Saga should be over soon.

[BlueWorld]

ASADA have enough proof for a RoF for possible use.

They don't have enough proof to convince a tribunal.

They won't be speeding up the process, they're trying to get players to take a deal.

Really. And you would know that. It took them 2 days to get deals for Cronulla. Where are the deals?

 

[Gigantor]

There would be if they feel the need to actually get something else out of the blackest day in Australian sport.

Remember everyone needs to feel they have won here, a penalty for Essendon, ASADA need to look like it has a win, the football public who have invested a lot in this, this board is representative of that and the AFL who need to have a decent team on the paddock but look like they are hard on drugs.

Not a lot of people are going to be happy after the final washup.

I agree here
it reminds me of a post I shared with someone a couple of weeks ago
I said that at the very end (should an end arrive in our lifetime)
everyone on this board will be able to say: I told you so
a bit like absolutely everyone thinks they go the AOD situation right (which is a little bit bizarre, but there you go)

 

[Gigantor]

I agree with this. Apparently Mike Fitzpatrick made a statement that Essendon itself would not be banned under any circumstances.
I don't think he had the right to make a blanket statement like that, if the AFL is to follow the WADA rules.

Cycling teams get banned from competition as a result of multiple drug cheats in the one team. Why not Essendon? Yes it will affect the competition. Essendon's actions have already affected the competition. The AFL should do what is right. Suspend Essendon for at least one season, and place lifetime bans on all those who should have been protecting the players, and not experimenting on them.

yes, he actually does have the right to make the statement:

22. CONSEQUENCES TO TEAMS

Where more than one Player from a Club has been notified of a possible Anti Doping
Rule Violation in any one season, the Club shall be subject to Target Testing for the
remainder of the season. If more than one Player in a Club is found to have
committed an Anti Doping Rule Violation during a season, the Club may be subject to
sanctions to be determined, in their absolute discretion, by the Commission.​

 

[andrewb]

That 4 days' expedience matters more than a month wasting a judge's time.

Please. We all know a desperate bs ploy when we see one.

I will be proven correct in time. They will stall at any opportunity from herein. Players called their bluff by requesting an expedited tribunal hearing.

 

[Gigantor]

I tell you what I do know for certain, and that is that asada changed its tact after the federal court overruled an AAT decision which meant that asada now only needs a 'possible doping' charge to put someone on the RoF.

Once you're on the register of findings, under the wada code you can be provisionally suspended until you are proven not guilty.

This was what the NRL players were threatened with and the primary reason that they rolled. Three weeks penalty in season where it didn't matter for them was vastly preferable to being put in provisional suspension limbo until this tortoise like organization gets off its arse and does something.

Unfortunately for asada, it is the afl that dictates provisional suspension under the afl anti doping code and that's why we dropped clothier and Gillon from the subpoena list for the case and little was seen entertaining Fitzpatrick in the weeks leading up to the court date.

Without a provisional suspension to blackmail players they will look a bit silly when they fail at the tribunal. Watch what happens.. They are going to draaaaaaaaag this out now and hope that the afl caves due to the brand damage aspect.

that's an interesting point
one I have not seen made here
I note that many on this board often put forward their understanding of how ADA's, schemes and codes work in a generic sense
they often neglect some of the nuanced language to be found in the AFL anti-doping code
it helps explain why the ASADA was able to so easily lead the NRL players towards deals and why the EFC players are unlikely to budge
with an unwillingness on the part of ASADA to show the evidence to Dillon, despite numerous requests,
I wonder where all of this is leading

 

[Gigantor]

I will be proven correct in time. They will stall at any opportunity from herein. Players called their bluff by requesting an expedited tribunal hearing.

I think this view has merit
we now have four months of ASADA being unwilling to show the evidence to the AFL, despite the fact that the AFL needs to see the evidence because they are the only ones who can issue infraction notices, and will not do so automatically following ADRVP deliberations
it helps support the view that McDevitt is chasing deals, and is only interested in deals, there appears to be very little interest in testing the evidence in the tribunal

 

[BlueWorld]

I will be proven correct in time. They will stall at any opportunity from herein. Players called their bluff by requesting an expedited tribunal hearing.

ASADA don't have any control over the tribunal hearing. That's up to the AFL. Wrong.

