View Full Version : Demetriou slams Akermanis, Articles and other Aker Talk
FROM: http://news.realfooty.com.au/demetriou-slams-akermanis/20070403-rep.html and
http://www.heraldsun.news.com.au/footy/common/story_page/0,8033,22185422%255E20322,00.html
AFL chief executive Andrew Demetriou has predictably savaged Jason Akermanis over the Western Bulldogs utility's comments this week about doping.
Demetriou said he would treat Akermanis' comments in a newspaper column "with the disdain they deserve".
In the column, Akermanis voiced suspicions about the performance of an unnamed opponent and wondered whether players might be using the banned blood booster EPO.
Not surprisingly, Demetriou was unimpressed with the column and pointed to the fact that there were no concrete allegations.
"They're just stupid comments and if he's got something to say he should contact ASADA (the Australian Sports Anti-Doping Agency) and let them know.
"There's nothing to support those comments, absolutely nothing, and I treat them with the disdain they deserve.
"We do blood testing, EPO testing - our record on performance-enhancing drugs is second to none.
"It's an outstanding record, 6000 tests and we've only had one positive, which was Justin Charles."
The use of EPO has been a massive problem in cycling and Spanish star Iban Mayo allegedly tested positive to the substance during last month's Tour de France.
Adelaide coach Neil Craig, formerly the sports science guru with the Australian track cycling program, said whatever the AFL was doing in regards to EPO testing, it needed to do more.
"My experience of my other life in cycling is that EPO can have a significant effect on endurance performance," he said.
"So whether they (the AFL) test for it or not, I'm not sure.
"But it's a drug where, if you want an increase in endurance performance, and you've only got to see it in the Tour De France, that's where it has risen and been in use for years.
"You could argue that based on the way the game is going, the endurance factor, so I think it'd be a fair call that the AFL, the drug agency that's doing it, might want to look into that."
Sydney coach Paul Roos said ideally, the AFL should test much more than what it is currently , but admitted he did not know if that would be practical.
"In reading the (Akermanis) article, regardless of whether you are a coach, a journalist, a player ... they prompt some thought," Roos said.
"Even as coaches we are not aware of absolutely everything that goes on.
"I don't know enough about the procedures and not enough about the (EPO) drugs. I wouldn't have known it wasn't tested until I read about it.
"Do the AFL request it be tested or who does? So I'm probably not the right person to talk about it, other than I think the AFL seem to be serious in their fight (against drugs).
"Ideally you would probably say every player gets tested every single week, twice a week. But is that possible? I don't know."
flukeyluke
4 Aug 2007, 01:27
Read it. Heard it.
Demetrious is overly sensitive to any criticism of his league.
Build a bridge Andy
flamethrower
4 Aug 2007, 16:27
Head in the sand stuff again by the AFL.
Remember when they ridiculed Dale Lewis when he highlighted the illicit drug culture creeping into the AFL.
Kennel Master
4 Aug 2007, 18:07
Aker says what a lot of people think but are too scared to say!!
I reckon he is probably correct.
I have no problem with what Aher has said this year.
And he is playing some good footy!!:p
Aquamarinejewel
4 Aug 2007, 18:19
Aker was on SEN earlier this afternoon ( during rehearsals for Dancing with the Dogs) and was asked what he thought about Vlad's comments. He basically said that it was his personal opinion that something was not 'qute right'. Was disappointed in Demetriou's comments but made mention he understands why they were said. Aker also mentioned that he was contacted by ASADA and had a chat with them regarding the issue.
FrediKanoute
4 Aug 2007, 19:52
If there are 600 playes in the AFL and the ASADA tests around 500 each year, that would mean that:
a) not every player every year gets drug tested;
b) some players are tested more than once in a season, so consequently the numebrs getting tested are again reduced.
Demetriou's comments are self fulfilling - if you don't test broadly and have a small sample size, then you are unlikely to catch drug cheats. Whose benefit is it that there is no tainting of the AFL's brand? The AFL of course.
Each player should be tested minimum 2 times a season and once in the preseason. Additionally, all GF players should be tested. If the integrity of the game is critically important then you can't stick your head in the sand and ignore it.
Scroater
4 Aug 2007, 21:29
Just saw on the Eagles board, apparently AKER has rung the drug agency and named the player. Apparently it is a WCE eagles player but not Cousins.
Just re-read, may not be a WCE player. Go to their board to find out more.
wonder if Aker ever stopped to think that he might have been having a shit game? :eek:
wonder if Aker ever stopped to think that he might have been having a shit game? :eek:
Or you could read the article
MeestaNob
5 Aug 2007, 18:28
Andy D should perhaps look in to the problem rather than attacking a 10+ year player who knows what he's about.
The Iraqi information minister act is getting old. Vlad might want to be more proactive on real issues or he might find himself out of a job.
dales.girl38
5 Aug 2007, 18:32
As if we didn't see that one coming Andrew...surprise us one time and actually admit there might be a slight problem.
