situation.

Obviously most think he has gone about it poorly, but I don't envy him and the circumstances he has found himself in.

I will buy a membership next year, no matter what happens.

I am of the believe I am an Essendon supporter, and the club is bigger than any person involved.

The club needs my membership more than it ever has.

no amount of nice guys chatting to us from the tumbril is going to change anything.

I think Essendon members ought to have put some pressure on the club, a long time ago; you are complicit by inaction in the face of outrageous behaviour in the organisation you are members of. Where has been the revolt against such unacceptable behaviour?

Chatting with us doesn't cut it, you should see that. You have failed to do what had to be done.

Are you serious?

In any event, I wouldn't be hanging my hat on that supposed "chink" because it's what probably broke the case against Essendon in the first place. Dank was too smart by half and thought he had found a way around the WADA Code by his querying of the status of AOD9604. He would have gotten away with TB4 as well but he stuffed it up by not understanding that TB4 is S2 and not S0.

In the eyes of most people, the smugness of Jobe's admission of the ingestion of an S0 peptide ain't a good look and will possibly not help his cause in the long run.

Nor will, I suspect, the current argy bargy about the players' lawyers advising them not to even consider making deals at this stage.

They really can't have their cakes and eat them and by that I mean that if they're prepared to have the cases tested in the appropriate tribunal (which is their right) they can't turn around much later and try to claim discounts because they supposedly co-operated or, in view of Job's boasts about ingesting an S0 peptide that's banned; how on earth can the no significant fault line be seriously argued?

"Smugness" and "boasting"?

C'mon Jack, really have a good look at Jobes interview.

He was asked the question and he answered it, probably too honestly for his own good.

I'm coping a lot on here, and most of it is fine, but I won't cop that you think Jobe was smug with his admission.

You're better than that.

But your other points are valid, and I think people here are misreading what I am saying.

I am in complete agreement that any minor confusions between ASADA and WADA along the way should in no way lessen any impact on what Essendon has done and what will come of this.

The "Chinks in the armour" comment was just giving you guys an insight into what it's like to be an Essendon person at the moment.

I don't think the WADA/ASADA stuff is a chink, but as supporters, and I guess as a club, we are always looking for something.

And bing181, I've long stopped trying to "reinforce my argument" on here a week ago. No point. You guys have your minds made up, and rightly so.

I come here, have a bit of a chat about it, no real biggie for me.

I read that people here want my club to become bankrupt, kicked out of the comp forever, we are called Essendrugs, everyone is dancing on our graves and we aren't even in the ground yet, and you guys are loving it. And please don't deny it.

But honestly mate, it's fine. I have a pretty thick skin these days. This is a Melbourne FC forum.

I'm not here looking for sympathy or an argument.

So if a little light hearted comment about cheerleaders for team ASADA bothers you, I'm sorry.

The only example of which I'm aware is the WADA response to the deals ASADA cut with the NRL players. It came out as a bit of a lecture to ASADA suggesting that it was prepared to tolerate the laxity of the sanctions in that case but not to go there in future. WADA has a complex anti doping code to uphold and the impression I gained was that it expected support in that regard from this country's anti doping body. I got the impression that giving out three match penalties when athletes bound by the code elsewhere get 12 to 24 months isn't going to be tolerated.

Also the whole AOD-9604 thing.

Jobe Watson admitted to taking it, the football world had him hung, drawn and quartered because WADA said it was banned.

ASADA didn't have it on their banned list and thus have not pursued Essendon over it.

There was a few weeks of uncertainty there while ASADA and WADA sorted themselves out over it.

And the Cronulla thing as mentioned previously.

I would have thought they would be in complete agreement on everything.

I guess when you're a Bombers fan, you're always looking for little chinks in the ASADA armour.

But none of this really matters in relation to what Essendon have done and what is to come.

Nor should it impact on what happens to Essendon.

So all the cheerleaders for team ASADA on here have nothing to worry about.

Thanks for the info.

I wasn't suggesting anything by my question, just gathering info for my own knowledge.

It seems WADA and ASADA haven't really been on the same page with a lot of things over the past couple of years.

I don't think the re-issuing of the show cause notices was anything unexpected.

Of course it was splashed all over the front pages of the newspapers "350 page document per player" etc etc

I was happy to hear about it, for two reasons.

It was finally giving the players what they have been asking for, ASADAS version of events, and secondly, it was another step towards a conclusion to the saga.

Did WADA appeal the Cronulla sharks "deal"?

I'm glad we can all talk about this here in a civil manner.

I'm not here looking for sympathy.

Hird has to go.

Dank should be locked up.

Thank you everyone for the measured responses.

It's difficult for me to digest a lot of what my club has done over the past couple of years.

As I have said all along, I'm preparing for the worst, hoping for the best.

When a Club has an endorsed legal substance program which is administrated to a majority of its players, IMO there is only one outcome possible that truly reflects a suitable punishment for the crime and that is expulsion from the league. However knowing how greedy and dishonest the AFL can be, it unlikely this will happen. However this will only encourage Clubs to push the limits on the use of legal/illegal substances in the future.

