Collingwood’s Josh Thomas, Lachie Keeffe accept two-year bans for taking banned drug clenbuterol

Remove this Banner Ad

Log in to remove this ad.

DapperJong said:
Are they not on trial for allegedly taking TB4? For which there were tests done? How is it not an element?

Are you saying it wouldn't have been considered by the tribunal at all?
Click to expand...

YES. It's not an element of the offence they were charged with.

Like ASADA don't need to prove they killed anyone either.

The offence they have been charged with is 'use or ATTEMPTED use'.

Please explain how one can register a positive drug test when one only attempts to use a drug?

ASADA don't need to even prove your blokes used TB4 for them to be found guilty.

I am ******* sick of repeating this for like over a year now.
 
Blueballs38 said:
They just don't get it! It's like trying to explain calculus to a 5 year old.

One more time peeps .....

There is no test for TB4! How can u get a positive test for a substance that although banned cannot be tested for?

So where does that leave ASADA ... Oh I know building a water tight circumstantial case ... which they have done.

How EFC supporters keep on trotting out this line .... but but but there is no positive test so we must be innocent.

THERE IS NO TEST!

Get it through your heads.
Click to expand...
Except CEB609Hu. So you're kinda wrong there.
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

blue harvest said:
2 players test positive, ASADA bust them and call Collingwood, no reason to investigate the whole club.
Essendon self reported their whole club's supplement regime, that's why the club got investigated.
Click to expand...
Why is two players returning positive tests "no reason to investigate the whole club"?

Surely it is very good reason to do so.

Why are Collingwood not demanding an investigation to learn if this apparent doping was not more widespread?
 
Malifice said:
YES. It's not an element of the offence they were charged with.

Like ASADA don't need to prove they killed anyone either.

The offence they have been charged with is 'use or ATTEMPTED use'.

Please explain how one can register a positive drug test when one only attempts to use a drug?

ASADA don't need to even prove your blokes used TB4 for them to be found guilty.

I am ******* sick of repeating this for like over a year now.
Click to expand...

It was an honest question bloke.
You need to chill.
 
BF Tiger said:
So Collingwood wait for tomorrow's Essendon verdict and then either go with the same defence or something different. Does that sum it up?
Click to expand...

Nah, their players will be charged with a different offence. A positive sample is enough to condemn them. Other circumstantial evidence is not required.

People - there are different offences in the AFL Doping code - Returning a positive test is one offence. Trafficking is another. Use or attempted use a third. Each of those offences has different elements that have to be proved. You don't need a 'positive test' for a charge of 'trafficking' or 'supply' or 'use or attempted use'. You do need a positive test for the charge of 'return a positive sample'. That's about the only one you do need a positive test for actually.

Positive tests are irrelevant to the essendon 34 who were charged with 'attempted use'. Positive tests are entirely relevant to Crowley and the Collingwood pair though as they were charged with 'return a positive sample'. The only element needed to be proved in that case is 'here is the test results'.

If people can't see why 'attempted use' doesn't require a positive blood sample then I totaly give up. It's like why the charge of 'attempted murder' doesn't require the prosecution to prove you murdered anyone.

Is this clear now?
 
Last edited:
Armchair Critic said:
The only issue is that you are wrong

http://s.afl.com.au/staticfile/AFL Tenant/AFL/Files/AFL Anti-Doping Code 2015 FINAL.pdf

25. 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.
Click to expand...
That's changed then, it used to be 2 or more.
 
JD11 said:
Why is two players returning positive tests "no reason to investigate the whole club"?

Surely it is very good reason to do so.

Why are Collingwood not demanding an investigation to learn if this apparent doping was not more widespread?
Click to expand...

If you were Peter Moody and you knew your vet was doping your whole stable yet only 1 got done after Raceday, would you then implore the RVL to do the run through his operations? Millions upon millions Millions of dollars worth of investments there mate, collingwood will be wanting ASADA to stay away from them as much as possible.
 
Theories aplenty
A. collingwood have created a diversion to save hird, in return for new sponsor japan post
B. hird supplied meat to the collingwood family bbq
C. tanya injected the boys
 
Has there been any suggestion that ASADAS have been tipped off about this? Is it usual for two players who live together to be chosen to be tested at the same time? It would make sense from a convenience point of view, but I would have thought that players would be selected randomly from a group, and to have two players who live together chosen to be tested at the same time seems a little more than a coincidence.

Someone posted a message about a Qld bikie gang drug bust earlier this month which included Clenbuterol and suggested that because these two players are from Qld, there may be a link.

The so-called 'blackest day in sport' was a joint investigation between ASADA and the ACC and specifically mentioned the possibility of bikie links to sports stars being problematic. Maybe the ACC gave ASADA a heads up on this.

(It could be that these blokes ate some dodgy beef together, too, but that is a bit of a longshot IMO.)
 
JD11 said:
Why is two players returning positive tests "no reason to investigate the whole club"?

Surely it is very good reason to do so.

Why are Collingwood not demanding an investigation to learn if this apparent doping was not more widespread?
Click to expand...
No club is going to demand an investigation, unless they are about to be busted and think that it will help their cause.
 
markm106 said:
I think a cyclist got off as he ate a steak. But could be hard to prove.
Click to expand...


Luckily for Collingwood, Tarkyn Lockyer took a photo of Lachie eating a steak that pre-dates the alleged offence....


steak_zpsx7lu7v3m.jpg
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

A
This is the way to treat drug cheats
2
Replies
25
Views
1K
PoppedCorn
PoppedCorn
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