What are your views in Aker coming out with the name of the apparent cheat?
Conflict or Praise?
What are your views in Aker coming out with the name of the apparent cheat?
Conflict or Praise?
Praise IMO. It's one step closer to making our competition as fair as possible..force lazy bastard to act and improve the drug testing situation... even if he cant proove Braun used them back then. eliminate the taint
OUT: Andrew D
IN: Kevin Sheedy
Anthony_
5 Aug 2007, 21:15
OUT: Andrew D
IN: Kevin Sheedy
Lol now that would be interesting
bulldogrob
5 Aug 2007, 21:15
Andy has lost the plot. aker might be telling the truth or might be making it up. How is Andy meant to know. If anyone looks stupid its him
Channel 7 news said that the player was Micheal Braun and that Aker's suspicions of his running ability arose from Rd 19 in 2004 and the 1st time WC Eagles and the Lions played in 2005. Brauns manager is now threatening legal action for defamation.
dales.girl38
5 Aug 2007, 22:58
Channel 7 news said that the player was Micheal Braun and that Aker's suspicions of his running ability arose from Rd 19 in 2004 and the 1st time WC Eagles and the Lions played in 2005. Brauns manager is now threatening legal action for defamation.
I'm confused about the legal action bit. As far as I know, Aker didn't come out to the media and say it was Braun, it was Channel 7. So therefore can Braun sue Aker? That doesn't seem right. Can Braun sue Channel 7? That seems obvious, but couldn't Aker sue Channel 7 or whoever leaked it out for defamation as well? He's copping as much as Braun is for this whole thing, and he didn't exactly come out with a name anyway.
I'm confused about the legal action bit. As far as I know, Aker didn't come out to the media and say it was Braun, it was Channel 7. So therefore can Braun sue Aker? That doesn't seem right. Can Braun sue Channel 7? That seems obvious, but couldn't Aker sue Channel 7 or whoever leaked it out for defamation as well? He's copping as much as Braun is for this whole thing, and he didn't exactly come out with a name anyway.
My thoughts entirely. Aker never mentioned who he was talking about so not sure how defamation could be appropriate. If the player was then leaked to the media then surely Aker can't be blamed for that.
The first step of Braun's Manager would be to go into damage control - threatening legal action sounds impressive but i'd be surprised if it got to the courts
Luke8186
5 Aug 2007, 23:55
i love the dogs
and as a player i love aker
but he should be concentrating on us making the finals rather than making outlandish unsubstantieded comment like this.
he's goin on a hunch
its ridiculous
im not saying he's wrong
but dont write an article just cos you got smashed by a player one day, accusing him of drugs.
if your gonna say that, give us somethin better.
LondonBulldog
6 Aug 2007, 05:45
For someone in the media he really isn't the brightest Aker.
There are channels to go through.... not second guess a certain player.
If Braun was the player he named to the doping federation after writing that article I would sue him as well.
I'm confused about the legal action bit. As far as I know, Aker didn't come out to the media and say it was Braun, it was Channel 7. So therefore can Braun sue Aker? That doesn't seem right. Can Braun sue Channel 7? That seems obvious, but couldn't Aker sue Channel 7 or whoever leaked it out for defamation as well? He's copping as much as Braun is for this whole thing, and he didn't exactly come out with a name anyway.
why are you confused? who do you think made the allegation that CH7 reported? Aker should have gone to ASADA and NOT the Herald Sun with his allegation, Aker wrote it, its his allegation and now he has to live with it...Tell him to pick a player that fits the profile next time. :eek:
ErnieSigley
6 Aug 2007, 10:20
I reckon Aker knows more than he is letting on.
ErnieSigley
6 Aug 2007, 10:25
This makes me laugh it, it known as a world wide sporting problem but no one in the AFL does it. Australians and especially AFL footballers would never cheat.
Instead of hiding these players, they should be doing their utmost to find them, identifying them then banning them to show they this game is not a joke.
Cycling is full of cheats but at the very least the body is trying to do something about it and its very rich to hear AFL footballers critisize that sport.
campbell
6 Aug 2007, 10:31
why are you confused? who do you think made the allegation that CH7 reported? Aker should have gone to ASADA and NOT the Herald Sun with his allegation, Aker wrote it, its his allegation and now he has to live with it...Tell him to pick a player that fits the profile next time. :eek:
He did got to ASDA and the AFL.
No one on these boards could work out who it was for days by his article.So how can he be done for defamining anyone?
Eagle outrage over Braun drug claim
06 August 2007
Herald Sun
Damian Barrett
http://www.heraldsun.news.com.au/footy/common/story_page/0,8033,22194435%255E19742,00.html
WEST Coast Eagle Michael Braun was "in shock" last night after being publicly linked to the use of performance enhancing drugs.
