Discussion: Did the AFL Run the PED Program Itself?

[andrewb]

The OP is interesting but I think even the bloke who posted it reckons it's a bit farcical. What I will find interesting is those who want the judicial review. It's very difficult for people to hide in a judicial review.

So far, Hird and Dank, i.e. the two people who have suffered the most reputational damage in the process, are asking for the ability to go on the public record in a context independent of what Dank refers to as a kangaroo court. If I don't see the AFL and ASADA saying that they would welcome a review then I'll be very suspicious.

 

[General Soreness]

Do they use the words 'amino acids' often?

Not once.

 

[Akka76]

The OP is interesting but I think even the bloke who posted it reckons it's a bit farcical. What I will find interesting is those who want the judicial review. It's very difficult for people to hide in a judicial review.

So far, Hird and Dank, i.e. the two people who have suffered the most reputational damage in the process, are asking for the ability to go on the public record in a context independent of what Dank refers to as a kangaroo court. If I don't see the AFL and ASADA saying that they would welcome a review then I'll be very suspicious.

Haven't seen the likes of Fitzpatrick, Evans and Demetriou ask for it (a Judicial Review), so you may be onto something....

 

[Proper Gander]

I've read some BS over the past three years in regards to this saga but this is a whole new level of ******ation

Careful there Catta. Fall too far down the ladder, and the Cats board will be churning out this stuff as a daily distraction.

The Melbourne board doesn't have anything like this, but that was because the corrupt AFL forced the Demons to tank by controlling their minds - all so that we would be forced to take no 1 draft pick Jack Watts as a kind of counter-irritant from losing everything.

 

[GreatBradScott]

Honestly? It wouldn't surprise me what the AFL's done behind closed doors over the years. But I think this is stretching the realm of possibility a bit too far.

 

[Art Corvelay]

Ha! Cute Pic…..but even I think the theory raised is worth a look……. The AFL after all have done everything in their power to shut this case down. WADA is going to take them out of the country to prosecute (most likely).

Of course they have, because having:

a) a convicted drug cheating club is not a good look for your corporate sponsors & parents deciding between soccer and Aussie rules for their kids
b) Having one of the biggest clubs suspended does not help revenue

 

[Akka76]

Got to love 'for discussion purposes only'

Dammit! I was halfway through sending this to Vicpol! Discussion my arse! Heads must roll, friend. REAL Heads! The kind that sit on shoulders. Corrupt shoulders of the AFL!!! And I mean REAL rolling!!!

I hate myself for doing this, but someone must.

Akka76, mate, here - just for you - is a picture of a rabbit with a pancake on its head:

"For research purposes" was good enough for Dank and Charter to do what they did:

http://www.afl.com.au/news/2014-12-03/i-wont-give-evidence

Charter said Dank asked him to buy banned peptide Thymosin beta-4, but said he didn't know which of Dank's clients were going to use it.
He gave the peptides to Alavi.
"I made it clear when I provided the Thymosin beta-4 it was for research purposes only, not for human use," he said

 

[ZergMinion]

yes, good point, why don't I spend time rebutting ludicrous conspiracy theories? I'll get it done after I've spend a couple of hours banging my head on the wall explaining to 9-11 truthers why they are wrong

Google "no planers" if you want a really good laugh. Even 9-11 truthers find those guys embarrassing.

 

[Akka76]

Will the chief come over the top on this thread ?

If the thread is closed on no valid grounds, you should be more concerned about Freedom of Speech-type provisions that the Essendon Football Club and/or the AFL.

 

[Tiger2709]

Doesn't he realise they can read his thoughts, cover your head damn it.

 

[Proper Gander]

If the thread is closed on no valid grounds, you should be more concerned about Freedom of Speech-type provisions that the Essendon Football Club and/or the AFL.

OK.

What about if it is closed on valid grounds?

(I hope it isn't - best thread in a while now)

 

[Akka76]

What valid grounds are there to close it?

 

[Ned_Flanders]

This is perhaps the most stupid idea I've read on this board since the Norf idea that should get the remains of the efc list and Tullamarine because efc took their zone back in 1907

 

[peppy la pew]

TLDR; but what a fantastic thread title

 

[TaylorMade]

I think the OP is onto something here.

Do we still have Google detectives to investigate this further?

 

[jenny61_99]

We're not in Kansas anymore toto!

 

[Jobe Watson]

Is OP the same guy who had all the conspiracy theories about Bomber Thompson's real estate deals?

 

[General Soreness]

What valid grounds are there to close it?

See my post at #8: the fact that the report you cite has nothing to do with the claims the argument is making is one good reason. If you can't bother to check your sources to make sure they actually do what you say they do there's diminished reason to trust the rest of the argument.

 

[Akka76]

See my post at #8: the fact that the report you cite has nothing to do with the claims the argument is making is one good reason. If you can't bother to check your sources to make sure they actually do what you say they do there's diminished reason to trust the rest of the argument.

All that does is give you a right to "not agree" with the argument, it doesn't give anyone the right to shut down the whole discussion though. That's Nazi Germany type stuff.

 

[Lance Uppercut]

Godwins this early in the day

 

[Proper Gander]

That's Nazi Germany type stuff.

Hmmmm...

uhoh

 

[General Soreness]

All that does is give you a right to "not agree" with the argument, it doesn't give anyone the right to shut down the whole discussion though. That's Nazi Germany type stuff.

Just because you can make a grammatically and logically sound collection of sentences that doesn't mean you've made an argument.

If you're going to defend the argument, try avoiding ad hominems and try to defend the material under question. I've shown that the Injury Report has nothing to do with the claims you're making - it's up to you to show it does, but I don't think you can. If you can't defend your premises there's no way the argument is going to stand up. This isn't a case of not agreeing with the argument, it's a matter of the OP failing to present anything like a convincing argument in the first place. This isn't Nazi Germany stuff, people have been applying this standard for thousands of years.

 

[peppy la pew]

This is perhaps the most stupid idea I've read on this board since the Norf idea that should get the remains of the efc list and Tullamarine because efc took their zone back in 1907

That has some merit though

 

[Akka76]

Just because you can make a grammatically and logically sound collection of sentences that doesn't mean you've made an argument.

If you're going to defend the argument, try avoiding ad hominems and try to defend the material under question. I've shown that the Injury Report has nothing to do with the claims you're making - it's up to you to show it does, but I don't think you can. If you can't defend your premises there's no way the argument is going to stand up. This isn't a case of not agreeing with the argument, it's a matter of the OP failing to present anything like a convincing argument in the first place. This isn't Nazi Germany stuff, people have been applying this standard for thousands of years.

That’s great, you’ve offered a counter argument to what was posted (which is not my handiwork by the way, I pinched it from somewhere else).

My main concern was the whole thread being shut down for “not valid” reasons.

It’s OK mate, you can argue with the OP, who’s on another forum.

 

[Chameleon75]

That’s great, you’ve offered a counter argument to what was posted (which is not my handiwork by the way, I pinched it from somewhere else).

My main concern was the whole thread being shut down for “not valid” reasons.

It’s OK mate, you can argue with the OP, who’s on another forum.

so are you now backing away from the hypothesis you made in your op?