No Oppo Supporters The ASADA Thread... from a Tiger perspective

[Ned_Flanders]

So please tell me, if ASADA used altered test reports, why have WADA appealed ?

Because they are thinking they can make the case without the stupidity ASADA engaged in

How they will do this and in what way, we have to wait and see

 

[Tiger Toffee]

Because they are thinking they can make the case without the stupidity ASADA engaged in

How they will do this and in what way, we have to wait and see

I know you like to think ASADA made a utensil up of things but just maybe ASADA had their case nailed and it was the AFL influenced tribunal that threw doubt on every detail because they were under instruction to do so, the AFL did not want suspensions, as soon as they put in their length of suspension request if there was to be any at 2 games the alarm bells were ringing right there because bans are time not games and believe me, essendon and the players knew they were getting off way before the tribunal even came to a conclusion IMO.

 

[Ned_Flanders]

I know you like to think ASADA made a utensil up of things but just maybe ASADA had their case nailed and it was the AFL influenced tribunal that threw doubt on every detail because they were under instruction to do so, the AFL did not want suspensions, as soon as they put in their length of suspension request if there was to be any at 2 games the alarm bells were ringing right there because bans are time not games and believe me, essendon and the players knew they were getting off way before the tribunal even came to a conclusion IMO.

Condescending much? Firstly you accuse me of saying stuff I never did now this?

On your first point, you need to understand how chain of custody works with regards to test reports. Having worked for a lab, I can tell you no lab will stand behind a report that has been tampered in any way (even just wiping the name or date). It's a golden rule in testing, and labs spend millions a year making their reports tamper resistant.

I have dealt with regulators for years, and I can tell you as fact they would never use a tampered test report because they know it has no value. ASADA using one was naive at best, lazy at worst.

They could have had the lab reissue the correct report, obtained the raw data used to prepare the report, all easily done with the cooperation of CNAS. Instead they said it was too expensive to go to China (apparently they haven't heard of email), so they relied on what they had.

Secondly you have just accused two former judges of corruption. Do you have any evidence of them being corrupted? What did the afl provide them in terms of inducements to corrupt their reputations and everything they believe in?

 

[ScallyWag1]

I know you like to think ASADA made a utensil up of things but just maybe ASADA had their case nailed and it was the AFL influenced tribunal that threw doubt on every detail because they were under instruction to do so, the AFL did not want suspensions, as soon as they put in their length of suspension request if there was to be any at 2 games the alarm bells were ringing right there because bans are time not games and believe me, essendon and the players knew they were getting off way before the tribunal even came to a conclusion IMO.

You're exactly right. For all the bleating from the media and the Essendon sympathetic about ASADA failing to make a case...They ultimately failed to make a case to the AFL tribunal that would severely impact the AFL if the AFL found them guilty.

Seriously, you can cry "independent tribunal" all you like, but people have rocks in their head if they think that the AFL version of "comfortable satisfaction" wasn't going to be very, very, difficult to reach.

Short of producing a photo of the players with needles hanging out of their arm, standing next to Dank, Hird, and Reid, alongside a vat with Thymosin Beta 4 written on the side..and even then the AFL tribunal would probably have said "yeah but we can't be satisfied that the vat that says TB4 on the side is in fact full of TB4".

 

[SunshineBoy]

How so, i believe ASADA did establish all the links in the chain but it was the AFL tribunal that chose not to believe that TB4 left China despite GL Biochem saying that it did and that TB4 was supplied.
Forget about what the AFL Tribunal said and wrote, they were under instruction to deliver a result that was in the best interests for the AFL.
If ASADA had failed to establish a link from China to Alavi then WADA IMO would not have appealed, WADA would've read ASADA's findings a million times, they would have read the AFL Tribunal's findings a million times, if there was any ounce of doubt WADA would not have appealed.
Also remember that one of the biggest drug cheats in the history of cycling would have been cleared if his case was heard in front of the AFL tribunal.

IM of the opinion that you are correct, also ASADA and now WADA are privy to the surveillance, they are not spending money on a dead horse,

They know and given CAS is not bound by the same rules on evidence regardless of where its heard, expect that there may be video, phone messages and the like likely to surface, expect the Law firm of Hird Hird and Tanya and Associates to scream about process

The AFL tried to do a snow job with their hand picked tribunal, and anyone who believes the outcome of it was not preordained is living in the land of OZ and I don't mean Australia

 

[Tiger7374]

Condescending much? Firstly you accuse me of saying stuff I never did now this?

On your first point, you need to understand how chain of custody works with regards to test reports. Having worked for a lab, I can tell you no lab will stand behind a report that has been tampered in any way (even just wiping the name or date). It's a golden rule in testing, and labs spend millions a year making their reports tamper resistant.

I have dealt with regulators for years, and I can tell you as fact they would never use a tampered test report because they know it has no value. ASADA using one was naive at best, lazy at worst.