The Eagles midfielder was named on Channel 7 as the player allegedly referred to by Jason Akermanis in his column in last week's Herald Sun, which detailed his suspicions of an opponent using banned substance EPO.
Braun's manager Paul Connors last night said his client was made aware of the link before he played in yesterday's loss to Fremantle at Subiaco.
"First and foremost, the accusations as reported on Channel 7 are unsubstantiated and a total disgrace," Connors said.
"They are ridiculous observations and for them to transcend in to being the lead item on the news is disgraceful.
"I am outraged this could be made in to what it has become.
"Michael Braun is an outstanding individual and it is extremely disappointing that a person's reputation, a reputation he has worked very hard to achieve, can be tarnished in such a reckless manner."
Connors said he would today pursue legal action over the public naming of Braun.
"We will leave no stone unturned in taking this as far as we possibly can, legally, to defend Michael's reputation."
Akermanis would not comment last night.
In his column, the Western Bulldog revealed he had concerns about an opponent while playing with Brisbane at the Gabba.
He described his opponent's performance that day as "Superman"-like.
The AFL's performance-enhancing drug testers, ASADA (Australian Sports Anti-Doping Authority), contacted Akermanis about his claims late Thursday, and an AFL medical commissioner interviewed him on Friday.
Akermanis said on Saturday he had told both ASADA and the AFL medical officer of the player in question.
He has never publicly named the player.
He did got to ASDA and the AFL.
No one on these boards could work out who it was for days by his article.So how can he be done for defamining anyone?
errr..he spoke to ASADA after writing the article and making the claim, he made the allegation public first without naming anyone but the fact remains that he opened his mouth and then was asked to name the player by ASADA. Makes no difference that nobody knew who it was at the time because we were always going to find out the moment he wrote the article.
Maybe WCE legal action will finally zip his mouth for good?
http://news.realfooty.com.au/eagles-respond-to-akermanis-allegations/20072405-rnz.html
whythelongface
6 Aug 2007, 11:34
Where does it state in the article that he will take legal action against Aker??
lindsay_bulldogs
6 Aug 2007, 11:37
Large thread about this on the main board. People have different views of whether Aker, channel 7, or Herald Sun can be sued for naming Braun. Not to mention ASADA or AFL medical officer for leaking who it was. What has not been proven at this stage is whether the accusations that Braun was named are true or not. Aker may not have name him at all and Channel 7 are making a guess in a quest to get someone to come clean and say who the real person is. People are assuming the information has been leaked to media just maybe it hasn't at all and Channel seven should be sued or come clean on there source.
flukeyluke
6 Aug 2007, 11:39
Where does it state in the article that he will take legal action against Aker??
It doesnt
Where does it state in the article that he will take legal action against Aker??
"We will leave no stone unturned in taking this as far as we possibly can, legally, to defend Michael's reputation."
whythelongface
6 Aug 2007, 11:45
"We will leave no stone unturned in taking this as far as we possibly can, legally, to defend Michael's reputation."
It is an assumption you are making and a stupid one at that.
Benno From Berwick
6 Aug 2007, 11:49
I know who is full of hot air in this story....
What a beat up!
Large thread about this on the main board. People have different views of whether Aker, channel 7, or Herald Sun can be sued for naming Braun. Not to mention ASADA or AFL medical officer for leaking who it was. What has not been proven at this stage is whether the accusations that Braun was named are true or not. Aker may not have name him at all and Channel 7 are making a guess in a quest to get someone to come clean and say who the real person is. People are assuming the information has been leaked to media just maybe it hasn't at all and Channel seven should be sued or come clean on there source.
go back and re-read what you wrote and point out your obvious contradiction... :thumbsd:
Not to mention ASADA or AFL medical officer for leaking who it was.
Aker may not have name him at all and Channel 7 are making a guess in a quest to get someone to come clean and say who the real person is.
which is it, AFL Dr leaked the players name or Aker may not have named Braun at all? either way, its Aker who MADE THE allegation in the first place and spoke with ASADA after it, he's a ****ing idiot if he thinks it would NEVER become public knowledge. :eek:
Benno From Berwick
6 Aug 2007, 11:53
go back and re-read what you wrote and point out your obvious contradiction... :thumbsd:
which is it, AFL Dr leaked the players name or Aker may not have named Braun at all? either way, its Aker who MADE THE allegation in the first place and spoke with ASADA after it, he's a ****ing idiot if he thinks it would NEVER become public knowledge. :eek:
Get off our board if you can't be even handed. If any player has information about drug use in our sport they should notify the right authority.
Maybe we could rename the atricle, Braun angry over drug accusations?
Anthony_
6 Aug 2007, 11:58
which is it, AFL Dr leaked the players name or Aker may not have named Braun at all? either way, its Aker who MADE THE allegation in the first place and spoke with ASADA after it, he's a ****ing idiot if he thinks it would NEVER become public knowledge. :eek:
Whether or not Aker is an idiot is irrelevant, the point is he didn't leak it therefore will be safe from defamation.
whythelongface
6 Aug 2007, 12:04
Maybe we could rename the atricle, Braun angry over drug accusations?