Can't see this happening. Whatever happens to Essendon going forward, surely if the entire football world has learnt anything from this whole saga, it's not to experiment with this sort of supplements program.

Time will tell what the result will be with regards to player suspension and other penalties but remember the Melbourn FC received a $500,000 fine for not controlling its employees from the Tanking investigation. What penalty would the Essendon FC get for purchasing illegal substances to give to its players?

I understand you have very strong believes about this topic.

You have every right to hope Essendon are banished forever.

But as you say, realistically, here on planet Earth, the AFL won't let that happen.

And yes, time will tell what happens from the ASADA side of things. Player suspensions or not, that will play out, hopefully sooner rather than later.

But I would compare the AFL fine you received for "Tanking" to our punishments last August for governance.

I wasn't around here when the Tanking business was being discussed, but from the evidence I heard, I think you guys tanked.

The AFL was nice enough to word it differently so you guys weren't labelled officially as "Tankers".

So tanking was worth a $500,000 fine.

Our lack of governance was worth a $2mil fine, lost of draft picks for 2 seasons and disqualification from the 2013 Finals series.

I'm comfortable with that.

But I'm struggling to see how we have got off lightly.

Especially with, as everyone here seems to think, suspensions to players from ASADA are still to come.

We are getting our right whack, and deservedly so, but being kicked out of the AFL forever is going way too far in my opinion, and frankly, with all due respect, doesn't show me there is a lot of logic in your argument. Are you that blinded by the hatred for EFC that you honestly think kicking them out of the AFL is justice?

Essendon have done a lot of things wrong since 2012. A lot.

And I fully understand how happy most opposition supporters are that we are under the pump from all angles.

We have suffered, and will continue to suffer.

And we can't complain about it.

Surely the years to come of pain is punishment enough.

First of all, I come in peace.

I haven't read past this current page of this thread, but it's not difficult to get what vibe is going on here.

I'm sorry DemonFrog, I can't see us getting kicked out of the comp forever.

Anyway, that would take away the satisfaction you get from beating us just about every year.

Anyway, I know there are some guys on here from the legal profession.

I read an article recently about this situation and I would like your take on it, as most of what was written went way over my head.

The article seemed to point to a favourable outcome for the players, which I know will upset all of you on here.

So I repeat, I'm not here for an argument, I'm here for you guys with a legal background to either say "yes, this is possible" or "no, that's crap".

This is not my opinion, this is just an excerpt from an article I read.

Here is the relevant passage, word for word.

The standard of proof that would apply in this case would be the "Briginshaw Principle". Legal minds present would know this derives from a 1938 case, Briginshaw V Briginshaw in which Dixon J stated :

"that the standard is one of 'reasonable satisfaction': ...but reasonable satisfaction is not a state of mind that is attained or established independently of the nature and consequence of the fact or facts to be proved. The seriousness of an allegation made, the inherent unlikelihood of an occurrence of a given description, or the gravity of the consequences flowing from a particular finding are considerations which must affect the answer."

In other words as I understand it, and our learned friends present might correct me, it falls somewhere between the criminal standard of beyond reasonable doubt, and the civil standard - the balance of probabilities - depending on the seriousness of the matter.

In this case one would imagine it would be closer to the criminal standard of proof than the civil, given that the livelihoods of 34 athletes and the very existence of an AFL club are at stake. And it seems to me that "beyond reasonable doubt" will be an impossible standard to achieve in this case, because there were no positive blood tests, only circumstantial evidence - enough for show-cause notices, but no more.

In the circumstances I think it is very unlikely that any Essendon player will be suspended at all. Perhaps 5-10% chance, no more. If it happened, the club would financially be in the hands of the AFL and would either be forcibly merged with another, or there would be a decade or more of cellar dwelling to recover.

Why is the existence of the Club at stake? Because unless the penalties was the sort of risible, cynical one applied to the Cronulla Sharks players - that is, time served while they were playing, so an effective suspension of three weeks - then all the players affected would sue the club for the rest of their playing careers' loss of earnings - tens of millions dollars. The Club would quickly be bankrupt.

This mysterious Robert Flower goal against Essendon at Windy Hill has got me intrigued.

I'm doing my best to hunt down footage of it, even with the mixed reports of its existence.

What would help is to narrow down the season it was kicked, so I'm hoping with some help of people here that were at the game, I can perhaps do that.

There are only 6 games in the time frame we are working with where Flower kicked goals at Windy Hill.

I'm hoping that with a bit of info about those games, those that attended might be able to narrow it down.

1975 - Rd 3, Flower kicked 1 goal as Essendon won by 17 points.

1976 - Rd 3, Robbie kicked 2 goals as the Demons won by 35 points. Greg Wells kicked 5.0 while Ross Brewer kicked 4.5.

1977 - Rd 4, Another early season meeting, this time with the Dons winning a close one by only 4 points. Brian Walsh kicked 7 and Simon Madden 4 for the winners, with the scores indicating Melbourne had their chances kicking 16.24 to Essendons 19.10. Flower slotted 2 goals.

