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

[vaughany]

Different sort of opinion article has surfaced tonight...

I can't copy&paste direct link on the mobile but check out the article titled

"Why James Hird is our new Lindy Chamberlain"

www.thenewdaily.com.au

 

[DonsRule]

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/spo...er-asada-letters/story-fnca0u4y-1227096603177

Essendon players told not to rush into any deals over ASADA letters

• CHIP LE GRAND

FOOTBALLERS accused of taking a banned peptide during Essendon’s 2012 supplement regime will be advised to hold their nerve and defend their case rather than bargain with anti-doping authorities.

Lawyers representing current and former Essendon players yesterday met the AFL Players Association to discuss the strength of the Australian Sports Anti-Doping Authority’s case, re-initiated last Friday.

A summary of evidence provided by ASADA, although expansive, contains no material previously unseen by the players’ legal team. “It is a just a rehash of old stuff,’’ a source said.

A telephone hook-up will be arranged over the next few days for lawyers to brief the players directly, all of whom are on end-of-season leave.

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/spo...er-asada-letters/story-fnca0u4y-1227096603177

 

[IggypopsTshirt]

Different sort of opinion article has surfaced tonight...

I can't copy&paste direct link on the mobile but check out the article titled

"Why James Hird is our new Lindy Chamberlain"

www.thenewdaily.com.au

 

[yaco55]

How many times do we have to read the mistaken belief that Essendon's case is similar to Lance Armstrong's team. Armstrong has a cohort of team-mates that admitted to taking PEDS in return for a reduced sanction - name me the Essendon players that have admitted to taking PEDS - The case would have been over 12 months ago if this was the case.

 

[yaco55]

Have no doubt that some players will take deals if they are ATTRACTIVE - I am convinced the deal will have players miss 4 to 10 matches - Be found guilty at the AFL tribunal and goodbye 2015 - Though I'd be staggered if any player is found guilty by an AFL tribunal - It is a disgrace that ASADA has put forward such a flimsy case - The sooner they are disbanded the better.

 

[BOMBERS 4 LIFE!!!!]

It is a disgrace that ASADA has put forward such a flimsy case - The sooner they are disbanded the better.

They target test 16 year old's for ped use ffs.

I'm convinced they're only thinking about their image they couldn't care less if s**t was banned or not they just love destroying peoples careers they need to piss off or change their code so it works with in team sports.

 

[Go_Blues!]

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/spo...er-asada-letters/story-fnca0u4y-1227096603177

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/spo...er-asada-letters/story-fnca0u4y-1227096603177

I am entirely stunned by that article. I guess to start with the veracity of the article is unclear but I find it hard to believe that lawyers will suggest the players go to court without first hearing the deal on offer. Surely this is a game of bluff by the lawyers attempting to get a better deal offer from ASADA. That is not to say the players should take deals or their lawyers may advise them not to take deals but you would at least get the options on the table before concluding a way forward.

The lawyers will know the risk to both the defense and prosecution of trying a case without precedence in this country that is bound by a poorly defined burden of proof. I think the most likely outcome is that the majority of the players will choose to fight this but I really am not buying the lawyers suggesting a particular path at this stage. In any case, the players instruct the lawyers and not the other way around. I would imagine the only advice the lawyers would give would be the likely outcome of a prosecuted case.

 

[Go_Blues!]

Have no doubt that some players will take deals if they are ATTRACTIVE - I am convinced the deal will have players miss 4 to 10 matches - Be found guilty at the AFL tribunal and goodbye 2015 - Though I'd be staggered if any player is found guilty by an AFL tribunal - It is a disgrace that ASADA has put forward such a flimsy case - The sooner they are disbanded the better.

I don't think that ASADA are the bad guys here and I don't think any of us want them disbanded. They are a government agency charged with the duty of protecting the integrity in sports in terms of drug use. All they do is enforce the ASADA act which is a bill of law. I totally agree that he act is outdated and shortsighted but these guys are just doing their jobs.

