WADA has it's say on NRL "deal"

Remove this Banner Ad

Essendon is very different though.

There's the AOD matter which will be fascinating to see how WADA view that one.

But ASADA also said that the reason they delayed Cronulla was because they were all working on Essendon. So I'd doubt Essendon can claim that one.

For what it's worth, I think this decision is bad for Essendon.

I think it's probably the worst case - aside from the 2 years of course, that they could have hoped for.

Effectively, I think this says they get 12 months.
They may squeeze a month or two backdated due to Downes' review. But that still has them out for an entire season!

Disastrous I'd have thought.
 
Bunk Moreland said:
Of course not, the very existence of many of the regulars on his board is a scourge on the whole interwebs.

But seriously, the hysterical "WADA OTT!!!!!!" crowd, what a pack of jokers. They speak of WADA like they're the illuminati or something. They're a bunch of frickin bureaucrats and ex political hacks.
Click to expand...
Well seeing as you are celebrating like you've had a big win I might as well offer my congratulations, dunno what you won but well done anyway. Just for the record I have never been a WADA OTTer.
 
Lavender Bushranger said:
Essendon is very different though.

There's the AOD matter which will be fascinating to see how WADA view that one.

But ASADA also said that the reason they delayed Cronulla was because they were all working on Essendon. So I'd doubt Essendon can claim that one.

For what it's worth, I think this decision is bad for Essendon.

I think it's probably the worst case - aside from the 2 years of course, that they could have hoped for.

Effectively, I think this says they get 12 months.
They may squeeze a month or two backdated due to Downes' review. But that still has them out for an entire season!

Disastrous I'd have thought.
Click to expand...

It seems you know a little about diplomatic speak, sweet smelling one.

From elsewhere;

"I'm not sure if they will surely be qualified for the delay on Downes, Johnny. E'dope took a vastly different approach to Cronulla, as did the NRL to the AFL. Essentially, as Roy Masters has reported many times, the NRL put themselves in ASADA's hands.

Point iii is interesting;

"iii. There is no explanation for the continued inaction from ASADA following the receipt of the Downes report in April 2014 until steps were formally taken by ASADA in August 2014."

There certainly wasn't 'inaction' on the E'dope matter over that time, because the legal process had been employed (again, unlike Cronulla and the NRL, who were lying 'doggo). Master's articles began to separate the 2 cases around this time, and he began to suggest the NRL had outsmarted the AFL by leaving the process with ASADA.

Also of interest is d;

"d. The 12 month sanctions were deemed to commence on November 2013, such “backdating” being justified by the delays in the process which could not be and were not attributable to any action or lack of action on the part of the players (or their representatives). It is this last aspect of the sanctioning process that required close review."

"Could not be and were not attributable to..........the players (OR their representatives)......required CLOSE review"

I think Ol' Roy may just have been closer to the mark than most others."

Further;

"Along those lines, D, and as per my response to Johnny, WADA's statement highlights a period of inaction, post Downes, that is from April to August - McDivot time, not Andruska.

Previous to that period, they mention the gubmint's decision to appoint Downes in November and say "for reasons IT considered appropriate". That's all Dutton time.

They're highlighting McDivot and the current gubmint, and the language used does not suggest they reckon it's all gone swimmingly.

Lying underneath all that is a not unreasonable interpretation (unscrambling diplomatic speak) that they'll cop this one a) because, probably, the evidence of a club wide conspiracy is weaker and b) it's the lesser scale......but don't try it on, again.

Shot across the bow, possibly, as you suggest."

Gone a fraction early, I reckon, those Windy Hill triumphalists.
 

Log in to remove this ad.

The 12 month sanctions were deemed to commence on November 2013, such “backdating” being justified by the delays in the process which could not be and were not attributable to any action or lack of action on the part of the players (or their representatives).
It is this last aspect of the sanctioning process that required close review.
Click to expand...

If that ain't a message to the essendon players............

. WADA is of the view that an appeal would not advance the fight against doping in any meaningful way.
Click to expand...

