"New drug and two more clubs in AFL doping saga"

[Jobe Watson]

As long as Carlton can provide proof that their employed coach didn't give these banned substances that he sought out and bought to any of his players then they should be alright.

If not, I call Carlton players cheats.

 

[Armchair Critic]

Does this provide an indication of the importance of the consent forms to ASADA's case?

We know that 32 players signed them, and 32 players have been infracted. That suggests that the consent forms are more important that the 12 'confessions'. (although it might not be the same 32, but it is an unusual coincidence)

Also if Dank is saying (or ASADA has concluded) that Dank gave the players Hexarelin - yet the players did not consent to that via the form - does that explain why they have not been charged with that substance? ASADA 'need' that link between supplier and consent?

According to Big Chip "all 34 signed consent forms to be administered with a Thymosin peptide and all told ASADA in their interviews they received injections as part of the supplement regime. "

Whereas according to Big Robbo only "some Essendon players were prescribed weekly injections of AOD-9604 during the 2012"

Could that be why ASADA would be "mad" to pursue AOD? They would be working only with a subset of the 32, instead of TB4 allowing them to charge the whole group?

Even if there were a cocktail of substances, maybe you only pursue the one that is common to everyone. ASADA don't need to prove more than 1 substance to get their bans. In the Lovett-Murray thread we have been told by the faithful of the prudent common-sense of aiming your case at the biggest target.

I think the consents are definately key as they have the dosage instructions that match directly with dosage instructions given by Charter for Tb4.I am pretty sure the consents listed 4 drugs though and AOD was included on them.

Also 38 players signed consent forms to receive Thymosin according to the AFL Charge sheet, I think it is telling that only 34 players received SCN's , it seems to indicate they know who received the injections and who did not.

For AOD I still believe ASADA/WADA are scared to test S.0 in court due to compounding pharmacy loophole

 

[SunshineBoy]

Can't anyone else see this as the possible catalyst for Essendon and Carlton to finally unite as one??!!??

the antichrist

 

[Jimthegreat]

As long as Carlton can provide proof that their employed coach didn't give these banned substances that he sought out and bought to any of his players then they should be alright.

If not, I call Carlton players cheats.

We got the dud batch, they certainly didn't work.They're supposed to send us up the ladder, now down....lol.

Maybe we took them in 2013, the year we took Essendon's spot in the finals. That would be an irony to say the least.

 

[Laphroaig]

Nice defensive shot; not off the middle though. I don't know any posters on the Essendon board who have ever said we've 'done nothing wrong', nor that we will 'get away with it'.

You're jesting, Shirley.

The frequent gleeful gloating, based on wishful thinking or not, about how terribly weak the case is the very distillation of those two points.

I also suggest that your innocent until proven guilty rationalisation is pure unadulterated horseshit. The last 4 months or so of the Essendon perception management effort has been layer upon layer of preparation for the faithful to find proven cases simply unbelievable. Which is precisely the reaction I expect.

Do you seriously believe that all those people who have denied and debated every single item of available information to the death are suddenly going to say "Oh well. The AFL tribunal found us guilty, that's all there is to it?"

You have to be kidding.

 

[Tigerland]

I think you'll find that every club has been asleep on the job in regards to governance issues, including the AFL boy's club. Let's clean out the whole comp and start again shall we?

If nothing illegal was given then Hird has already been given his punishment by the AFL in relation to governance issues. The fact that he was paid whilst suspended is merely another AFL governance mistake. As far as supporter backing; we have seen evidence of Hird stipulating that the supp program must be WADA compliant. He was also part of a matrix structure that has him removed from direct responsibility. He also has the players fully behind him being coach. That, for me, is enough to give him the benefit of the doubt unless other evidence arises. There is also the empathy I have for the character assassination in the media. It makes you all the more steadfast in your resolve to support those who are being attacked.

More diversion tactics from Bomber supporters... We're all guilty.

On Hird.... Yep I guess that's why 14 AFL coaches chose not to attend a meeting with Hird and the AFL coaches associations to discuss the issue.

 

[Masto]

I think the consents are definately key as they have the dosage instructions that match directly with dosage instructions given by Charter for TB4.I am pretty sure the consents listed 4 drugs though and AOD was included on them.

Also 38 players signed consent forms to receive TB4 according to the AFL Charge sheet, I think it is telling that only 34 players received SCN's , it seems to indicate they know who received the injections and who did not.

