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

[Lance Uppercut]

Nope. She's f*****.

yeah she's ****ed, but she should be attacked on the calibre of her articles, her character, and the colour of her black heart; not with language that is straight out of the misogynists handbook

 

[Dave]

I've spent quite a bit of time recently thinking about how I have reacted to this saga. Initially it was shock, anger and disbelief and, I think a quite human reaction of, opposition to what the "out group" (ie non Essendon people) were seen as wanting to impose on us. I think that some of the reluctance to consider sacking Hird stems from this reaction, not wanting to be seen as giving in to what others want (even if they are right, and I'm not saying they are), not necessarily because people believe he bears no responsibility for what happened. Footy is an amazing psychological study into in groups and out groups, however I digress!!

Whilst I agree on the one hand with those who point out that from a purely corporate view point there is a reporting chain (Dank & Robinson --> Hamilton/Corcoran--> Robson) that does not include Hird, we have to be cognizant of the fact that football clubs are not typical corporate entities. Whilst the Senior Coach is not the de jure organisational head, nothing that occurs with regard to the players occurs without their imprimatur. From that perspective they do shoulder some (how much, I don't know) responsibility for anything that happens within the football department. Has Hird been punished for the part he played in the "saga"? Yes. Has he been punished enough? Some think yes, some think no. I don't believe anyone can be condemned for their opinion on that, as it's something everyone's entitled to. I also think that it's splitting hairs to ask has he been punished by the club.

Like many on here I firmly believe that if players are suspended then he has to go, along with anyone else in a senior position at the time (Reid, Thompson), and probably a few board members to boot -they are responsible for what the club employees do. I'm still in two minds as to whether he stays if players are exonerated. Can we as a club move on whilst he remains? Is what others (AFL/other clubs/the media) want to see us do worth removing him? Do we set dangerous precedent of allowing the AFL and other cubs dictate who we do or don't employ? Do we risk players not wanting to come to the club whilst Hird is coach?

Lots of questions, not many answers at this stage. One thing I do know is that attacking people because of how they feel is unproductive. We all have a right to our opinion and to express in here without fear of abuse (the TEB exists for those of us with a masochistic streak!).

Anyhow, I'll get off the soap box now and go so some work.

 

[keepzitreal]

Hahahaha Sheeeiit. Just found this book written in 2005. This is real guys, the illuminati is real.

It is real.

 

[baz_machine]

No I agree with Ogg. It's misogynistic and crap. You wouldn't call a man a witch would you?

No, he'd be a wizard.

Or a warlock.

 

[Lance Uppercut]

I think it's in large measure a fishing expedition.

Which is a legitimate tactic by ASADA, by the way.

I don't think it's legitimate, when the almost guaranteed result is a provisional suspension. That's bullshit.

As I said earlier, the process needs a change. Provisional suspensions should only automatically apply when an AAF is involved.

 

[boncer34]

You complain about her and yet your response is to just stoop to her level with your posts about her?

Makes sense. I'd like to think we can bet better than that on this board and I daresay the community expectation is that we are better than that.

I daresay the community couldn't give a flying * what is said on an Essendon board on the internet.

I'd also daresay their expectation would be that on the Essendon board on an internat forum that Carowhine and others are being soundly and roundly slammed.

 

[Dave]

Well no, considering that SCN have resulted in infraction notices being issued in over 90 per cent of occasions. Until such time as proven otherwise, the SCNs and ASADA's evidence deserve to be treated with significant seriousness and respect.

Almost all of which are related to AAFs. Stats based on investigative cases would be of more relevance to our clubs situation.

Edit: Beaten too it!

 

[Lance Uppercut]

Robinson and Dank reported to Paul Hamilton, who reported to Ian Robson.

James Hird did not manage Robinson and Dank.

to be fair, the black ops circle at Hird's house was allegedly just Hird, Dank and Robinson.

Not saying it's necessarily the case, but I think it's pretty obvious Hird was a driving force. Maybe not to be cheating, but to get as close to the line as possible a la every other ******* club I'm looking at you Geelong Collingwood Hawthorn

 

[Lance Uppercut]

No, he'd be a wizard.

