A new Dank interview

Remove this Banner Ad

Status
Not open for further replies.
Jeez it's a Steve "Love-In".

This slimy prick could sell ice to eskimos.

* me. They actually asked DANK how the supplement regulations should be set up in an ideal world!!!

My God, we should all just bow down to his "pharmacological knowledge" which he continually says is better than everybody else.

Still sounds like his ambitions exceeded his own estimations of his expetise.
 
Last edited:

Log in to remove this ad.

Began with the usual stuff about sorting it out in a proper forum - not the kangaroo court of the AFL Tribunal. Lets see, would that be the tribunal your contract to work at an AFL club would have stipulated that you had to abide by?

His points:

Reckoned "more than six or seven people" knew the full truth at Essendon.

Clear, concise and full detailed records were left behind at Essendon.

Lack of records myth is a fabrication by the AFL and ASADA.

Players knew EXACTLY what they were getting and why and if they didn't they weren't allowed to leave until they did.

Robson was the best perfomance manager in football "by a mile", and Hird will eventually be known as "one of the greatest coaches" (can't rmeember exact words there) and that if eveyone had not stuck their noses in Essendon would have produced "7, 8 or 9 premierships with these two".


Most of the rest was how "things should be" and how the sports all refuse to progress..... Eg they don't drive Formula One cars each weekend using Unleaded91 out of the petrol pump. No Steve, they use WHAT'S WITHIN THE RULES - NOT WHAT THEY WOULD LIKE

Rather than "interesting" it was a total suck-up interview about how Dank had been so hard done by by the big bad AFL and ASADA and then how they would like to be able to use all this new stuff without all these sporting admin people getting in their way.

Weak as piss interview yet again.
 
Last edited:
Mostly the usual crap, but some interesting stuff in there. Moderators were ludicrously sycophantic. As usual with Dank, the things he didn't say were more enlightening than the things he did.

Just some of the things I picked out, not a full summary of what was said:

  • Said that the records kept at Essendon were actually quite thorough and that the governance was fine. Says more than "six" people at the club know exactly what happened.
  • On why he hasn't done more to defend himself, he said that he's not going to submit himself to a "kangaroo court" and will only defend himself in court. "When they get to court they have to produce the evidence... It's okay for them to sit there and say I've done a, b, c and d. Well boys, you have to go to court to prove that I did a, b, c and d."
  • ASADA first contacted Dank 6-7 weeks after the story first broke. Dank put them immediately onto his barrister and "won't repeat [his] barrister's words".
  • Says he's already started litigation, and that the "appropriate forum" for the airing of evidence will be in the form of lawsuits. Will take legal action against AFL and NRL. Believes that there were leaks in the investigation that damaged his reputation, and believes he knows where those leaks came from (but didn't elaborate further).
  • The substances used at Essendon were "well and truly part of the established landscape in terms of medicine in this country and overseas. All of these substances have some sort of approval somewhere in the world for use...." Says he would do it again. "There was nothing that we did that we didn't have permission for. There was nothing that we did that no-one [sic] had any issues with. And we certainly didn't do anything that wasn't discussed well throughout the club infrastucture."
  • Says he has (had?) all the records and that he "left them at Essendon football club. It was certainly left on the club intranet. And those records recorded every player on a spreadsheet, for every day, every week, every month of the season." Says this has been verified by an external body, and that you'd "have to ask the club" what happened to them and "why they've [including the AFL] tried to perpetrate the lie that these records don't exist".
  • When asked about whether it was necessary for the players to know what they were taking: "In the early days, when we started whatever we were doing... such was the degree of dilligency... [that] Dean [Robinson] would actually sit in the office with me and any player who could not say what we were giving them, what they were taking it for, what the benefit was, they weren't allowed to take it or have it until sat down and I went through that again. Dean was very, very rigid about that in the first couple of months that we started, until players were very, very coherent with that information."
  • Said the program was about delivering that extra "5 or 6 percent". "It was never set up to be performance enhancement. It was... management of tissue loads and tissue stress.... The guys down in Canberra and the guys down in AFL House would have you think that there was some Lance Armstrong type moment in terms of what we were running.... If I was doing something that was performance enhancement, it certainly wouldn't represent the program that was undertaken at EFC." Went on for ages and ages justifying the place of pharmacology in sport - says players need supplements and criticises the "stupidity" of the codes for not understanding what the medical science teams are trying to do. Won't bother quoting any of that crap.
  • When asked about the future of the players: "I have no doubt that the AFL will do whatever they can to imply that they've done something wrong and hence to suspend them - I think that's what they're trying to do.... If it was as systematic and as deep as they're trying to imply, surely the guys should get two years and not two weeks, is that a fair call?"
  • Predictably, did not directly address TB4 nor was he asked about it. It must be a condition of him doing these interviews. Pretty damning when he could say something as simple as "I didn't give the players TB4."
 
Most interesting part was Dank being asked about off label substances - Dank replied that all substances had regulatory approval somewhere in the world - Which brings me to my hobby horse - WADA approving substances if they have regulatory approval in one country - This could create a world of pain.
 
