Show Cause Notices v2.0 sent out by ASADA

[Gigantor]

In other words, you have no proof to back up your claims.

once again
it's ASADA which needs to come up with evidence that each and everyone of the 34 players was administered with TB4
and the crux of their case is as follows:

• the consent forms refer to "thymosin"
• 34 players signed consent forms
• therefore 34 players were administered with TB4

if you believe I am misrepresenting the ASADA case, please feel free to proffer an opinion
no doubt it would be a more informed opinion than someone who failed year 11 legal studies

 

[LoungeLizard]

anyone considered the fact that maybe, just maybe, ASADA didn't show their full hand in the SCN???? Maybe they don't want a deal, maybe they want them smashed to the full extent of the drug code and so they have left the "smoking gun" out of it. They gave the players their wish, evidence, but where does it say they have to provide "all" of the evidence? Chances are that they have laid out most of their hand, but I would be highly suspicious it is their full hand

read the GG's posts, he knows all.
Its all there in black and white, can't you see it?

 

[Gigantor]

As opposed to, they have got nothing, i haven't seen it but I know

we know what's in the public domain
we now hear that “It is a just a rehash of old stuff,’’
we do know that ASADA needs to come up with evidence that each and everyone of the 34 players was administered with TB4
all of our discussion would naturally start with how difficult that would be
have we seen anything of note that would allow us to conclude that ASADA has overcome this difficulty?

 

[telsor]

once again
it's ASADA which needs to come up with evidence that each and everyone of the 34 players was administered with TB4
and the crux of their case is as follows:

• the consent forms refer to "thymosin"
• 34 players signed consent forms
• therefore 34 players were administered with TB4

if you believe I am misrepresenting the ASADA case, please feel free to proffer an opinion
no doubt it would be a more informed opinion than someone who failed year 11 legal studies

How do you know that's the crux of their case?

Because that's what you've heard on BF? If that's the case, then trade week rumours have clearly taught you nothing.

 

[LoungeLizard]

we know what's in the public domain
we now hear that “It is a just a rehash of old stuff,’’
we do know that ASADA needs to come up with evidence that each and everyone of the 34 players was administered with TB4
all of our discussion would naturally start with how difficult that would be
have we seen anything of note that would allow us to conclude that ASADA has overcome this difficulty?

lmao, thanks for your reply.
I don't think i need to answer, you did that already with your own post

 

[Taylor]

once again
it's ASADA which needs to come up with evidence that each and everyone of the 34 players was administered with TB4
and the crux of their case is as follows:

• the consent forms refer to "thymosin"
• 34 players signed consent forms
• therefore 34 players were administered with TB4

if you believe I am misrepresenting the ASADA case, please feel free to proffer an opinion
no doubt it would be a more informed opinion than someone who failed year 11 legal studies

What if TB4 was mentioned in communications between the likes of Dank and the supplier?

That is enough.

 

[onemancyclone]

I put this forward as the standard bearer of the majority view on this board

From my reading of the board, my impression of most is:

1) Hope allegations are false - to ease concerns of the players' welfare
2) In event allegations are true, want the architect of the scheme to be accountable
3) In event allegations are true, want the process to follow same rigoeur afforded to all athletes of all sports in all countries
4) Don't want the process beholden to special interests, whether they be the AFL or Essendon
5) Want it over

 

[tesla1962]

anyone considered the fact that maybe, just maybe, ASADA didn't show their full hand in the SCN???? Maybe they don't want a deal, maybe they want them smashed to the full extent of the drug code and so they have left the "smoking gun" out of it. They gave the players their wish, evidence, but where does it say they have to provide "all" of the evidence? Chances are that they have laid out most of their hand, but I would be highly suspicious it is their full hand

LOL If they don't want a deal then just don't offer a deal.