1978 - Rd 20, A late season game that saw Melbourne win a high scoring game by 6 points, 21.10 to 19.16. Flower kicked 4 goals that day.

1980 - Rd 10, Flower kicked 1 goal as Essendon ran over the top of Melbourne with a 6 goals to nil last quarter, winning by 44 points.

1983 - Rd 9, Robbie slotted 3 goals in a day that saw Essendon win by 34 points [22 goals to 17], with Steven Copping kicking 6 for the Dons.

So I don't know if results or other performances help you guys remember which game it was.

My guess is the 1977, 1978 or 1980 game perhaps.

But over to you guys that were there on the day.

Any ideas?

pick 3 is way too much for Ryder.

I think pick 17 is a bit under, but closer to the mark.

Maybe the pick 12 you get for Trengrove might get the job done and some late picks swapped in Melbourne favour.

But would you swap Trengrove for Ryder?

it's all hypothetical, Ryder is Port bound.

Wants out of Melbourne [the city] and has his heart set on the Power.

Essendon, as supporters or the club, have no right to be cocky.

Things were great under Sheedy, and I think a lot of supporters, particularly of my vintage, took it for granted.

But nothing has clicked since he left, similar I guess to Man U after Sir Alex departed.

We haven't won a final in 10 years, and with the current situation and what our future prospects look like, we as a club have absolutely no right to be arrogant in any way.

But I had Carlton people still talking themselves up during the 2000's.

I guess arrogance can be inbred into a clubs culture.

I wish at times, my club showed a bit more humility.

I reckon most of you hated us before this current scandal broke, so I'm going with jealousy. lol

ignition, thank you for that insight and info.

Stephen Dank was never on my Christmas card list.

I read the paper this morning, what Patrick Ryder and his partner has experienced over the past couple of years, and it's awful.

I don't blame the man for wanting to leave, get a fresh start elsewhere.

The club has already effectively admitted it failed in its duty of care to players - the Switkowski report and accepting the AFL penalties last August has seen to that.

So realistically, every single player has an open and shut case of breach of contract against the club.

Obviously Essendon and the AFL don't want this can of worms opened up.

The club should let Paddy Ryder go [cut this crap about if a trade can't be done he will stay] and try and get what it can for him and pray no one else triggers the clause.

It's obviously in Essendons best interests as it will only be the good players who walk because they can get more money elsewhere, and their managers will be keen to pursue that. It's like voluntary redundancy - the best people put their hands up because they can walk into new jobs. All companies that have a series of voluntary redundancy rounds end up with weak teams.

Add possible suspensions from ASAGA for the players that stay, and this is why I am preparing myself for a long stretch of non-success.

All brought upon itself.

Long time no see Ash! Good to have you back.

You're right, Garlett was a steal.

Garlett knows where the goals are.

Has speed to burn.

I think he looked a very dangerous forward under Ratten, but just didn't gel with Malthouse.

Played a lot of VFL in 2014 cos Malthouse wanted him to chase and tackle more.

I can live with that when a guy kicks 40+ goals a season, which Garlett is capable of doing.

Essendon were keen, he toured Tullamarine.

He would have filled a massive hole in our team [small quick crumbing forward].

But he chose Melbourne, so another feather in your cap.

For the price of a pretty late draft pick, he has massive up side.

Undeeterred, I didn't come here looking for sympathy.

But I take your points on board.

I have learnt over the years that there isn't a lot of love for the Dons here at Demonland, which is fine.

I never wanted to hijack the thread.

It just sort of happened that way.

I know my place.

I don't disrespect the MFC.

I try to give an oppositions point of view while maintaining the fact this is a Melbourne FC website.

I'm more than happy to stop talking about the Essendon scandal.

There are no winners.

I "came back" here because of last weeks tragic passing of Robert Flower.

I'm not a troll and I'm not here to put peoples noses out of joint.

Thanks for the support guys.

BTW, todays Garlett trade was a steal IMHO.

Ash\

You do understand this is a demons board. Tell someone who cares.

Cheers

Jnr

Sorry mate, I must of misread the title of this thread.

ash, i feel for you as a supporter. i have some close friends who are bomber supporters and i know how they feel

but, as for not knowing what was taken, i don't buy that

there must have been records kept by the club for such an extensive undertaking

that they have "disappeared" is damning

this also puts the onus of proving innocence back on the club, saying we don't know doesn't wash

the only thing stopping the club moving on is the disingenuous obstructiveness and delaying tactics of the clubs administration and hird

like you i hope it can be wrapped up quickly and we all get back to footy, but alas i see it dragging on and on

Again, I can't disagree with this.

As a fan, I just hold out hope for a better result than we are probably going to get.

A whole world of pain is yet to descend on the bunker at Tullamarine. You are welcome to follow the Dees during the EFC exile.

PS an 18th team will be introduced during EFC hiatus.

I might take you up on that offer. lol

I just have to work out who my new favourite player is.

Anyway, I knew I came back here for a reason.

I didn't realise so many posters here had the inside word on this whole investigation.

You guys should write for The Age.