For AOD I still believe ASADA/WADA are scared to test S.0 in court due to compounding pharmacy loophole

McDevitt has already gone on record about AOD. He said it is prohibited but it would be unfair to charge them:

http://www.theage.com.au/afl/afl-ne...table-disappoints-players-20140618-zsdqk.html

''The advice I’ve had is that we cannot take the position that prior to April, 2013, that athletes and support personnel could have known AOD-9604 was, in fact, a prohibited substance,'' he said on ABC radio.

''What it comes down to is if WADA publicly stated for the first time on the 22nd of April, 2013,that it was a prohibited substance in sport, it would seem that if you pursued an anti-doping rule violation that related to the substance being administered prior to that date, then not only would it - in my eyes - be unsuccessful, it would be unfair."

 

[Armchair Critic]

McDevitt has already gone on record about AOD. He said it is prohibited but it would be unfair to charge them:

http://www.theage.com.au/afl/afl-ne...table-disappoints-players-20140618-zsdqk.html

''The advice I’ve had is that we cannot take the position that prior to April, 2013, that athletes and support personnel could have known AOD-9604 was, in fact, a prohibited substance,'' he said on ABC radio.

''What it comes down to is if WADA publicly stated for the first time on the 22nd of April, 2013,that it was a prohibited substance in sport, it would seem that if you pursued an anti-doping rule violation that related to the substance being administered prior to that date, then not only would it - in my eyes - be unsuccessful, it would be unfair."

It is basically saying S.O is pointless

 

[Masto]

It is basically saying S.O is pointless

I don't agree with McDevitt and neither does WADA but thats the way ASADA have chosen to go on the issue. The fact AOD is found in some products does not mean it is approved for human use. I think its pretty clear cut.

 

[Armchair Critic]

I don't agree with McDevitt and neither does WADA but thats the way ASADA have chosen to go on the issue. The fact AOD is found in some products does not mean it is approved for human use. I think its pretty clear cut.

No but the Tga allows it to compounded legally under certain conditions so it would be a good argument to be had in court

 

[Masto]

No but the Tga allows it to compounded legally under certain conditions so it would be a good argument to be had in court

Not the same thing IMO.

 

[Beer n Skittles]

As long as Carlton can provide proof that their employed coach didn't give these banned substances that he sought out and bought to any of his players then they should be alright.

If not, I call Carlton players cheats.

That'd be a tad hypocritical after all your whining surely

 

[Blind Turn]

More diversion tactics from Bomber supporters... We're all guilty.

On Hird.... Yep I guess that's why 14 AFL coaches chose not to attend a meeting with Hird and the AFL coaches associations to discuss the issue.

More circumstantial assumptions from HTB supporters... we're all guilty until proven innocent.

 

[KnaveyBlue]

 

[DonsRule]

You're jesting, Shirley.

The frequent gleeful gloating, based on wishful thinking or not, about how terribly weak the case is the very distillation of those two points.

I also suggest that your innocent until proven guilty rationalisation is pure unadulterated horseshit. The last 4 months or so of the Essendon perception management effort has been layer upon layer of preparation for the faithful to find proven cases simply unbelievable. Which is precisely the reaction I expect.

Do you seriously believe that all those people who have denied and debated every single item of available information to the death are suddenly going to say "Oh well. The AFL tribunal found us guilty, that's all there is to it?"

You have to be kidding.

And you don't think ASADA are going the same perception management .

Ben's out evidence is comprehensive and compelling. The radio and TV interviews. The quoting the Ziggy report etc

Do you think ASADA would even hint their case is weak before or during the trial/hearing?

Perceptions and PR here work both ways.

 

[The Old Dark Navy's]

As long as Carlton can provide proof that their employed coach didn't give these banned substances that he sought out and bought to any of his players then they should be alright.

If not, I call Carlton players cheats.

Oh, is that all they have on Essendon? One coach using a substance and every other poor bastard getting drawn into it?

That is terrible. No wonder you guys feel like you have been unfairly treated.

 

[Laphroaig]

And you don't think ASADA are going the same perception management .

Ben's out evidence is comprehensive and compelling. The radio and TV interviews. The quoting the Ziggy report etc

Do you think ASADA would even hint their case is weak before or during the trial/hearing?