ASADA don't determine guilt, they simply apply a process. It does not matter if ASADA think your players are guilty or not, they don't get to play god. All they do is apply their statute. The SC Notices were delivered because there is some possibility that that banned substances may have been taken. ASADA are bound by their own statute to issue those notices. Guilt or otherwise is determined by others. I think the one area that is really, really murky is offering deals. I don't understand this and I wonder if this is the first instance of such "deals" in any WADA jurisdiction? To me this is really ethically challenged and seems a bit like the police offering plea-bargains which they never do - that is the role of the DPP because it seems so open to corruption. Surely a third party needs to be responsible for offering any such deals?

 

[EnolaGay]

I inferred the use of the word inferred on this thread was implied, but that's just me.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

 

[Mercurial89]

How many times do we have to read the mistaken belief that Essendon's case is similar to Lance Armstrong's team. Armstrong has a cohort of team-mates that admitted to taking PEDS in return for a reduced sanction - name me the Essendon players that have admitted to taking PEDS - The case would have been over 12 months ago if this was the case.

No one was suggesting that the case is similar to the Lance Armstrong case, people only mentioned it to draw the connection that both cases are being built on testimony and paper trails not tests. Thats it. People need to stop hearing Lance Armstrong and jumping on the offensive all the time. The cases are being built in a similar fashion, it a is a relevant good high profile link to make. That is where the similarities end however, which im sure was the poster's point when this link was brought up, and still people took it the wrong way.

Have no doubt that some players will take deals if they are ATTRACTIVE - I am convinced the deal will have players miss 4 to 10 matches - Be found guilty at the AFL tribunal and goodbye 2015 - Though I'd be staggered if any player is found guilty by an AFL tribunal - It is a disgrace that ASADA has put forward such a flimsy case - The sooner they are disbanded the better.

I am convinced the deal will have players miss 4 to 10 matches
Be found guilty at the AFL tribunal and goodbye 2015
Though I'd be staggered if any player is found guilty by an AFL tribunal

Yaco Full sentences
Try typing them
Easier to understand
less contradictions

 

[MightyDon]

ASADA are bound by their own statute

We have learned this means nothing.

 

[Go_Blues!]

We have learned this means nothing.

I guess that I disagree. I think what we have learned is that there are complexities in interpreting the act. This seems pretty understandable for an act that had never been tested.

 

[222EB]

No way the players will take deals any longer than 4 matches, the precedent has been set if the authorities want this to all go away.

 

[Jesse Custer]

Flimsy evidence? Rehash of old stuff? If they take deals now im out.

 

[rumply]

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/spo...er-asada-letters/story-fnca0u4y-1227096603177

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/spo...er-asada-letters/story-fnca0u4y-1227096603177

FOOTBALLERS accused of taking a banned peptide during Essendon’s 2012 supplement regime will be advised to hold their nerve and defend their case rather than bargain with anti-doping authorities.


So the media gets the advice before the players...sounds legit...

 

[DonsRule]

I am entirely stunned by that article. I guess to start with the veracity of the article is unclear but I find it hard to believe that lawyers will suggest the players go to court without first hearing the deal on offer. Surely this is a game of bluff by the lawyers attempting to get a better deal offer from ASADA. That is not to say the players should take deals or their lawyers may advise them not to take deals but you would at least get the options on the table before concluding a way forward.

The lawyers will know the risk to both the defense and prosecution of trying a case without precedence in this country that is bound by a poorly defined burden of proof. I think the most likely outcome is that the majority of the players will choose to fight this but I really am not buying the lawyers suggesting a particular path at this stage. In any case, the players instruct the lawyers and not the other way around. I would imagine the only advice the lawyers would give would be the likely outcome of a prosecuted case.

I think there is a little bluff.

But, perhaps a confirmation on where they stand too.

Were they worried ASADA may have something they did not know about? We can defend the charges if what we know is true but is tehre something ASADA uncovered that we don't know about? Could that weaken out stance?

 

[jmoo wan]

I am entirely stunned by that article. I guess to start with the veracity of the article is unclear but I find it hard to believe that lawyers will suggest the players go to court without first hearing the deal on offer. Surely this is a game of bluff by the lawyers attempting to get a better deal offer from ASADA. That is not to say the players should take deals or their lawyers may advise them not to take deals but you would at least get the options on the table before concluding a way forward.

