Revealed: Deals proposed to/by AFL, ASC et al.

Remove this Banner Ad

People like Fitzpatrick, Little and Wylie only go down if somebody finds a dead Malaysian boy on their yacht. They laugh in the face of these articles.

The only interesting twist in all of this will be if it results in backlash from the NRL. And surely it would. They were on to this from the start, I don't see how they could stomach infractions to their players while the AFL laughs at them.
 
I Rock said:
Depends if WADA are as Toothless and corrupt as some suggest. Or if the guys at ASADA are feeling more pressure from "local" sources than they are from WADA.
But it would seem more logical that WADA is riding with ASADA the whole way here.

Another reason why I hope we get to see just how far down this rabbit hole goes.
Click to expand...
well it's interesting. As Laphroaig has pointed out, the actual signatory to WADA is the Australian government.

Things are so muddy right now
 

Log in to remove this ad.

Stop ruining our competition Essendon.

#StandByDemetriou
#StandByTheGame
#Rat****TheCheats
 
bomberjez said:
It's not significant news, it's a significant statement to make.

For the CEO to stand here in December and say that there is 'nothing before us to indicate infraction notices' is a pretty big call to make given whats available in the public domain (let alone what he has seen/heard behind closed doors).

How could he make this statement if AOD was going to be a problem?

Perhaps the "classification issue" actually leans more in Essendon's favour then the HTB believes?

Fascinating position for Andrew to take given he is under fire.
Click to expand...

From my experience it's not a significant statement, its a nothing statement. It's true, no matter what the end outcome is, but it says nothing.

Let's assume, as an example, that Vlad privately knows that 38 players are in the gun. The very last thing he's going to say now is "When this investigation wraps up, these guys are screwed". And that remains the case until the day it is formally announced. Even the day before. Until then, he knows nothing. Whether he knows something or not.
 
Echols said:
View attachment 37166
Click to expand...
I never said that they pretend it never happened. If in the final wash up players are suspended then the club will feel the pain of that by losing players from their list.

What I was saying is that the EFC will not get penalised again by the AFL. The AFL has hit them once and that will be it. The reason for my belief in this, lies in the fact that the program whilst establish through the club under a set of guidelines was clearly taken beyond the original scope by certain individuals inside the football department. The club was unaware of the full extent due to the governance failures, this was shown by the fact the club doctor was able to clear his name. If the AFL were to take action it would no doubt be challenged by the EFC and I'd be backing the club to win, which would be a bad look for the AFL administration. Also it would mean that the AFL would have to come clean on everything in court and I'll bet AD & Fitz don't want to take the stand under oath.
 
MaddAdam said:
Whack whack

http://www.afl.com.au/news/2013-12-04/demetrious-letter-to-the-clubs
Click to expand...
whack whack?

How so exactly? Nothing there I wouldn't have expected to read.

I do note these points though:

the AFL Commission determined various sanctions which were the most severe ever imposed on an AFL club including the unprecedented step of excluding Essendon from the 2013 finals series.

The sanctions by the AFL Commission are the most significant imposed on an AFL club. They included Essendon FC being excluded from the 2013 finals series, the first time since 1897 that a club has been excluded from participating in the finals

6. Ultimately, the sanctions imposed on the Essendon FC and the individuals concerned were the harshest in the history of Australian football and reflected the seriousness of the matters dealt with.
Click to expand...

Yet there are still muppets on this board who consider the penalties to be "pissweak"

I ask again, does anyone really think the AFL will level further penalties to Essendon?

Give me a break...
 
bomberjez said:
Pretty much what AD said this morning...we aren't paying Hird.

Answers none of the other 5 questions raised.

AFL look worried here.
Click to expand...


AFL look like they've issued a holding statement to address a media claim coming out of Bomberland that still doesn't explain:

* Dank's admitted Thymosin Beta 4 program
*The Mexican drug
* The mass blood testing
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

Lance Uppercut said:
I ask again, does anyone really think the AFL will level further penalties to Essendon?

Give me a break...
Click to expand...


No, the AFL won't unless via the agency of ASADA/WADA.
 
bomberjez said:
Pretty much what AD said this morning...we aren't paying Hird.

Answers none of the other 5 questions raised.

AFL look worried here.
Click to expand...

You know how Essendon/Hird were being very clever with their language throughout this whole saga (ie. not lying but not telling the truth)? Well Vlad's doing it now.
 
Slax said:
I never said that they pretend it never happened. If in the final wash up players are suspended then the club will feel the pain of that by losing players from their list.

What I was saying is that the EFC will not get penalised again by the AFL. The AFL has hit them once and that will be it. The reason for my belief in this, lies in the fact that the program whilst establish through the club under a set of guidelines was clearly taken beyond the original scope by certain individuals inside the football department. The club was unaware of the full extent due to the governance failures, this was shown by the fact the club doctor was able to clear his name. If the AFL were to take action it would no doubt be challenged by the EFC and I'd be backing the club to win, which would be a bad look for the AFL administration. Also it would mean that the AFL would have to come clean on everything in court and I'll bet AD & Fitz don't want to take the stand under oath.
Click to expand...

The pic of Duthie was merely in response to the bolded part of your post.
" Anyone who has follow the AFL for long enough knows that AD does a lot of deals behind closed doors to try and avoid the AFL name being dragged through the mud."
 
Laphroaig said:
From my experience it's not a significant statement, its a nothing statement. It's true, no matter what the end outcome is, but it says nothing.

Let's assume, as an example, that Vlad privately knows that 38 players are in the gun. The very last thing he's going to say now is "When this investigation wraps up, these guys are screwed". And that remains the case until the day it is formally announced. Even the day before. Until then, he knows nothing. Whether he knows something or not.
Click to expand...