Perceptions and PR here work both ways.

The scale is incredibly different. For example. I dont think there are any ASADA perception engineers in this forum. But I'm guessing that PR team Essendon has just upped it's representation from two to three. And they're getting very busy.

 

[Blind Turn]

You're jesting, Shirley.

The frequent gleeful gloating, based on wishful thinking or not, about how terribly weak the case is the very distillation of those two points.

I also suggest that your innocent until proven guilty rationalisation is pure unadulterated horseshit. The last 4 months or so of the Essendon perception management effort has been layer upon layer of preparation for the faithful to find proven cases simply unbelievable. Which is precisely the reaction I expect.

Do you seriously believe that all those people who have denied and debated every single item of available information to the death are suddenly going to say "Oh well. The AFL tribunal found us guilty, that's all there is to it?"

You have to be kidding.

Whilst most clubs would fray and crumble over all the speculation by finger-pointing and ripping at each other's throats, our club has remained defiantly united as best could be expected despite the unprecedented media attacks. Of this, I am very proud of my club. And whatever your opinion of Hird, there is no denying his strength of conviction in the face of the character assassination. I still have questions for the club/board that need to be answered, and much of the handling of the saga in the early stages I am not proud of. But what good does a misinformed lynching of the club achieve? It would merely set us back for decades of bitterness I'd have thought.

 

[DonsRule]

The scale is incredibly different. For example. I dont think there are any ASADA perception engineers in this forum. But I'm guessing that PR team Essendon has just upped it's representation from two to three. And they're getting very busy.

I think ASADA have been just as bad.

The whole AOD9604 thing last year when pressure came that ASADa may have stuffed up with their advice.


ASADa release a statement along teh lines of ASADA have never advised Athletes AOD9604 is prohibited in sport Our advice is in line with WADA etc etc etc.

But that is not what they were being accusing of at the tomes. There was a change in langue, the line being used was ASADA said it was not prohibited which is a slight change to their PR line of 'permitted in sport; Both sides playe the dirty game of semantics when they want. The court docs iirc showed at least cons conflict within ASADA on it's status internally. Yet there was a very strong and definate messageput of at the high of it.

I''m not saying Essendon PR aren't guilty at the same times; they are and are no doubt running a PR line all this times. DOn't pretend the AFL and ASADA aren't doing the same though, No one in this investigation has come out looking good; irrespective of the final result. ATM, I don't overly believe ASADA, Essendon or the AFL with much trust.

 

[Lavender Bushranger]

I think the consents are definately key as they have the dosage instructions that match directly with dosage instructions given by Charter for Thymosin4.I am pretty sure the consents listed 4 drugs though and AOD was included on them.

Also 38 players signed consent forms to receive TB4 according to the AFL Charge sheet, I think it is telling that only 34 players received SCN's , it seems to indicate they know who received the injections and who did not.

Excuse me whilst I sit back and bask in that incredibly rich irony.

Some deadshit must have thought they were so freakin' clever when they came up with the idea for these 'consent forms'! Who'd have thought huh?

 

[LanceRomance]

I only have one thing to add to this:

LOL @ Carlton

In b4 TA65

 

[Lavender Bushranger]

#standby.......?

 

[kiwicrow]

Whilst most clubs would fray and crumble over all the speculation by finger-pointing and ripping at each other's throats, our club has remained defiantly united as best could be expected despite the unprecedented media attacks. Of this, I am very proud of my club. And whatever your opinion of Hird, there is no denying his strength of conviction in the face of the character assassination. I still have questions for the club/board that need to be answered, and much of the handling of the saga in the early stages I am not proud of. But what good does a misinformed lynching of the club achieve? It would merely set us back for decades of bitterness I'd have thought.

Re Hird, I think you're overstating to call it strength of conviction, More like he's looked into the abyss, and realised the awful predicament he is about to inflict on his family's name for decades to come, and all he can do now is fight, sad isn't it really?

 

[Blind Turn]

Re Hird, I think you're overstating to call it strength of conviction, More like he's looked into the abyss, and realised the awful predicament he is about to inflict on his family's name for decades to come, and all he can do now is fight, sad isn't it really?

The character assassination continues...
Might be time for some of the lurkers here to aim your vitriol at some real criminals in society.

 

[Go_Blues!]

It never ends,

Sure but it just got a lot more interesting!!