 

[Gigantor]

anyone considered the fact that maybe, just maybe, ASADA didn't show their full hand in the SCN???? Maybe they don't want a deal, maybe they want them smashed to the full extent of the drug code and so they have left the "smoking gun" out of it. They gave the players their wish, evidence, but where does it say they have to provide "all" of the evidence? Chances are that they have laid out most of their hand, but I would be highly suspicious it is their full hand

fair enough
although ASADA has recent form
it also had a compelling case against Cronulla
and it was too, since the club itself had admitted to administering the two prohibited substances
and yet ASADA accepted 3 match suspensions
AND
no action has been taken on the five players who didn't deal
two months on

 

[Gigantor]

read the GG's posts, he knows all.
Its all there in black and white, can't you see it?

I think it would be an exaggeration to say I know all
afterall, I failed year 11 legal studies
nevertheless
I find the ASADA reasoning flawed:

• the consent forms refer to "thymosin"
• 34 players signed consent forms
• therefore 34 players were administered with TB4

of course people on this board are free to run with it

 

[Lavender Bushranger]

I think it would be an exaggeration to say I know all
afterall, I failed year 11 legal studies
nevertheless
I find the ASADA reasoning flawed:

• the consent forms refer to "thymosin"
• 34 players signed consent forms
• therefore 34 players were administered with TB4

of course people on this board are free to run with it

They must have used very big font to spread that over 350 pages!

 

[LoungeLizard]

I think it would be an exaggeration to say I know all
afterall, I failed year 11 legal studies
nevertheless
I find the ASADA reasoning flawed:

• the consent forms refer to "thymosin"
• 34 players signed consent forms
• therefore 34 players were administered with TB4

of course people on this board are free to run with it

So by your own admission you have no idea, as i recall you said you need to pass year 11 legal studies to work this out.
Sorry you nearly had me, but now i can't believe a word you say

 

[FuManchu]

or he was mistaken in an interview with a journalist. At least in an interview under oath he would be paying full atention

He is a supposed expert, Essendon employed him as an expert. Experts might say the name wrong once, but not 5 times in an interview. He knows there is a difference between the 2 substances but he he chose to name the banned substance 5 times. When told after the interview that he had named the banned substance, he didn't immediately change his story, he waited until the next day. He had the perfect opportunity to say he was nominating the wrong substance because being an expert, he knew the difference and the implications.

He could have nominated Thyomodulin on the consent forms but went with Thyomosin. There is no escaping several damning factors here. The bloke has almost deliberately lagged in the players.

 

[Gigantor]

What if TB4 was mentioned in communications between the likes of Dank and the supplier?

That is enough.

is that right?
and even if that did happen, doesn't that merely go to supporting ASADA's conclusion that thymosin = TB4
which leads us back to the crux of their case:

• the consent forms refer to "thymosin"
• 34 players signed consent forms
• therefore 34 players were administered with TB4

 

[Argy]

I see lots of skipped post numbers. I guess that means GG is blowing his brains out trying to smear and confuse. I remember his avatar - it always looked like his head exploded and he's trying to mend it.

Fact is, no one here has seen the evidence trail that ASADA has produced, me included. I have no special knowledge, but I will be putting my money on ASADA to win this one, mainly because I cannot believe that a government agency would go out on a limb with no evidence or no hope of a conviction. EFC supporters seem to have a blind hope that ASADA is merely doing this to trick the players into confessing. Very long odds on that!

 

[Gigantor]

So by your own admission you have no idea, as i recall you said you need to pass year 11 legal studies to work this out.
Sorry you nearly had me, but now i can't believe a word you say

it's true that I withheld that important bit of information

 

[Gigantor]

I see lots of skipped post numbers. I guess that means GG is blowing his brains out trying to smear and confuse. I remember his avatar - it always looked like his head exploded and he's trying to mend it.