That would be a lot more appropriate. Maybe the mods can change this.
Aquamarinejewel
6 Aug 2007, 12:09
Ppl's I have merged both threads together regarding Aker...if we contain it to one area will be easier to sift through.
Get off our board if you can't be even handed. If any player has information about drug use in our sport they should notify the right authority.
lol..the fact remains that he published an article first and made some accusations, he spoke to ASADA second! I'm even handed, perhaps its you that hasn't understood the situation.
the point is he didn't leak it therefore will be safe from defamation.
the point is that he pointed the finger without proof...doesn't matter who leaked the name because it was always going to become public knowledge sooner or later. He wrote the story, he made the claims, now its up to him to prove his claim with evidence. If he'd gone to ASADA with his claims instead of printing it in the media he'd have saved himself a shit fight which now seems inevitable...another case of foot in mouth for Akermanis.
bulldogrob
6 Aug 2007, 13:10
lol..the fact remains that he published an article first and made some accusations, he spoke to ASADA second! I'm even handed, perhaps its you that hasn't understood the situation.
the point is that he pointed the finger without proof...doesn't matter who leaked the name because it was always going to become public knowledge sooner or later. He wrote the story, he made the claims, now its up to him to prove his claim with evidence. If he'd gone to ASADA with his claims instead of printing it in the media he'd have saved himself a shit fight which now seems inevitable...another case of foot in mouth for Akermanis.
Aker cant be sued.
Benno From Berwick
6 Aug 2007, 13:16
lol..the fact remains that he published an article first and made some accusations, he spoke to ASADA second! I'm even handed, perhaps its you that hasn't understood the situation.
Calling him a ****ing idiot shows your lack of maturity. You would not even care about this subect if it wasn't involving (Again what a shock to the rest of us) an Eagles player..
The notion that he now has to prove anything is plain ignorant.
stickman11
6 Aug 2007, 13:23
lol..the fact remains that he published an article first and made some accusations, he spoke to ASADA second! I'm even handed, perhaps its you that hasn't understood the situation.
the point is that he pointed the finger without proof...doesn't matter who leaked the name because it was always going to become public knowledge sooner or later. He wrote the story, he made the claims, now its up to him to prove his claim with evidence. If he'd gone to ASADA with his claims instead of printing it in the media he'd have saved himself a shit fight which now seems inevitable...another case of foot in mouth for Akermanis.
All players have a suspisions about someone - most players know if something is odd - they should be encourage to report it to the ASADA. God knows nobody, not even the federal government trusts the AFL commision to act. Drug taking = cheating and non cheats in any sports hate cheats.
Calling him a ****ing idiot shows your lack of maturity. You would not even care about this subect if it wasn't involving (Again what a shock to the rest of us) an Eagles player..
The notion that he now has to prove anything is plain ignorant.
He went about the wrong way. There was no need for him to make his suspicions public and state that he dropped names. He has brought unwanted heat onto himself and our club. If he has concerns air them in the right channel and stay the F### away from the media with it.
Aka - been there, done all that. Hang on for the ride ...
lindsay_bulldogs
6 Aug 2007, 15:15
All players have a suspisions about someone - most players know if something is odd - they should be encourage to report it to the ASADA. God knows nobody, not even the federal government trusts the AFL commision to act. Drug taking = cheating and non cheats in any sports hate cheats.
Imagine ringing crimestoppers and every knows who you are and who you are making allegations about.
This is what has happened with ASADA and there leaking like sieve. Why would anybody ring these numb nuts may as well ring seven and tell them as its the same thing.
Footynut08
6 Aug 2007, 15:42
Aka needs to keep his mouth shut, hasnt he learnt anything since ;eaving brisbane.!
Benno From Berwick
6 Aug 2007, 15:49
Aka needs to keep his mouth shut, hasnt he learnt anything since ;eaving brisbane.!
You are a DH. He writes an article and is involved in the media. The HS must be mighty please with the level of interest in his article. He will continue to do media and will likely do alot more in retirement.....
If he has concerns air them in the right channel and stay the F### away from the media with it.
He is part of the media. Bit hard to stay the F### away from himself.
My guess Aka knows more than he is saying in public. There is strange things happening over there did not former player Paul Peos who went for WCE to Brisbane some years ago raise concerns sometime ago before he was silenced.
Remember the whole football rumour mill knew recreational drugs were a problem years ago but their coach and the club only knew there was a problem this year.
MeestaNob
6 Aug 2007, 20:36
In other news, Bulldogs will be laughing all the way through this. They have not only managed to re-enforce their image as the community-friendly club by publicly condemning the use of any form of drug, and have also kept the Dogs in the news early in the week (traditionally the 'Nathan Buckly walks his dog exclusive pictures after the financial report' slot).