The lawyers will know the risk to both the defense and prosecution of trying a case without precedence in this country that is bound by a poorly defined burden of proof. I think the most likely outcome is that the majority of the players will choose to fight this but I really am not buying the lawyers suggesting a particular path at this stage. In any case, the players instruct the lawyers and not the other way around. I would imagine the only advice the lawyers would give would be the likely outcome of a prosecuted case.

These are the lawyers that have actually read the 350 pages of evidence that will be used to prosecute them. Why are you surprised that they would advise them to not take a deal (plead guilty) after reading the evidence?

 

[PressureCooker]

No, according to the AFL the suspension last year was not for being drug cheats, but for poor governance.

Well, it was technically for bringing the game into disrepute of course - for getting bad PR, etc.

But why did the players miss games for the club's poor governance?

 

[Jade]

No way the players will take deals any longer than 4 matches, the precedent has been set if the authorities want this to all go away.

If they are not guilty of PED use, they shouldn't take ANY ban.

 

[cymarak]

But why did the players miss games for the club's poor governance?

Because the punishments handed out last year were punishments for the club as a whole, and the players are part of the club.

I'm not getting into whether the club should have been kicked out of the finals - that's a different argument altogether.

 

[Mercurial89]

If they are not guilty of PED use, they shouldn't take ANY ban.

This is how I see it. Ill add to this that if players have taken a banned substance i would expect them to be hit with the a ban, there still better not be any deals.

The problem is however its becoming more and more apparant the whole system is flawed, not nessasarily ASADA themselves. Atm all parties are doing their best to operate within a flawed system. But ill pose this question to get people thinking, its one i use on people at work when the ASADA stuff comes up.

IF ASADA have this evidence, or they want to find out what happened. We have McDipshit on the record stating that he wants to know what happened at our club.
Why is every action they make and even the AFL (if the rumors of them pushing for deals are real) in the complete opposite interest of us finding out what happened? Its an attempt to wrap this up with a bow never to be questioned or challenged. Players would be labeled as drug cheats and ASADA would have their scalp. Their would be no truth, no greater good. Just point scoring.
If the entire system is so broken that it appears that the only way anything ever happens is that deals are made then the whole thing needs to be torn down for team based codes and rebuilt. With proper legislation dictating how things would be handled, you know the way it should have been done previously but because of short sightedness we needed an absolute catastrophe before anything would change.

 

[rumply]

This is how I see it. Ill add to this that if players have taken a banned substance i would expect them to be hit with the a ban, there still better not be any deals.

The problem is however its becoming more and more apparant the whole system is flawed, not nessasarily ASADA themselves. Atm all parties are doing their best to operate within a flawed system. But ill pose this question to get people thinking, its one i use on people at work when the ASADA stuff comes up.

IF ASADA have this evidence, or they want to find out what happened. We have McDipshit on the record stating that he wants to know what happened at our club.
Why is every action they make and even the AFL (if the rumors of them pushing for deals are real) in the complete opposite interest of us finding out what happened? Its an attempt to wrap this up with a bow never to be questioned or challenged. Players would be labeled as drug cheats and ASADA would have their scalp. Their would be no truth, no greater good. Just point scoring.
If the entire system is so broken that it appears that the only way anything ever happens is that deals are made then the whole thing needs to be torn down for team based codes and rebuilt. With proper legislation dictating how things would be handled, you know the way it should have been done previously but because of short sightedness we needed an absolute catastrophe before anything would change.

Great post, only thing I would say is that I reckon trying to 'fix' something like this would be akin to trying to fix the MRP & that any new system looks good on paper but that's it's only once the thing is up & running for a while that we all see how ****ed up it all is.

I have zero faith we will ever see either operating in an acceptable manner.

 

[Jade]

I refuse to actually link it here, but did anyone see that pile of steaming s**t that Rita Pananhi put out yesterday? That was quite possibly the worst article I've seen in this debacle - and * me dead that is saying something.