Fact is, no one here has seen the evidence trail that ASADA has produced, me included. I have no special knowledge, but I will be putting my money on ASADA to win this one, mainly because I cannot believe that a government agency would go out on a limb with no evidence or no hope of a conviction. EFC supporters seem to have a blind hope that ASADA is merely doing this to trick the players into confessing. Very long odds on that!

which goes to show that the majority view has as little backing as the opposite view (although I reckon I'm on safer ground with the latter)

 

[FuManchu]

is that right?
and even if that did happen, doesn't that merely go to supporting ASADA's conclusion that thymosin = TB4
which leads us back to the crux of their case:

• the consent forms refer to "thymosin"
• 34 players signed consent forms
• therefore 34 players were administered with TB4

He could have referred to Thyomodulin if he meant thyomodulin

 

[fabulousphil]

That was not my point
My point is that most posters on here are not aware
You have singled out GG and AndrewB for posting a definitive view without seeing the evidence but ignore every second poster on here who is doing exactly the same thing but just from the opposite side of the fence
The call was for more balance in your role as a moderator - how about responding to that?

Absolutely spot on.

Have been saying the same thing for quite a number of months.

 

[WATiger86]

no
it's not fixed, seriously
the only link to the 34 players are the signed consent forms, which brings us back to:
the consent forms refer to "thymosin"

• 34 players signed consent forms
• therefore 34 players were administered with TB4

what you have referred to above, which has it's own gaps, merely serves to prove what "thymosin" means in the consent forms, in ASADA's own mind, which in itself is flawed

Oh dear...

So ASADA has supplied 350 pages worth of explanation of what "thymosin" means on the consent forms, in their own mind, to the players in the SCN's?!

You are embarrassing yourself here mate, the burden of proof is not high in doping cases... I'm guessing "year 11 legal studies" isn't the only thing you've failed

 

[Bobby Charlton]

Yes Ive seen the comments by the AFLPA lawyers (paid by Essendon) and saying that theres nothing new. That said, these are show cause notices, not a case for the prosecution.

Again. Looks like you're being definitive before seeing the facts of the case.

How about you attack Argy for his unfounded accusation that Hird and EFC revealed discovered documents or any one of the other 1000s of anti-Essendon assertions not supported by definitive facts. Sounds like you're trying to impose a one-sided discussion. It's already a massively one-sided forum by poster numbers - now you wish to throttle the few posters you disagree with.

 

[FuManchu]

How about you attack Argy for his unfounded accusation that Hird and EFC revealed discovered documents or any one of the other 1000s of anti-Essendon assertions not supported by definitive facts. Sounds like you're trying to impose a one-sided discussion. It's already a massively one-sided forum by poster numbers - now you wish to throttle the few posters you disagree with.

Go to the Essendon board if you're feeling unloved. No opposition is allowed at all there. You get banned if you even mention fact. If you don't like the fact that you can't post here without drawing criticism because the odds are against you, then maybe that's indicative of the level of support your stance has. Sometimes arguments are not meant to be completely balanced because a particular stance is not completely right.

 

[jenny61_99]

That was not my point
My point is that most posters on here are not aware
You have singled out GG and AndrewB for posting a definitive view without seeing the evidence but ignore every second poster on here who is doing exactly the same thing but just from the opposite side of the fence
The call was for more balance in your role as a moderator - how about responding to that?

ALL posters on here are not aware.

We are all in the same boat, reading from the same material. The only difference is the colour of kool aid. Those that are being definitive about anything are delusional. On both sides.

 

[Argy]

How about you attack Argy for his unfounded accusation that Hird and EFC revealed discovered documents or any one of the other 1000s of anti-Essendon assertions not supported by definitive facts. Sounds like you're trying to impose a one-sided discussion. It's already a massively one-sided forum by poster numbers - now you wish to throttle the few posters you disagree with.

Think about it before sounding off.

The only way the players could know what was in the discovered documents is if Hird/EFC or their lawyers told them. I do not believe the lawyers would. That leaves Hird and/or EFC. They have left themselves open to contempt of court charges.

 

[fabulousphil]

lance has got the runs on the board too

Lance as a Essendon fan would have more invested than Jenny you would imagine ?!!.