Aker + Bulldogs = Bulldogs -> Centre of Universe.
FrediKanoute
6 Aug 2007, 21:09
Using performance enhancing drugs is cheating - end of story. If thre is so much as a wiff of it the AFL should respond, not by hanging Aka out to dry, but by investigating the matter thoroughly.
If Braun came out as the player Aka was suggesting, that is really unfortunate, b/c no player should be shamed without proof, something that Aka's article lacks.
This once again smacks of the AFL's head in the sand attitude. Like someone posted earlier - the rumour mill is typically spot on about things and there has been a rumour mill re performance enhancing drugs going around for a while.
boydsno1
6 Aug 2007, 21:11
aker will be fine. if braun deciedes to sue he will be wasting his own money. the afl encourage players to talk up if they beleive in something so his got thier backing for telling asada. also aker never named wat team or player. it was leaked by asad so its their problem...
Aquamarinejewel
7 Aug 2007, 01:19
More......
Aka in doghouse with club and AFL (http://realfooty.com.au/news/news/dogs-seek-explanation/2007/08/06/1186252628770.html?page=fullpage#contentSwap1)
The Age
Stephen Rielly | August 7, 2007
The turbulence that engulfed Jason Akermanis' final years at the Brisbane Lions is swirling about his career as a Bulldog for the first time, with the Brownlow medallist asked by the club yesterday to explain his unsubstantiated allegations of performance-enhancing drug use by an opponent three years ago.
Akermanis also has miffed the AFL Players Association with his claim and may yet face a sanction from the AFL, which is believed to be considering the possibility of charging him with bringing the game into disrepute.
Akermanis' allegation, published in his weekly newspaper column last Wednesday, did not name the player but he subsequently identified him to the Australian Sports Anti-Doping Authority on Saturday. On Sunday, a television report made the claim the player was West Coast premiership wingman Michael Braun.
West Coast and Braun's management are expected to receive advice about their legal position today and were indicating last night that they want to pursue a case for defamation. Both described the claim and the nature of the disclosure yesterday as appalling and baseless.
"It is absurd that the club must now defend one of its players against these claims and the club intends to seek every legal avenue open to it," the Eagles said. "The club is also angered and outraged that such accusations have been so irresponsibly reported in some sections of the media."
Bulldog chief executive Campbell Rose confirmed late yesterday that he met with Akermanis about his claims.
Akermanis has admitted he had no proof of drug use, but said in his column that the alleged culprit "ran like Superman" having never done so before, which caused him to think something was not "smelling right". Akermanis was playing for the Lions at the time.
"We caught up with Aka but that's as much as we're going to say. A number of accusations have been made by various people, in various places, and they will be judged over time. There is no other comment," Rose said.
It is believed that a complicating issue for the Dogs, who are unhappy about being embroiled in a controversy as the team tries to stabilise its teetering finals campaign, is the fact that Akermanis' columns are vetted by the club before publication. Last Wednesday's column is believed to have been given the nod by senior coach Rodney Eade.
AFLPA chief executive Brendon Gale also spoke to Akermanis yesterday, and later with Braun, while the association's operations manager, Matt Finnis, liaised with Braun's manager, Paul Connors. Finnis described the episode as "regrettable and avoidable".
"We've spoken to Paul about that and if we think there is a legitimate case to be pursued, then certainly Michael would have our support," Finnis said. "They (Akermanis and Braun) are both members of our organisation but it's fair to say that we would have preferred that Jason made his concerns apparent through ASADA and the right channels. He might have known, perhaps, that by writing an article of the nature he did that it would lead immediately to a witch hunt-style chase and that's disappointing to us.
"But having said that, if a player like Jason has a concern for a level playing field, that is a concern we also share. But in the case of Michael, he obviously feels aggrieved and upset and as his player association, he is entitled to look to us for support in these types of situations."
The AFL is believed to share the view that an allegation of performance-enhancing drug use ought to be aired through channels other than the media, especially when the alleged culprit is named without evidence supporting the allegation.
It is on these grounds that the league is believed to have considered a charge of bringing the game into disrepute and has expressed as much to the Bulldogs. A league spokesman said yesterday it was premature to consider if any action will be taken. "There is no comment from the AFL and will be no comment until ASADA finishes its inquiries," Patrick Keane said. "They are in control, as the government agency in charge of drug testing."
bulldogrob
7 Aug 2007, 01:25
The afl is not hard enough on drugs. All players should be test 2-3 times a year for performance enhancing drugs. The problem is i believe too many players would be caught.
The afl is not hard enough on drugs. All players should be test 2-3 times a year for performance enhancing drugs. The problem is i believe too many players would be caught.
It seems odd that they go on and on about how much it costs to do? Surely it'd cost the AFL more in terms of reputation if there was a massive drugs problem and it came out? What are they doing about it?
It's not as if the AFL doesn't have the cash to test players more often - they obviously don't see it as a priority.