They could have had the lab reissue the correct report, obtained the raw data used to prepare the report, all easily done with the cooperation of CNAS. Instead they said it was too expensive to go to China (apparently they haven't heard of email), so they relied on what they had.

Secondly you have just accused two former judges of corruption. Do you have any evidence of them being corrupted? What did the afl provide them in terms of inducements to corrupt their reputations and everything they believe in?

I respect your perspective mate!

And I agree the sport has been rife with individuals going behind the shed for the last two decades.

Is there a strategy here tho...perhaps one that is not incompetent. You raised reissuing...I'm not educated in this area...it didn't get done back then...only takes an email...can it be done now?

Might it have been that ASADA sniffed the wind & just knew the Offal wasn't serious. So it lobbed into the Tribunal a case that could meet comfortable but wouldn't meet beyond. And the judges, not incompetent, not corrupt, adjudged accordingly. And ASADA said, yay, here you go WADA, clean up this technicality, you take them down, it's out of the Offal tribunal system.

The movement out of the Offal is sign of the regulator determination to keep the pressure squarely on to my mind. Prosecutors do not run a case they cannot win...it should not begin. Any thought that a CAS not comfortable is unfair to the players is bullshit on this basis.

 

[Tiger7374]

I respect your perspective mate!

And I agree the sport has been rife with individuals going behind the shed for the last two decades.

Is there a strategy here tho...perhaps one that is not incompetent. You raised reissuing...I'm not educated in this area...it didn't get done back then...only takes an email...can it be done now?

Might it have been that ASADA sniffed the wind & just knew the Offal wasn't serious. So it lobbed into the Tribunal a case that could meet comfortable but wouldn't meet beyond. And the judges, not incompetent, not corrupt, adjudged accordingly. And ASADA said, yay, here you go WADA, clean up this technicality, you take them down, it's out of the Offal tribunal system.

The movement out of the Offal is sign of the regulator determination to keep the pressure squarely on to my mind. Prosecutors do not run a case they cannot win...it should not begin. Any thought that a CAS not comfortable is unfair to the players is bullshit on this basis.

And a subtle edit to this position...if there was a slam dunk case there screwed over by incompetency...then ASADA will be gutted and refreshed after the next Senate and Departmental review...unless the present ASADA administration can show the logic and ultimate target of its actions. If indeed this is a 101 non recoverable error...as a taxpayer...I want it done!

 

[Tiger7374]

ASADA have been accused of:

1 Scewing up the AOD advice,
2 Sitting lifeless for x months between the August 13 to June 14 and not interviewing Dank
3 Tampering with witness statements
4 Incompetence by not getting Stat Decs
5 Not getting the supply chain locked down

Lol our national sports regulator is a big big joke if all of the above is correct...and our oversight committees are just as bad.

The players seemingly can't be done on AOD...does that change the fact that they consented to take it and expected to be injected with it per Jobe? I've often wondered actually if the ok to use AOD might have come from the Offal medical department, not ASADA.

Did they sit lifeless? Did they try to get Dank's presence? Did they fine a bankrupt fella every day as a means to get him in? Were they allowed to water board him if he shows?

Tampering evidence meaning I'm not signing a Stat Dec...isnt that the easy way out when ASADA can't get into a public tit for tat. Perhaps they also had electronic and hard data that doesn't need verbal comfortable confirmation

Screwing up the supplier compliance statement...can/can't be reissued? If it can't...and if that is the true keystone...then I'm with you...they are truly crap.

 

[Ned_Flanders]

I respect your perspective mate!

And I agree the sport has been rife with individuals going behind the shed for the last two decades.

Is there a strategy here tho...perhaps one that is not incompetent. You raised reissuing...I'm not educated in this area...it didn't get done back then...only takes an email...can it be done now?

Might it have been that ASADA sniffed the wind & just knew the Offal wasn't serious. So it lobbed into the Tribunal a case that could meet comfortable but wouldn't meet beyond. And the judges, not incompetent, not corrupt, adjudged accordingly. And ASADA said, yay, here you go WADA, clean up this technicality, you take them down, it's out of the Offal tribunal system.

The movement out of the Offal is sign of the regulator determination to keep the pressure squarely on to my mind. Prosecutors do not run a case they cannot win...it should not begin. Any thought that a CAS not comfortable is unfair to the players is bullshit on this basis.

Just IMO, but they are not that cunning

Remember this case was initially overseen by a CEO who's previous experience was Centrelink, and then someone used to the powers and regs of the coppers. Add to this ASADA personnel, who mainly managed positive test cases till now.

When you combine inexperience in chain of custody cases with inexperience in sports regulation, it's understandable mistakes happen.