It was full of errors, which in itself is laughable (* me, you're paid to do this but can't do a simple fact check?), but the scary part is people reading it and BELIEVING it. The slovenly masses are so used to swallowing whatever vomit inducing crap is shoved down their throats that they've actually stopped bothering to check whether or not the author of an article ACTUALLY knows what they are on about.

Here's a sample of Ritas musings:

1) Strict liability applies in this case. No it doesn't you ******* moron, strict liability only applies with an adverse analytical finding.

2) The players could have done a simple Google search to find out a substance was dodgy. And how exactly were they supposed to magically know to look for Thymosin Beta 4, when they were never informed they were receiving it? ******* idiot.

3) Ahmed Saad was less culpable than Essendon players. Guess what Rita you bloated sack of piss, THIS is where strict liability DOES apply. Imbecile.....

How the * as a nation have we gotten to a point where what used to be a profession of reporting the news is now a mind-numbingly stupid race to the bottom by some of the dullest, dumb as * imbeciles I've ever seen.

* you Australia, the stupidity of the populace makes me physically ******* sick.

 

[carnthedons]

I refuse to actually link it here, but did anyone see that pile of steaming s**t that Rita Pananhi put out yesterday? That was quite possibly the worst article I've seen in this debacle - and **** me dead that is saying something.

It was full of errors, which in itself is laughable (**** me, you're paid to do this but can't do a simple fact check?), but the scary part is people reading it and BELIEVING it. The slovenly masses are so used to swallowing whatever vomit inducing crap is shoved down their throats that they've actually stopped bothering to check whether or not the author of an article ACTUALLY knows what they are on about.

Here's a sample of Ritas musings:

1) Strict liability applies in this case. No it doesn't you ******* moron, strict liability only applies with an adverse analytical finding.

2) The players could have done a simple Google search to find out a substance was dodgy. And how exactly were they supposed to magically know to look for Thymosin Beta 4, when they were never informed they were receiving it? ******* idiot.

3) Ahmed Saad was less culpable than Essendon players. Guess what Rita you bloated sack of piss, THIS is where strict liability DOES apply. Imbecile.....

How the **** as a nation have we gotten to a point where what used to be a profession of reporting the news is now a mind-numbingly stupid race to the bottom by some of the dullest, dumb as **** imbeciles I've ever seen.

**** you Australia, the stupidity of the populace makes me physically ******* sick.

Agreed.

 

[rumply]

I refuse to actually link it here, but did anyone see that pile of steaming s**t that Rita Pananhi put out yesterday? That was quite possibly the worst article I've seen in this debacle - and **** me dead that is saying something.

It was full of errors, which in itself is laughable (**** me, you're paid to do this but can't do a simple fact check?), but the scary part is people reading it and BELIEVING it. The slovenly masses are so used to swallowing whatever vomit inducing crap is shoved down their throats that they've actually stopped bothering to check whether or not the author of an article ACTUALLY knows what they are on about.

Here's a sample of Ritas musings:

1) Strict liability applies in this case. No it doesn't you ******* moron, strict liability only applies with an adverse analytical finding.

2) The players could have done a simple Google search to find out a substance was dodgy. And how exactly were they supposed to magically know to look for Thymosin Beta 4, when they were never informed they were receiving it? ******* idiot.

3) Ahmed Saad was less culpable than Essendon players. Guess what Rita you bloated sack of piss, THIS is where strict liability DOES apply. Imbecile.....

How the **** as a nation have we gotten to a point where what used to be a profession of reporting the news is now a mind-numbingly stupid race to the bottom by some of the dullest, dumb as **** imbeciles I've ever seen.

**** you Australia, the stupidity of the populace makes me physically ******* sick.

There has been a bit of fuss made on twitter about the amount of personal abuse Rita copped after that article, got nothing to say about that, if you dip your toe in boiling water what do you think is going to happen?

Didnt read it after I saw she was the author as Rita is simply a planted troll & loving her time rolling around in s**t with the rest of her ilk.