DANCIN DOUGIE
7 Aug 2007, 09:23
Akermanis may get charged for bringing the game into disrepute. What an absolute crock of S#@T.
The Eagles players over the past 18 months have been found to have drug addicts, run away from the police, belted up taxi drivers, belted each other.
Not to mention Didak who spent time with a criminal on the run who allegedly fired shots at Police while Didak was in the car.
Akermanis is being made a scape goat for a remark which he was referring back to the Tour De Farce. He wasn't the one who mentioned the players name in the public.
Andrew Demetriou you are a Hypocrite.
Anthony_
7 Aug 2007, 10:07
Good old AFL lets shoot the messenger
lindsay_bulldogs
7 Aug 2007, 10:21
Pure speculation on the papers behalf. Once again they are not reporting the NEWS they are reporting speculation.
No one is charged and I am sure they (AFL) are looking closely at what can be done to discourage players saying things like AKER did in the media. Whatever they do they will look gutless if the punish AKER and have not punished people like Cousin's.
MickRicho
7 Aug 2007, 12:14
The AFL have confirmed this morning that they will be taking no action against Aker
DANCIN DOUGIE
7 Aug 2007, 12:30
Hooray for that.
The AFL have confirmed this morning that they will be taking no action against Aker
Commonsense prevails!
Bunga_From_65
7 Aug 2007, 13:12
the afl would never have the balls to do anything to aker, the same situation with the eagles aswell.
although there is little doubt he will get sued though.
Benno From Berwick
7 Aug 2007, 13:14
the afl would never have the balls to do anything to aker, the same situation with the eagles aswell.
although there is little doubt he will get sued though.
Love to hear the basis on which someone plans to sue Acker!
the afl would never have the balls to do anything to aker, the same situation with the eagles aswell.
although there is little doubt he will get sued though.
If Aker leaked it to Ch7 then he and Ch7 are in the poo.
If he didn't and it came from some other source, then that source and Ch7 are in the poo. Aker is not - he gave the information confidentially.
Simple rules of defamation re publication. In the latter example above, Aker did not publish it.
Hope that helps.
LibbaDog
7 Aug 2007, 13:50
The AFL have confirmed this morning that they will be taking no action against Aker
There was no action for the AFL to take ,as it was Demetriou, Mr head in sand, who suggested Aker to take it to the ASADA(not thinking that he would) and now the media has turned it into a circus, naming a certain individual. At no stage did Aker mention a Name or Team.
Libba_39
7 Aug 2007, 13:59
Go Aker, you beauty!
LibbaDog
7 Aug 2007, 14:20
go back and re-read what you wrote and point out your obvious contradiction... :thumbsd:
which is it, AFL Dr leaked the players name or Aker may not have named Braun at all? either way, its Aker who MADE THE allegation in the first place and spoke with ASADA after it, he's a ****ing idiot if he thinks it would NEVER become public knowledge. :eek:
Perhaps it's Demetriou who should be sued, isn't it he who instructed Aker to go to the ASADA if he had suspicions. If demetriou hadn't come out the way he did maybe the whole episode would have just washed over as just another Aker's opinion, which is all it was.
Perhaps it's Demetriou who should be sued, isn't it he who instructed Aker to go to the ASADA if he had suspicions. If demetriou hadn't come out the way he did maybe the whole episode would have just washed over as just another Aker's opinion, which is all it was.
opinion..you're joking, read the last paragraph of his article!
Back to my opponent, who I suspect is using EPO or something similar. He's still playing and next time I play against him, I'll tell him I think he's a cheat.
seriously, he's even saying the player IS still using EPO and will call him a drug cheat, if its not Braun that he's referring to then he's even more gutless for not fronting the media and saying you've got the wrong guy. Its his allegation, it's he who spoke to ASADA, its he who gave the name to ASADA & its he who remains silent while another players reputation is trashed by the media. If its the wrong name then just come out and say that so Braun's reputation can be restored...its the silence that tells the real story!
It strikes me as quite strange that many on this board are defending this twit. No doubt he has a right to voice suspicions, but to voice them out in public 5 years after the fact is possibly the dumbest thing anybody at our club has done in the 29 years I've supported them.
A player that is obviously struggling to attain the respect of team mates and a football club has a greater responsibility to that, rather than writing a ill informed peice just to maintain an image of contraversy.
The AFL have confirmed this morning that they will be taking no action against Aker
West Coast on the other hand will beat the living suitcase out of us next time we play and pump us by 180 points instead of the usual 80 !
its the silence that tells the real story!
We do need to hear from Aker again. He might sue Channel 7 and drug agency for defamation.
paul scholes
7 Aug 2007, 15:44
Silly article i agree , but no worse than a certain plane trip in 85. ''This is your captain speaking''
It strikes me as quite strange that many on this board are defending this twit. No doubt he has a right to voice suspicions, but to voice them out in public 5 years after the fact is possibly the dumbest thing anybody at our club has done in the 29 years I've supported them.