On the report, this happens all the time, but you need the local regulator on side. A labs report is its IP, and they take cases of manipulation very seriously (I used to "investigate" cases we came up against in Australia a number of times). I have no doubt if ASADA approached their Chinese colleagues for support, the lab would have handed over the original.

 

[Ned_Flanders]

And a subtle edit to this position...if there was a slam dunk case there screwed over by incompetency...then ASADA will be gutted and refreshed after the next Senate and Departmental review...unless the present ASADA administration can show the logic and ultimate target of its actions. If indeed this is a 101 non recoverable error...as a taxpayer...I want it done!

My understanding is the govt ain't happy, changes and more resources are likely regardless of outcome

 

[Tiger7374]

S

Just IMO, but they are not that cunning

Remember this case was initially overseen by a CEO who's previous experience was Centrelink, and then someone used to the powers and regs of the coppers. Add to this ASADA personnel, who mainly managed positive test cases till now.

When you combine inexperience in chain of custody cases with inexperience in sports regulation, it's understandable mistakes happen.

On the report, this happens all the time, but you need the local regulator on side. A labs report is its IP, and they take cases of manipulation very seriously (I used to "investigate" cases we came up against in Australia a number of times). I have no doubt if ASADA approached their Chinese colleagues for support, the lab would have handed over the original.

So can WADA get it now?

And if they can, as ASADA could have done, rubber on road time mate, would you be comfortably satisfied TB4 was at the EFC?

 

[Tiger7374]

My understanding is the govt ain't happy, changes and more resources are likely regardless of outcome

Fair enough...I don't hear those whispers in my line of work

 

[SunshineBoy]

ASADA have been accused of:

1 Scewing up the AOD advice,
2 Sitting lifeless for x months between the August 13 to June 14 and not interviewing Dank
3 Tampering with witness statements
4 Incompetence by not getting Stat Decs
5 Not getting the supply chain locked down

Lol our national sports regulator is a big big joke if all of the above is correct...and our oversight committees are just as bad.

The players seemingly can't be done on AOD...does that change the fact that they consented to take it and expected to be injected with it per Jobe? I've often wondered actually if the ok to use AOD might have come from the Offal medical department, not ASADA.

Did they sit lifeless? Did they try to get Dank's presence? Did they fine a bankrupt fella every day as a means to get him in? Were they allowed to water board him if he shows?

Tampering evidence meaning I'm not signing a Stat Dec...isnt that the easy way out when ASADA can't get into a public tit for tat. Perhaps they also had electronic and hard data that doesn't need verbal comfortable confirmation

Screwing up the supplier compliance statement...can/can't be reissued? If it can't...and if that is the true keystone...then I'm with you...they are truly crap.

can someone other than Essendon state that they falsified evidence, tampered with test reports or is that just Chip LE Spud and Flobbo talking

 

[Ned_Flanders]

ASADA have been accused of:

1 Scewing up the AOD advice,
2 Sitting lifeless for x months between the August 13 to June 14 and not interviewing Dank
3 Tampering with witness statements
4 Incompetence by not getting Stat Decs
5 Not getting the supply chain locked down

Lol our national sports regulator is a big big joke if all of the above is correct...and our oversight committees are just as bad.

The players seemingly can't be done on AOD...does that change the fact that they consented to take it and expected to be injected with it per Jobe? I've often wondered actually if the ok to use AOD might have come from the Offal medical department, not ASADA.

Did they sit lifeless? Did they try to get Dank's presence? Did they fine a bankrupt fella every day as a means to get him in? Were they allowed to water board him if he shows?

Tampering evidence meaning I'm not signing a Stat Dec...isnt that the easy way out when ASADA can't get into a public tit for tat. Perhaps they also had electronic and hard data that doesn't need verbal comfortable confirmation

Screwing up the supplier compliance statement...can/can't be reissued? If it can't...and if that is the true keystone...then I'm with you...they are truly crap.

All this is just IMO, but fwiw:

1) aod was poor communication, and it does happen. It's annoying, but I've heard it happen a couple of times elsewhere. It sucks, but you accept and move on - this will always occasionally happen when humans are interpreting info without a six month love in to review the response

2) I don't agree with this one. I defended efc using its rights of appeal and process, same goes with these guys

3) the witness statement allegation I have my own view, so grain of salt. I don't think they blatantly manipulated or changed the words in the statements, so I think the tampering allegation is too far. I do believe however they "restructured" and edited the statements to increase the emphasis on key parts. Smart move by them if it worked, but I suspect they may have over done it.

4) I have no idea why they didn't nail these two down. Esp given their histories, you'd want that stat signed IMO before they leave the office. Don't give them time to think and reconsider

 

[Ned_Flanders]

S


So can WADA get it now?

And if they can, as ASADA could have done, rubber on road time mate, would you be comfortably satisfied TB4 was at the EFC?