Not in the way the next case will.
 
http://www.abc.net.au/news/2014-09-...ing-asada-bans-handed-t/5780656?section=sport

The World Anti-Doping Agency (WADA) has savaged the Australian Sports Anti-Doping Agency's (ASADA) protracted investigation into Cronulla's 2011 supplements program but says it will not appeal the back-dated suspensions handed out to 12 Sharks players.

But WADA took aim at the investigation process followed by ASADA, the length of time it took and the involvement of the Federal Government.

"WADA has determined that full scrutiny of the file revealed that the number of delays were directly the result of the lack of activity or decision by either ASADA or the Australian Government," the statement read.

"Nothing was done by ASADA to advance the matter following the completion of the ASADA investigation in November 2013 for many months.

"The Australian Government decided, for reasons it considered appropriate, to appoint a retired judge (Garry Downes) to review the ASADA files. It took some months for Downes to complete his task in early April 2014.

"There is no explanation for the continued inaction from ASADA following the receipt of the Downes report in April 2014 until steps were formally taken by ASADA in August 2014."

WADA says it is not entirely satisfied with the outcome of the Sharks case and the "practical period of the 12-month suspensions that will actually be served by the players".
Click to expand...

How fortunate that ASADA are so incompetent and the government caused delays.
 
fabulousphil said:
According to everyone on this board, the delays did not occur and ASADA was just meticulous in dotting I's and crossing T's and collating all it's eveidence.
Click to expand...

we know there were delays outside of ASADA's control - under-staffing after several of ASADA's key investigators didn't get their contracts renewed, ADRVP didn't have the members to make quorum etc. those are on the government. probably tied to the government change-over.

the downes investigation was a government intervention too

the numerous accusations of leaking from efc meant ASADA had to stop and investigate its own internal behaviour.

fabulousphil said:
The reason was to make a watertight case, but maybe the opposite is true and ASADA actually has very little to nothing in way of a case.
Click to expand...

sure, scn's were issued and cronulla players accepted doping bans, no matter how short, because ASADA had little to no case :rolleyes:
 
Jobe Watson said:
Ohhhh WADA you beauty!

So here we have admitted, confirmed, self-confessed PED users getting away with 3 game bans... and the evil overlord WADA is allowing it.

WADA aren't the ooga booga organisation everyone here made them out to be, it looks like. Different circumstances and all that, but it's extraordinary WADA didn't come over the top like some people said they would.
Click to expand...
I agree, circumstances certainly are different. Cronulla didn't have Paul Little & James Hird turning their crusade against ASADA into a personal vendetta.
 
Me, I'm happy for WADA to allow similar deals for EFC players.

Might stimulate some deal making and end this in early 2015 for the players.
 
Really quite interesting.

Lets not pretend we can predict the outcome from here.

WADA looking begrudgingly soft and ASADA being made to look incompetent.
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

mysainters said:
Conspiracy theory.

Could they be trying to land a big fish?

Would a EFC player now move to accept a backdated penalty, thinking wada will react in the same fashion...

Then they appeal?
Click to expand...

I know we love afl here, but no afl side would be considered a big fish over a league side by WADA. They would think of as teams in insignificant sports in an insignificant country

As such, there is no way WADA would deliberately low ball Cronulla just to suck Essendon into a plea
 
If I were Essendon I would be very worried. ASSADA would like to redeem themselves now with Essendon and the court case has certainly opened the door for that.
 
Sharks got reduced bans due to huge delays in their case that was completed in Nov 2013. They took forever due to the focus on the Essendon case hence were entitled to a huge backdate. Not to mention the stuff-up with the right numbers in the Review panel. They got 12 months, which many forget, but under WADA rules, due to that delay, they got it backdated to when their investigation was finished, Nov 2013. Obviously there's not the same delays in the Essendon case. Essendon have actually delayed it themselves by going to Court, meaning they'll probably get 12 months as well, if they admit guilt, but only backdated to the point when the Court case judgement was handed down. Means they'd miss next season if judgements are consistent with both Cronulla and WADA rules. 2 years backdated to the same time if players decide to fight it.

That's my interpretation at least.
 