I've come accrossa few shifty ferkers in my time. Two things I learnt is never trust a bloke who starts every second sentence with "to be honest..." and every third sentence with the other person's name.

"Look John, to be honest, we never gave the players performance enhancing drugs it was all about tissue repair...

How Albert got scammed by this clown is unfathomable. I now understand how Alberts QC conned him into two unwinable and expensive court appeals. He's must be totally green and a sucker for a fast talking 'expert'.
 
Doesn't management of tissue loads and stress enable players to train longer and harder - which in turn enhances their performance?
Dank certainly has a different way of looking at his practices. I'm not so sure the AFL would see it as just 'tissue management'.
 
yaco55 said:
Most interesting part was Dank being asked about off label substances - Dank replied that all substances had regulatory approval somewhere in the world - Which brings me to my hobby horse - WADA approving substances if they have regulatory approval in one country - This could create a world of pain.
Click to expand...
He was mostly talking about the harmfulness of the substances to the players, though. And something having approval in the US doesn't make it OK to use in Australia.

Steroids and HGH are used extensively in medicine, but it doesn't make them OK to use by athletes for non medical reasons.
 
Soft ball interview. They set the tone right from the start, the host and Dank slamming ASADA, I mean, the Kangaroo Court, and then the other chap 'really feeling for Dank' and what he's been through. (No mention of how the players must be feeling, mind you.)

Oh, what's that? You left all the records at Essendon? But what about the confusion over which "Thymosin" was used? Surely you had a receipt still? Oh, when ASADA came knocking you put your lawyer onto them. Well done mate. * the players, but that's two fingers up to the establishment.

What a guy. :rolleyes:
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

Who was this interview for? The six or seven people who knew the full extent and details of the program?

We could reasonably assume that would include Hird, Robinson, and Cochran. Who else - the CEO, the Doc, a board member or two??

As things are getting to the pointy end of proceedings, it looks to me like another gentle shot across the bows.
 
This was interesting:

When asked about the future of the players: "I have no doubt that the AFL will do whatever they can to imply that they've done something wrong and hence to suspend them - I think that's what they're trying to do.... If it was as systematic and as deep as they're trying to imply, surely the guys should get two years and not two weeks, is that a fair call?"
 
Satan said:
The last thing dank wants is to appear in normal court.Cross examination would be his worst nightmare
Click to expand...

But it seems he believes he is smarter than anyone else, so he wouldn't rationally think, like you or I might, that he could be in trouble under a cross examination.
 
yaco55 said:
Most interesting part was Dank being asked about off label substances - Dank replied that all substances had regulatory approval somewhere in the world - Which brings me to my hobby horse - WADA approving substances if they have regulatory approval in one country - This could create a world of pain.
Click to expand...
So where was AOD approved then? Hutt River Province?
 
Satan said:
The last thing dank wants is to appear in normal court.Cross examination would be his worst nightmare
Click to expand...
I thought that. This silly interview was clearly conducted around agreed guidelines with Dank - or more likely a lawyer. Life gets trickier when you get down to the TB4, which he avoided today.

I love the bit about getting the extra 5 or 6 percent, but not about performance enhancement. How much percentage improvement does make it performance enhancing Steve? 7 percent? 8 percent too high?

Erm .... he does appear to be gunning at least in part for someone at Essendon. There were complete records and he left them at Essendon? Oh dear - not the line Essendon has been rolling with. Also, this is not quite consistent with the drivel of his last interview where he claimed he had evidence that would clear the players, but (for no adequately explained reason) wasn't going to give ASADA the evidence or appear before the Tribunal.

So, with the records, either:

1. They exist and are complete but Steve has them (but why? Go figure)
2. They don't exist in a sufficiently professional and coherent form to establish who was given what and when (as per the AFLs findings on governance and record keeping)
3. They exist and are complete and ASADA & AFL sabotaged them for, dunno, random reasons or a spot of entertainment.
4. They exist and are complete and remained with Essendon (here it gets tricky because it starts to look like Essendon suppressed or destroyed them. Which means the AFL penalties already incurred are nothing compared to the damage of the information gathered about the supplements program).
5. Steve is full of it.

On the whole, 5 seems likely, which is why it is frustrating and probably fruitless to pay any attention to anything that this chowderheads invents.

And I still think he naturally sounds dodgy. Christ only knows how Hird manages to get himself tangled up with such a bunch of obvious sleazes.
 
mxett said:
wonder how he will sleep at night if 34 players get a season or two ban as a direct result of his refusal to be part of a 'kangaroo court'. Seems a very harsh penalty to pay for Dank's 'issues' with the AFL and ASADA's process
Click to expand...

Do you think there is Cronulla induce insomnia?

Or will another bunch of players he was going to save will reflect cumulative impacts?

Has yet to demonstrate to me the necessary conscience to lead to such an outcome.



(yes, I understand rhetorical questions)
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

The_Wookie
The Andrew Wilkie Allegations
Replies
17
Views
668
pattymalone00
pattymalone00
The_Wookie
Play Nice Happy 10th Anniversary (of the Essendon/ASADA Saga)
2
Replies
30
Views
3K
blackcat
blackcat
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