A player that is obviously struggling to attain the respect of team mates and a football club has a greater responsibility to that, rather than writing a ill informed peice just to maintain an image of contraversy.
You know what??? I'm sick and tired of people verbally "bashing" easy targets like Aker because he had the balls to write what he believed in the paper. What? You don't believe that this type of activity could exist amongst our footballers? Come on now, fellow doggie, do you think that it stops at recreational substances?? Do you believe that we should all be that naive or that our game is that fragile that an accusation can ruin it? Aker believed and said what he said. Was it he who revelaed the name to CH 7? I really do doubt it as he is contracted to ch 9 to appear on the footy show every now and then. He used the appropriate avenues and the name was leaked... So what does everybody do? They attack him for airing his 'suspicion'.... I've said it once and I'll keep saying it, in other more higher profile world sports, it doesn't matter who you are, you can voice your opinion without getting your head knocked off. Our response to Aker's article just highlights how insular and precious we have become about our beloved game. Please don't say anything negative because it will bring our game into disprepute!!!! Hello??? Just look at WEST COAST, (Cousins drug addiction, Kerr's forgery of prescription drugs, both their in-fighting) Gardiner and Cousins alleged criminal associations; St Kilda (Milne and Montagna, Frazer Gherig's indiscretions with Voss and other Lions players and not to mention Didak; and there's plenty more where they came from....
So Aker writes an article in the paper and we all cut him down... Well done mate, you've just echoed the words of another 'upstanding fine individual' who called Aker a "Dimbat" on that Footy Classified show last night... A person of 'high' intelligence who obviously believes all indiscretions should be hidden away from the public domain, the paying public who basically funded his paycheck when he played and all the current players in the AFL. People just keep blindly paying your memberships and enjoy the show.....
I think a concern is that we automatically assume that these so called footy experts have opinions that are gospel due to their successes in the footy arena both on and off and the past and present. The line is certainly blurred and I for one am not that narrow minded and encourage players to voice their suspicions and opinions as long as it does not cross the line of false accusations, of which I can deduce that Aker didn't do based on the facts provided.
Remember, my fellow doggie, it wasn't that long ago that one of our very own was censured when he wrote his feelings about the war in Iraq on his arm before posing for a team photograph at the start of that footy season...Did you think it was fair that he was censured by the AFL???
Probably not!!!
Aker, you did nothing wrong...At worst you basically highlighted to many people that drugs can infiltrate all types of environments and that the AFL arena is no exception. Maybe the AFL is a little concerned about the focus this has brought upon it's testing policies and precedures.......Hmmmm
Go Puppies!!!!
gridlocked
7 Aug 2007, 16:10
You know what??? I'm sick and tired of people verbally "bashing" easy targets like Aker because he had the balls to write what he believed in the paper. What? You don't believe that this type of activity could exist amongst our footballers? Come on now, fellow doggie, do you think that it stops at recreational substances?? Do you believe that we should all be that naive or that our game is that fragile that an accusation can ruin it? Aker believed and said what he said. Was it he who revelaed the name to CH 7? I really do doubt it as he is contracted to ch 9 to appear on the footy show every now and then. He used the appropriate avenues and the name was leaked... So what does everybody do? They attack him for airing his 'suspicion'.... I've said it once and I'll keep saying it, in other more higher profile world sports, it doesn't matter who you are, you can voice your opinion without getting your head knocked off. Our response to Aker's article just highlights how insular and precious we have become about our beloved game. Please don't say anything negative because it will bring our game into disprepute!!!! Hello??? Just look at WEST COAST, (Cousins drug addiction, Kerr's forgery of prescription drugs, both their in-fighting) Gardiner and Cousins alleged criminal associations; St Kilda (Milne and Montagna, Frazer Gherig's indiscretions with Voss and other Lions players and not to mention Didak; and there's plenty more where they came from....
So Aker writes an article in the paper and we all cut him down... Well done mate, you've just echoed the words of another 'upstanding fine individual' who called Aker a "Dimbat" on that Footy Classified show last night... A person of 'high' intelligence who obviously believes all indiscretions should be hidden away from the public domain, the paying public who basically funded his paycheck when he played and all the current players in the AFL. People just keep blindly paying your memberships and enjoy the show.....
I think a concern is that we automatically assume that these so called footy experts have opinions that are gospel due to their successes in the footy arena both on and off and the past and present. The line is certainly blurred and I for one am not that narrow minded and encourage players to voice their suspicions and opinions as long as it does not cross the line of false accusations, of which I can deduce that Aker didn't do based on the facts provided.
Remember, my fellow doggie, it wasn't that long ago that one of our very own was censured when he wrote his feelings about the war in Iraq on his arm before posing for a team photograph at the start of that footy season...Did you think it was fair that he was censured by the AFL???
Probably not!!!