I imagine they could, and we know they have some new evidence apparently

Who knows what it is though

 

[Tiger7374]

Just IMO, but they are not that cunning.

Perhaps so...I can't refute that. You are a smart bloke tho, you can see thru this. General counsel, directly provided or sourced from the Attorney General Department, would see this.

Dear god, what if Groupie and his first dungeon experiment, SpudsLiveChild, worked there...lol

 

[SunshineBoy]

All this is just IMO, but fwiw:

1) aod was poor communication, and it does happen. It's annoying, but I've heard it happen a couple of times elsewhere. It sucks, but you accept and move on - this will always occasionally happen when humans are interpreting info without a six month love in to review the response

2) I don't agree with this one. I defended efc using its rights of appeal and process, same goes with these guys

3) the witness statement allegation I have my own view, so grain of salt. I don't think they blatantly manipulated or changed the words in the statements, so I think the tampering allegation is too far. I do believe however they "restructured" and edited the statements to increase the emphasis on key parts. Smart move by them if it worked, but I suspect they may have over done it.

4) I have no idea why they didn't nail these two down. Esp given their histories, you'd want that stat signed IMO before they leave the office. Don't give them time to think and reconsider

So us allegedly accusing two highly esteemed judges of having a pre ordained decision ordained by the AFL is different to ASADA being accused of tampering with lab reports and falsifying statements.

AFL tribunal Brice Gibbs three weeks no priors Buddy Franklin 1 week plenty of priors, Gay Schulz not cited and you tell me the AFL are impartial and beyond reproach..........FML

 

[Tiger7374]

All this is just IMO, but fwiw:

1) aod was poor communication, and it does happen. It's annoying, but I've heard it happen a couple of times elsewhere. It sucks, but you accept and move on - this will always occasionally happen when humans are interpreting info without a six month love in to review the response

2) I don't agree with this one. I defended efc using its rights of appeal and process, same goes with these guys

3) the witness statement allegation I have my own view, so grain of salt. I don't think they blatantly manipulated or changed the words in the statements, so I think the tampering allegation is too far. I do believe however they "restructured" and edited the statements to increase the emphasis on key parts. Smart move by them if it worked, but I suspect they may have over done it.

4) I have no idea why they didn't nail these two down. Esp given their histories, you'd want that stat signed IMO before they leave the office. Don't give them time to think and reconsider

It's all IMO...I just don't see pure incompetence everywhere...no doubt poor judgement from all involved exists

 

[SunshineBoy]

I imagine they could, and we know they have some new evidence apparently

Who knows what it is though

New evidence isn't that new at all, its the surveillance footage and wire taps and dare I say texts which we only got to see a few

 

[Ned_Flanders]

can someone other than Essendon state that they falsified evidence, tampered with test reports or is that just Chip LE Spud and Flobbo talking

On the altered statements, the source is alavi and charter (off memory ASADA refused to comment, and details of what was "falsified" was never released)

On the tampered test report, this has been reported in the leaks from the hearing, and to date the main source for that has been chip. It's one part I don't doubt though, because it appears the tampering was done by charter to take out the manufacturer detail. This is VERY common in China, because middle men are paranoid about their buyer leap frogging them (apparently charter was worried dank would do that to him).

Fwiw this was probably the biggest alteration on reports out of China I used to deal with

 

[SunshineBoy]

It's all IMO...I just don't see pure incompetence everywhere...no doubt poor judgement from all involved exists

Mainly in the idiots trust in their club

 

[Tiger7374]

I imagine they could, and we know they have some new evidence apparently

Who knows what it is though

Well something to look forward to post the draft!!

 

[Ned_Flanders]

Perhaps so...I can't refute that. You are a smart bloke tho, you can see thru this. General counsel, directly provided or sourced from the Attorney General Department, would see this.

Dear god, what if Groupie and his first dungeon experiment, SpudsLiveChild, worked there...lol

I've dealt in the industry (of compliance) though, so I'm used to being paranoid and checking this stuff

Most laypeople are very trusting

 

[Ned_Flanders]

New evidence isn't that new at all, its the surveillance footage and wire taps and dare I say texts which we only got to see a few

Can't be anything the ACC obtained, it's against the law for ACC evidence to be used in a prosecution

 

[Tiger7374]

On the altered statements, the source is alavi and charter (off memory ASADA refused to comment, and details of what was "falsified" was never released)

On the tampered test report, this has been reported in the leaks from the hearing, and to date the main source for that has been chip. It's one part I don't doubt though, because it appears the tampering was done by charter to take out the manufacturer detail. This is VERY common in China, because middle men are paranoid about their buyer leap frogging them (apparently charter was worried dank would do that to him).

Fwiw this was probably the biggest alteration on reports out of China I used to deal with

Well the man does know his stuff...have to acknowledge professionalism...dirty but slick

That's why I will agree with you if they can't recover from that...101