I must be missing something. Aren't the Sharks and Essendon case a million miles apart in terms of extent of drug taking?

Cronulla were only at it for a few weeks and there didn't seem to be much in the way of deliberate cheating going on.

Essendon on the other hand seem to be a deliberate planned drug regime orchestrated by the coach and over a long period of time, with backdated invoices, forged letters and players who were so concerned at the drugs they were taking that they asked consent forms be drawn up in a forlorn attempt to exonerate themselves from any blame if they were caught taking banned drugs.

Surely the fact the Essendon players were concerned enough to ask for consent forms, is evidence that they knew something was wrong but went with it. How can they receive a discount for no fault based on that?

The Cronulla and Essendon cases are nothing like each other in terms of seriousness. And as someone else said earlier WADA were very clear to stipulate that the fault for the delay was NOT with the Cronulla players or Representatives (The club).

In Essendon's case there were no delays from ASADA, they acted as soon as they compiled the report. The only delay was Essendon to court and as WADA make crystal clear in that article Essendon are the players "representatives" so bans will not be backdated because Essendon tried to delay bans through frivolous court action.

Not sure why so many Essendon supporters are getting excited tbh.
 
Jimthegreat said:
Sharks got reduced bans due to huge delays in their case that was completed in Nov 2013. They took forever due to the focus on the Essendon case hence were entitled to a huge backdate. Not to mention the stuff-up with the right numbers in the Review panel. They got 12 months, which many forget, but under WADA rules, due to that delay, they got it backdated to when their investigation was finished, Nov 2013. Obviously there's not the same delays in the Essendon case. Essendon have actually delayed it themselves by going to Court, meaning they'll probably get 12 months as well, if they admit guilt, but only backdated to the point when the Court case judgement was handed down. Means they'd miss next season if judgements are consistent with both Cronulla and WADA rules. 2 years backdated to the same time if players decide to fight it.

That's my interpretation at least.
Click to expand...

I would have to agree with all of this, if the players admit guilt they will get 12 months. I am not sure they will get it back dated given the court action etc. it still seems like ASADA will go for 2 years if there is no guilty plea, still a lot to think about for the players.
 
I'm not sure how WADA can advocate that players escape proportionate sanctions based on the incompetency of their country's governing bodies. Isn't part of WADA's role to ensure such ineptitude doesn't get in the way of stamping out drug use in sports?
 
The Falcon Strike said:
Interesting reading, particluarly about the backdating.

https://www.wada-ama.org/en/media/news/2014-09/wada-statement-on-nrl-sanctions#.VCpmCBbm6Gx

Unsure of the dates, but I don't think Essendon would get the same sweetheart deal due to delays/court action from Essendon and I believe the investigation finished sometime this year (anyone have a date for this).
Click to expand...
Not only that, Dank was much more heavily involved at Essendon and over a longer period than at Cronulla.

In comparison Cronulla smelt the smoke and called the firies, while Essendon sat around wondering what that funny smell was, then tried to tell everyone that they weren't really flames, just an optical illusion.
 
Echols said:
Not only that, Dank was much more heavily involved at Essendon and over a longer period than at Cronulla.

In comparison Cronulla smelt the smoke and called the firies, while Essendon sat around wondering what that funny smell was, then tried to tell everyone that they weren't really flames, just an optical illusion.
Click to expand...

Don't forget the players had more direct involvement though. Several were still seeing Dank privately after he left the club. Also as much as we debate thymosin a vs b and what the players knew, one Cronulla player admitted he asked "what does equine mean?" when reading the vial he was about to be injected with (and he still had the injection)
 
Yeah this doesn't help Essendon. It's basically WADA saying they aren't happy with all the ******* about done by ASADA in regards to the Sharks players only. Can't blame their players for awaiting everything else to occur.

Essendon however have done their best to slow things up and delay it. WADA won't allow ASADA to go soft here.
 
bomberjez said:
Really quite interesting.

Lets not pretend we can predict the outcome from here.

WADA looking begrudgingly soft and ASADA being made to look incompetent.
Click to expand...
If it makes you feel gooder!?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

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