I think you are mis-reading what is and isn't being said.

AD is saying 'There is nothing in front of us to suggest infractions'

NOT

'There is an investigation underway which I am unable to comment on'

The difference is turkey slapping you in the face.
 
Andrew's letter to the clubs on the matter:
Good morning
Various News Limited publications have this morning devoted considerable space to coverage of the investigation into the Essendon Football Club and its supplements program and the sanctions applied to the club and various individuals.
Both the Herald Sun and Australian newspapers make a great deal about the role of Australian Sports Commission Chairman John Wylie but that fact has been on the public record since September 3, 2013 when the Sydney Morning Herald and The Age newspapers outlined his involvement.
Mr Wylie was asked by Essendon FC Chairman Paul Little to facilitate discussions with the AFL at a time when there was an impasse between the parties. We were not privy to the discussions between Mr Little and Mr Wylie and ultimately, the AFL Commission determined various sanctions which were the most severe ever imposed on an AFL club including the unprecedented step of excluding Essendon from the 2013 finals series.
The sanction accepted by James Hird included a suspension for 12 months and the fact he could not be on the payroll of the Essendon Football Club for the duration of the suspension.
Some of the coverage by News Limited today appears to assert the AFL has paid or is paying James Hird which is completely false.
The various sanctions were applied a matter of days after a special meeting of AFL Club Presidents/Chairmen on August 22, 2013 which, among other things, urged the AFL Commission to resolve the matters relating to Essendon FC within the AFL industry and as soon as possible.
You will also recall the following statement was released by Western Bulldogs President Peter Gordon on behalf of 17 AFL Club Presidents/Chairmen after the August 22 meeting:
“The 18 AFL clubs met today in Melbourne with the AFL Commission.
After discussions with both the AFL and Essendon Chairman Paul Little, the 17 other clubs met in the absence of the AFL and Essendon to consider the Essendon dispute.
We resolved to unanimously express our support for the integrity of the AFL Rules and the need for those rules and the integrity of our competition to be preserved.
In our view, it is of paramount importance that every effort be made to resolve these matters within the AFL industry.
We wish to unanimously express our confidence in the AFL Commission and AFL management.
In the meantime, we call upon all parties to exercise restraint and discretion in any public comments about this matter and with the safety and welfare of players and their families and the integrity of the game as the paramount considerations.”
Peter Gordon , Western Bulldogs
In our view, the coverage in the News Limited publications does not provide any significant new information.
The sanctions by the AFL Commission are the most significant imposed on an AFL club. They included Essendon FC being excluded from the 2013 finals series, the first time since 1897 that a club has been excluded from participating in the finals. The sanctions are included as Attachment 2 to this memorandum.
We believe the key points are as follows:
1. The matters for which Essendon FC and others were held to account involved a significant failure in the duty of care to players. They were extremely serious and something we would not want to see in our game ever again.
2. Essendon”s own report (Switkowski) described “a disturbing picture of a pharmacologically experimental environment never adequately controlled or challenged or documented within the club”.
3. It is already well-known that negotiations were held to resolve the matter as quickly and as appropriately as possible – this is hardly a revelation. Consistent with the strong view put by the 17 AFL Club Presidents, the issue was resolved within the AFL industry.
4. Football fans and the 17 other clubs wanted the issue dealt with as soon as possible and the AFL wanted to safeguard the integrity of the 2013 Finals Series in the best interests of our game. We make no apologies for that.
5. Without detailing the cut and thrust of those discussions, they were held in good faith at a number of levels and were always appropriate.
6. Ultimately, the sanctions imposed on the Essendon FC and the individuals concerned were the harshest in the history of Australian football and reflected the seriousness of the matters dealt with.
7. It is the role of the AFL Commission and administration to oversee the health and safety of all players, the integrity of the AFL competition and the rules governing the game.
8. The AFL Commission’s fundamental objective was to resolve the issues relating to the Essendon FC and various individuals so that the finals could proceed without the risk of compromise at some point in the future as has been the case in other sports.
9. The sanctions and the acceptance of those sanctions by Essendon and various individuals was a genuine outcome arrived at under the rules of the AFL competition which in turn allowed supporters of the game to enjoy a finals series without the risk of compromise.
If you have any queries concerning this matter, please do not hesitate to call.
Kind regards
Andrew Demetriou
Click to expand...
http://www.krockfootball.com.au/demtriou-rejects-hird-inducement-claims/
 
jenny61_99 said:
Perhaps the reporters are actually reporting? No hidden agenda other than breaking some pretty damning news.
Click to expand...

Could it be to do with a combination of things including the treatment of Le Grand and also the recent success of the fairfax journo's in their reporting of this saga?
 
Lance Uppercut said:
whack whack?

How so exactly? Nothing there I wouldn't have expected to read.

I do note these points though:



Yet there are still muppets on this board who consider the penalties to be "pissweak"

I ask again, does anyone really think the AFL will level further penalties to Essendon?

Give me a break...
Click to expand...

The penalties ARE pissweak if doping has occurred. PARTICULARLY if the Coach has received an all expenses paid 12 month holiday.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

The_Wookie
The Andrew Wilkie Allegations
Replies
17
Views
892
pattymalone00
pattymalone00
A
This is the way to treat drug cheats
2
Replies
25
Views
1K
PoppedCorn
PoppedCorn
CASEYS9420
Moved Thread James Hird - is it time to give him a second chance at coaching an AFL club? Gil says yes! - The PEDs Forum Version
2 3 4
Replies
88
Views
6K
Caligo
Caligo

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top