Or a warlock.

both of which have positive connotations, unsurprisingly

 

[Jade]

No I agree with Ogg. It's misogynistic and crap. You wouldn't call a man a witch would you?

Nope - I'll call her whatever the * I want. Witch, bitch and several other things that would result in a sooner than planned perma for me if posted here.

 

[2one2]

This board is obsessed with the media.

**** the media, I want decisions made because they are best for the club in the long term, which removing Hird as coach is definitely one such decision.

12 months ago you were of the opinion on this forum that it was a "witch hunt" against James Hird.

Since then, he has publicly done the following:

Given a short video to members saying "I can't wait to come back" at the start of the year
Not silenced his wife when she spoke out on his behalf
Joined the club motion that the investigation was illegal
Said "I'm glad to be back and can't wait to coach again"
Done the ice bucket challenge.

What, if not the consistent media slander, has informed your 180 degree about turn?

 

[ManWithNoName]

Hird didn't devise the program. Misconception. He simply wanted the players to be fitter and stronger so as to not have a repeat of the 2011 Elimination Final. He wanted a legal and safe program that pushed the boundaries. Not sure about you but I want my sporting team pushing all boundaries safely and legally to get the best out of themselves and to have a better shot at matching/beating opponents. Hird effectively said what he wanted and asked for the resources to make that happen.

If Hird didn't devise the program, why was he asking ASADA about certain drugs? Why was he receiving reports about the effectiveness of drugs? Why was Hird having meetings with Robinson and Dank telling them how they'll "turn this club around"?

Hird didn't oversee the program. Another misconception. Robinson and Dank did, who reported to Hamilton (and Corcoran when he wasn't on bereavement leave) who reported to Robson. If you request a bacon deluxe burger with extra cheese and they get you to check it's okay when it arrives that doesn't mean you oversaw the production of the burger.

Why did Hird receive the email from Robinson about how the stuff should be run by Reid? Why did Hamilton nor Corcoran receive that email? Why was Hird talking to Corcoran so directly about a program he (Hird) had no involvement in? ("Understand about the injecting and don't want to push the boundaries...") Why did Hird, having been warned several times about these substances not even think to ask a question?

When did he override Reid? Evidence please. Unacceptable health risks? Do you know something the club or players don't? Mistaken belief that other clubs were pushing the boundaries? What evidence do you have to say this is mistaken?

"Reidy's stopped everything which is getting frustrating". Reid only approved AOD, yet there were three other substances Hird knew about. Why? And I said apparently mistaken belief. Do you see any other clubs being investigated? I don't.

The reputation of our club has been tarnished by an uneducated blood thirsty media taking advantage of an impatient and uneducated public. The point is that there is no definitive conclusion from the investigative body ASADA at this point regarding the drugs that were administered to the players. At this point in a different world the media would barely talk about it saying the ASADA are investigating, Essendon are innocent unless proven otherwise and the vast majority of the public would have no interest (especially as we are not premiership contenders).

The club hold Hird responsible for what Hird was responsible for, which is why they did not want him to be suspended and why he received a contract extension. It's you who wants him held responsible for something he is not.

The reputation of our club has been tarnished by all of the above and much more. That all stems back to the program Hird devised with others and failed to oversee adaquetly. Should he have been responsible for all this? Probably not. Hence the hiring of Neil Craig to lesson the roles of the coach. But the fact is he was. And at some point he needs to be held responsible for the mess the club is now in as a result of it.

 

[Whispering_Jack]

No I agree with Ogg. It's misogynistic and crap. You wouldn't call a man a witch would you?

What about FatPrick? I don't think it's really misogynistic to call someone a gender specific insult.

Having said that, we shouldn't be insulting anyone, we should be attacking their views and opinions that we believe are wrong, not playing the man... Or woman.

 

[carnthedons]

No, he'd be a wizard.

Or a warlock.

Or maybe a wizard's sleeve?

 

[pepsi]

Anyhow, I'll get off the soap box now and go so some work.

Thank you for posting this Dave, it is very much where I sit at the moment with it all.

 

[cymarak]

As I said earlier, the process needs a change. Provisional suspensions should only automatically apply when an AAF is involved.

Completely agree.

