No Oppo Supporters CAS hands down guilty verdict - Players appealing - Dank shot - no opposition - (cont in pt.2)

Remove this Banner Ad

Status
Not open for further replies.
Good article by Darren Lockyer questioning the suitability of the WADA code for team based sports, though Richard Ings still doesn't get it.

The Chip Article - Two things

1) I will be angry if its true ( no reason to doubt Chip ) that ASADA charged players on the basis of the evidence produced in the article.

2) Interesting that two players refused to be interviewed and it's gone through to the keeper. Maybe all players should have done the same.
 
IMO, ASADA are driving the sanction still via the AFL because Middleton would not be impressed if they targeted players.

Gill: There is no new offer. I was talking to Ben this morning.
Ben: There is no active offer on the table for Essendon players
Gill: I did not offer any deal to Essendon we just talked about stuff

Gill proposes to Little the voluntary sanction subject to the court case (Roy masters come on down,maybe). Tell the club board.
Board rejects.

Ben acts surprised he did not know there wre negociations betweeen Essendon and the AFL on sanctions..

I agree with your summation though it would been more prudent to run this through the AFLPA. The AFL deal is an insurance policy if Essendon lose the Federal Court Case - The players may continue to fight the process for however long it takes, but at the same time take a provisional suspension and if the players lose, they have server most if not all of their suspension.

Of course the expectation is that if the Federal Court rules that the interview part was illegal, then ASADA will drop the case.
 

Log in to remove this ad.

Is this the first time we have heard of two players refusing to be inteviewed? I know we had two players refuse injections but id never heard about the inteviews until now.
 
So, ASADA's evidence extends to... verbal statements by players who trusted the medical staff of their club and would have had only limited knowledge of what they were being given.

Wow. Such strength.
 
Seriously though, if the case is that weak that it collapses if the players' statements cannot be used - that's a ****ing joke. Why have we been put through this for 19 months?
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

So what I can gather from that:
  • ASADA's case is that 34 players said they were 'injected'.
  • Some players didn't explicitly say they received 'thymomodulin', instead they used the much broader description of 'thymosin', which could incorporate thymomodulin or TB4.
  • This is ASADA's evidence players were admitted TB4.
  • If evidence is quashed in court, the players' 'evidence' disappears.
  • Since players would be under no obligation to speak second time around they could: not answer questions or explicitly say they took thymomodulin.
  • Hence, ASADA's evidence would now seemingly be very little.
I suspected ASADA still hadn't compiled any significant evidence due to A) the lack of information on show clause notices; and B) McDevitt saying on Sunday he wants to find out what really happened at Essendon.
 
Last edited:
So what I can gather from that:
  • ASADA's case is that 34 players said they were 'injected'.
  • Some players didn't explicitly say they received 'thymomodulin', instead they used the much broader description of 'thymosin', which could incorporate thymomodulin or TB4.
  • This is ASADA's evidence players were admitted TB4.
  • If evidence is quashed in court, the players' 'evidence' disappears.
  • Since players would be under no obligation to speak second time around they could: not answer questions or explicitly say they took thymomodulin.
  • Hence, ASADA's evidence would now seemingly be very little.

You've just summed up exactly what the HTB idiots fail to gather.
 
Emma Quayle's responses - "is it called annual leave?" and "and more importantly are you back for end of season 10 pin bowling".

Doesn't sound too serious.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top