 

[Gigantor]

Are you suggesting the AFL might believe its in their best interest to getting this saga behind it by letting Essendon off, i.e not holding it responsible for doping?

no, I don't think that is what he is suggesting
ASADA was able to lead the NRL players to deals because of differences in the wording between the two codes vis-a-vis suspensions pending tribunal hearings
so ASADA entered the Cronulla fray with confidence that the players would accept deals with tiny suspensions rather than risk lengthier suspensions pending tribunal hearings, the players effectively gained by accepting deals
that situation does not exist in the AFL, so ASADA has less leverage leading the players towards their preferred outcome, that is, deals
we can say that with confidence because ASADA has shown a reluctance to forward the evidence to the AFL, and the only way infraction notices can be issued is if the AFL sees the evidence
why would ASADA be reluctant to forward the evidence to the AFL?
because they have a preference for a deal rather than testing the evidence in the tribunal

 

[andrewb]

ASADA don't have any control over the tribunal hearing. That's up to the AFL. Wrong.

And which part do ASADA control in those timelines? The ones that they are stalling on now.
Oh goodness, I'm right!

 

[Gigantor]

ASADA don't have any control over the tribunal hearing. That's up to the AFL. Wrong.

correct, but the only way the AFL can proceed to the tribunal stage is if ASADA supply the evidence (which they are reluctant to do, and have been reluctant for 4 months now)

 

[fabulousphil]

Really. And you would know that. It took them 2 days to get deals for Cronulla. Where are the deals?

Intersting that you are back, got a link yet for your below statement ? .........................

Even though McD has stated that EFC will not get the same leniency as Cronulla.

Facts are, he or ASADA said no such thing, you just made it up ?.

Several Rugby league columnists have stated it, but they wouldn't have a agenda, would they ?.

 

[chelseacarlton]

And which part do ASADA control in those timelines? The ones that they are stalling on now.
Oh goodness, I'm right!

Not stalling,following process.
Something your club took them and the affal to the Fed court for.
Correct procedure,Asada is following it.
Pity some others can't.

 

[andrewb]

Not stalling,following process.
Something your club took them and the affal to the Fed court for.
Correct procedure,Asada is following it.
Pity some others can't.

We'll wait and see what happens then, eh?

 

[Ancient Tiger]

Sorry, that is just not true and actually a remnant of one of memes going around. They did have records but tried to stick to the confidentiality agreement. I believe that ASADA also stuck to the confidentiality agreement. It all came from AFL house at first believing that actual doping had occured, prior to any investigation, and trying to manufacture an outcome where it was all about bad governance with an inexperienced coach and rouge "scientist" at the centre of it all. There is the bad guy and the fool who has to take the fall for it. The fact that he was a club legend satisfied the blood lust of supporters of bitter rivals.

This whole thing started with the Ziggy report.

Why would the club go along with this? Because Evans was very close to Demetriou and with the deal guaranteed with ASADA there would be the punishments that we saw last year, except Hird would have been 100% gone, and that was it. The club would have moved on. I'd also hazard a guess that whatever fine the club was to receive would be a little less than what the AFL would then go on to invest into the HPC .... which would be justified somehow by having it as the Vic base for AIS, or something similar. This is pretty much the same way organised crime muscle into businesses run by a degenerate gambler or father of a drug addict.

I suggest you read carefully through the revelations in the court case that relate specifically towards the construction of the interim report. Clearly there are records because the AFL use injection numbers. Of course they decided to add vitamin injections to count in a deliberately ambiguous manner so that it would be misconstrued as peptide injections. They also added every supplement and drug ordered by Dank through Charters for both his business and Essendon as the one thing.

I'm not saying you are wrong, but that is a very interesting conspiracy theory. I know anything is possible but having the AFL trying to falsely accuse a big club by putting in confusing evidence, would just hurt itself more. Add the fact that Vlad and his whole family are strong bomber supporters and that he tried to assist them by tipping them off goes against some of what you are saying.
I think you are conveniently ignoring the other possibility. This is that the AFL knew more about what had been happening at Essendon than the club realized. We have clues that this is the case with Vlad warning Hird to stay away from peptides in 2011. They may have been aware that Dank was delving into stronger S2 drugs such as GHRP 2&6. He certainly had a history of using them elsewhere. This goes in keeping with my own experience and what I had heard at the time (March 2012) and still have an email from that time stating that Dank himself stated that these peptides were being administered to Essendon. The person he told this to has testified under oath to ASADA.
So the AFL knowing what they did and knowing there may be a very difficult situation unfolding with the ACC and ASADA tried to manufacture a soft landing for Essendon. This is where things were headed with Evans and Vlad. But Hird did not want to go and things went haywire forcing Evans to resign and the whole manufactured ending was destroyed. Part of the problem is ASADA know about other S2 drugs but their paper trail was well and truly destroyed. Their only hope was "thymosin" and there was some evidence coupled with the consents that they pinned their case on. I actually doubt they have enough to convict. But that doesn't mean they are innocent.
So there you go. One theory can be easily be replaced with another!

 

[Tomjas00]

No, but I do know that the afl will not provisionally suspend players for possible doping, which means that the players can challenge asada's case.