Aker, you did nothing wrong...At worst you basically highlighted to many people that drugs can infiltrate all types of environments and that the AFL arena is no exception. Maybe the AFL is a little concerned about the focus this has brought upon it's testing policies and precedures.......Hmmmm
Go Puppies!!!!
Yes indeed. Its a ****ed up world the AFL lives in.
D Mitchell
7 Aug 2007, 18:55
When he commits to paper publicly, Aker reaps what he sows, that's the fate of journalists. However, what is amusing is the two threats against him.
1. Bringing the game into disrepute. Eh ? This is a game which features tanking clubs, lying club presidents, drunken footballers, cheating players, neanderthal, mysogenistic values, hopelessly conflicted prime movers, an administration which has just doubled the salary of its CEO for doing no more than he did last year and the rest with their snouts in the trough. Aker is a comparative saint.
2. Defamation action by Braun, more accurately his manager. That'll be the day. Can you just imagine what will come out in the wash ? How much dirt do you reckon Ch 7 has that could be released in court ?
FrediKanoute
7 Aug 2007, 19:00
You know what??? I'm sick and tired of people verbally "bashing" easy targets like Aker because he had the balls to write what he believed in the paper. What? You don't believe that this type of activity could exist amongst our footballers? Come on now, fellow doggie, do you think that it stops at recreational substances?? Do you believe that we should all be that naive or that our game is that fragile that an accusation can ruin it? Aker believed and said what he said. Was it he who revelaed the name to CH 7? I really do doubt it as he is contracted to ch 9 to appear on the footy show every now and then. He used the appropriate avenues and the name was leaked... So what does everybody do? They attack him for airing his 'suspicion'.... I've said it once and I'll keep saying it, in other more higher profile world sports, it doesn't matter who you are, you can voice your opinion without getting your head knocked off. Our response to Aker's article just highlights how insular and precious we have become about our beloved game. Please don't say anything negative because it will bring our game into disprepute!!!! Hello??? Just look at WEST COAST, (Cousins drug addiction, Kerr's forgery of prescription drugs, both their in-fighting) Gardiner and Cousins alleged criminal associations; St Kilda (Milne and Montagna, Frazer Gherig's indiscretions with Voss and other Lions players and not to mention Didak; and there's plenty more where they came from....
So Aker writes an article in the paper and we all cut him down... Well done mate, you've just echoed the words of another 'upstanding fine individual' who called Aker a "Dimbat" on that Footy Classified show last night... A person of 'high' intelligence who obviously believes all indiscretions should be hidden away from the public domain, the paying public who basically funded his paycheck when he played and all the current players in the AFL. People just keep blindly paying your memberships and enjoy the show.....
I think a concern is that we automatically assume that these so called footy experts have opinions that are gospel due to their successes in the footy arena both on and off and the past and present. The line is certainly blurred and I for one am not that narrow minded and encourage players to voice their suspicions and opinions as long as it does not cross the line of false accusations, of which I can deduce that Aker didn't do based on the facts provided.
Remember, my fellow doggie, it wasn't that long ago that one of our very own was censured when he wrote his feelings about the war in Iraq on his arm before posing for a team photograph at the start of that footy season...Did you think it was fair that he was censured by the AFL???
Probably not!!!
Aker, you did nothing wrong...At worst you basically highlighted to many people that drugs can infiltrate all types of environments and that the AFL arena is no exception. Maybe the AFL is a little concerned about the focus this has brought upon it's testing policies and precedures.......Hmmmm
Go Puppies!!!!
Well said. The article has been taken out of context- it was written in the context of the Tour de France and to highlight the dminishing status of that event due to drugs like EPO. Aka didn't name a player (yes he gave a description of the game etc) and suggested that given the AFL only tests 500 out of the 700 players each year and in many cases may not tests some players at all, and doesn not test for EPO how do we know that there are not drugs in the AFL.
The AFL do not own the game. They are merely custodians of the game, thre to administer it for the benefit of the public. The questions which should be put out there is not who has been taking drugs or who did Aka refer to, but more impottantly, why is there not a much more comprehensive drug testing regime and why is a drug like EPO, which would certainly give AFL footballers more indurance not tested for.
Its a case of shoot the whistleblower with Aka and I am of the opinion that when people shoot whistleblower's its because they are covering something up.
FrediKanoute
7 Aug 2007, 20:07
It seems odd that they go on and on about how much it costs to do? Surely it'd cost the AFL more in terms of reputation if there was a massive drugs problem and it came out? What are they doing about it?
It's not as if the AFL doesn't have the cash to test players more often - they obviously don't see it as a priority.
Hence the reason Gooka why it is VERY unlikely that the AFL will adopt tougher drug testing. Their current argument works fine - we test (not everyone and not for everything) and we have a zero record so far......The AFL have a HUGE downside to finding players are taking drugs - if you use Aka's example of cycling and Tour de France, many companies (ie Discovery Channel) are withdrawing their sponsirship of teams because they don't want their brand associated with cheats.