Right now, players can be suspended from playing in the AFL simply because a third party (ASADA / ADRVP) thinks a doping violation may have occurred. Not good enough.

Either raise the burden of proof bar at the ADRVP - e.g. make the ADRVP use a 'comfortable satisfaction' test or higher - or abolish provisional suspensions for non-AAF infraction notices.

 

[Kong]

We seem to be going around in circles. The undisputable fact is that the AFL doesn't want Hird as coach of Essendon - McLachlan has been asked on more than one occasion about Hird and its ' No comment '. Common-sense dictates that if the head body clearly doesn't want you as coach that you walk away gracefully - Then again Hird and Ryder have been poorly advised by their closest confidants - Actually they are surrounded by people who live in a different world.

There is little reason to discuss accountability or the like.

What? No.

Essendon are a club that is accountable to its shareholders: members.

We decide what happens at the club, not the AFL.

 

[Kong]

So true - Answer them individually ( which I find easier ) and you are accused of filling up the board.

Click the + symbol, collect quotes as you go, then hit "Reply" when you're ready to respond to them.

Each post is responded to, but it's in one post rather than 4 or 5.

 

[DonsRule]

yeah she's ******, but she should be attacked on the calibre of her articles, her character, and the colour of her black heart; not with language that is straight out of the misogynists handbook

Yep, you don't have to go far to pull apart some of her articles. But the whole name calling, or misogamy only lowers people to her level.

 

[DonsRule]

to be fair, the black ops circle at Hird's house was allegedly just Hird, Dank and Robinson.

Not saying it's necessarily the case, but I think it's pretty obvious Hird was a driving force. Maybe not to be cheating, but to get as close to the line as possible a la every other ******* club I'm looking at you Geelong Collingwood Hawthorn

Corcoran was there too iilc

Essendon's former high performance manager Dean Robinson, in a paid interview with the Seven Network, says Mr Dank offered the colourful description of his secretive nutrition and supplements program during an interview with senior coach James Hird and Hird's long-time mentor, Danny Corcoran.

"They put a scenario to Stephen," Mr Robinson said. "Steve said to Danny and James, specifically to them, 'What you are asking me to do is black ops'."

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/spo...lack-ops-program/story-fnca0u4y-1226688385112

 

[Dave]

Group of players admitting they thought they were injected with it, combined with suppliers forms showing the club had enough to inject the entire/bulk of the list = logical conclusion they all got it.

Assuming all that of course, don't know.

FWIW while I understand the players wanting to see the evidence, it's not a requirement of ASADA is it?

Do they have this though?

 

[Kong]

So Dank (or whoever it was) only injected 10 players with thymosin?

It's most likely either none, or all. Why the hell would he pick such a seemingly random number like that?

Why would we trial only 10 (or so) players for high altitude training?

 

[Stopher]

I've been making the first point repeatedly. However it's worth pointing out that WADA won't be reviewing it, nor other NADAs, for the simple reason that the SCN stage is unique to Australia, and is a byproduct of the ASADA act rather than any overarching global anti-doping principle. It will in all likelihood be scrapped very shortly as it is, as we've spoken about, utterly useless.

The only issue I have is that NADAs can recommend an infraction and sporting bodies uphold a provisionary suspension, and threaten years of legal fighting whilst suspended. That is awfully unfair. I think the provisional suspension needs to go too in the absence of an AAF. If there's an AAF fine, you probably doped, but in circumstantial cases it is outrageous that you are presumed guilty until the verdict is handed down

Yep, it should be a fairly simple distinction- an AAF means the presence of physical evidence, so surely that in itself creates a definitive line between 'probability' and 'possibility'. As such, an AAF by logic could result in a provisional suspension whereas a circumstantial case still leaves the onus with the investigators, ie more work before justifying such a drastic step. Because if we are being honest, any type of suspension related to a drug offence is drastic due to the stigma forever attached to it. As Hird now has.

 

[ManWithNoName]

Do they have this though?

Hence "Assuming all that, don't actually know". Was just proposing a hypothesis in answer to the question.

 

[Dave]

No I agree with Ogg. It's misogynistic and crap. You wouldn't call a man a witch would you?

How many blokes get called pricks or worse?