If asada were fair dinkum they'd bring this case forward, nothing to lose by acquiescing to a request for expedience.

Why would a drug agency do a suspected doper a favour?

 

[HoopsAhoy]

I reckon the players will get a backdated 1 year penalty, perhaps miss up to 8 weeks of the 2015 season.

If they get that - when compared to Ahmed Saad's penalty for what he did and admitted on one game day - then I'd have to agree with you that it is corrupt top to bottom.

 

[Gigantor]

Not stalling,following process.
Something your club took them and the affal to the Fed court for.
Correct procedure,Asada is following it.
Pity some others can't.

certainly McDevitt is able to put his hand on his heart and say he is following process
but as has been pointed out
1/ the NAD Scheme itself gives McDevitt the discretion to push things through a little bit quicker than the stated time period
2/ the NAD Scheme is silent on when the AFL should see the evidence, but under the AFL anti-doping code (also part of the "process"), infraction notices cannot be issued unless the AFL has reviewed the evidence

putting these two points together, looking at the events of the past four months, noting some of the silly bluster from McDevitt in the media the last few days, one gets the impression that ASADA is not interested in testing this evidence in the tribunal

 

[Gigantor]

Why would a drug agency do a suspected doper a favour?

seeing that we can't get to the tribunal stage unless the AFL sees the evidence, how is providing the evidence to the AFL a case of doing a player a favour?

 

[chelseacarlton]

We'll wait and see what happens then, eh?

Exciting isn't it!?.

 

[Gigantor]

The way I see it is like this:

The SCN phase is the "we think you might have done something wrong, what say you?"
The ADVRP phase is the " well there is a prima facie possibility something wrong was done and we think that formal charges should be laid (Register of Findings).
At this point players can go to AAT to say they didn get a fair

If they get that - when compared to Ahmed Saad's penalty for what he did and admitted on one game day - then I'd have to agree with you that it is corrupt top to bottom.

it's becoming increasingly clear that the chances of the players copping even an 8 week suspension in 2015 are exceedingly slim
it's clear now that ASADA has no intention of testing the evidence in the tribunal
their actions since June has been consistent with an agency keen to look for deals (despite the bluster)
and this will bring us back to a cronulla type scneario or nothing

 

[andrewb]

certainly McDevitt is able to put his hand on his heart and say he is following process
but as has been pointed out
1/ the NAD Scheme itself gives McDevitt the discretion to push things through a little bit quicker than the stated time period
2/ the NAD Scheme is silent on when the AFL should see the evidence, but under the AFL anti-doping code (also part of the "process"), infraction notices cannot be issued unless the AFL has reviewed the evidence

putting these two points together, looking at the events of the past four months, noting some of the silly bluster from McDevitt in the media the last few days, one gets the impression that ASADA is not interested in testing this evidence in the tribunal

100%. I believe they now also know that the AFL won't be provisionally suspending players, which takes all the ammunition they were going to use away from them.

Wilson (Gillon's mouthpiece) will start writing about how much the players deserve closure.

 

[chelseacarlton]

certainly McDevitt is able to put his hand on his heart and say he is following process
but as has been pointed out
1/ the NAD Scheme itself gives McDevitt the discretion to push things through a little bit quicker than the stated time period
2/ the NAD Scheme is silent on when the AFL should see the evidence, but under the AFL anti-doping code (also part of the "process"), infraction notices cannot be issued unless the AFL has reviewed the evidence

putting these two points together, looking at the events of the past four months, noting some of the silly bluster from McDevitt in the media the last few days, one gets the impression that ASADA is not interested in testing this evidence in the tribunal

Just wanting to cross each bridge as he walks along the correct procedural path,like any 'very good' authority should!.

 

[Gigantor]

100%. I believe they now also know that the AFL won't be provisionally suspending players, which takes all the ammunition they were going to use away from them.

Wilson (Gillon's mouthpiece) will start writing about how much the players deserve closure.

it's certainly starting to make a lot of sense
a few things didn't add up from the past 48 hours
why would ASADA not be trying get things to the tribunal?
ahh....because they have no interest in getting to the tribunal!!
not it starts to make sense

 

[Gigantor]

Just wanting to cross each bridge as he walks along the correct procedural path,like any 'very good' authority should!.

it's a fair enough response
but as a group, it's interesting to look at the events of the past 4 months, look at the public statements from the parties involved, and a slightly different picture emerges
certainly one worth debating on this forum (for those interested in a contest of ideas and real debate)

 

[Tomjas00]

seeing that we can't get to the tribunal stage unless the AFL sees the evidence, how is providing the evidence to the AFL a case of doing a player a favour?

Tribunal isn't the next stage so that's irrelevant