Peptides! *The * Dopers: come smell the bull****! ESSENDON FANS NOT WANTED

[rdhopkins2]

I don't think you get to come here and post that you think something is a load of crap or fantasy, mate.

Our posters certainly don't get that opportunity on your board.

This is our board and sanctuary away from Bomber posters who are impartial, compromised and smug in their eagerness to be completely ignorant as to what happened at Essendon in 2012.

I welcome discussion but if our guys are getting carded on the Essendon board, you can't expect to have much of a say on this board, Lance.

Don't card him IMO but Lance it 's probably best to stick to your own board.

 

[savagelunchbox]

Have a read of this, people.

It raises plenty of questions.


http://www.bigfooty.com/forum/threads/bomber-thompsons-aod-comments.1092035/page-7

Surprise, surprise, look who is in there clutching at the shortest of straws taking the smallest of molehills and trying to turn it into a mountain to make all of it seem lacking in credibility.

For someone who used to be one of the respected, he's well and truly turned the corner. It's so sad.

 

[Strapping Young Lad]

Remember this text to Hird from Danky-poos.
"We've financials ready for you and David for AOD project. These financials cover all possible revenue streams where the project applies."

 

[Off The Couch]

But will anyone have the gumption to investigate it and actually report on it.

I think not

 

[rdhopkins2]

Remember this text to Hird from Danky-poos.
"We've financials ready for you and David for AOD project. These financials cover all possible revenue streams where the project applies."

It's better than having a player DOA I suppose.

But seriously. If WADA don't get up on this case, you have to seriously be worried for the future of clean AFL (and world sport).

 

[Strapping Young Lad]

But will anyone have the gumption to investigate it and actually report on it.

I think not

Baker and McKenzie have, but yes, that'll be about it. No one else will touch it.

 

[QuietB]

Remember this text to Hird from Danky-poos.
"We've financials ready for you and David for AOD project. These financials cover all possible revenue streams where the project applies."

It's better than having a player DOA I suppose.

But seriously. If WADA don't get up on this case, you have to seriously be worried for the future of clean AFL (and world sport).

So, what about that free media we enjoy living in a democracy

 

[Brishawk]

This is true. They have their set of protocols to follow and under their rules they can say we have enough evidence to satisfy "us". And you are going to be charged because we believe we have a strong case.. So who is going to be charged , every one again I guess, that ASADA failed to get or AFL failed to get.

Again I'll say to you Wundo, because others fail to see it from me, I have never argued about guilt or innocence I 've argued about proving it, either way.

And I don't want to call or be called names either. So this is about the subject not anyone in particular.

So once again unless WADA have a much bigger wider range to gather more evidence or know things we don't , and will follow through with it, will that still not result in a long long process of appeals and civil court visits , if the club and the players maintain innocence, and proof gets harder and harder for the world body .
WADA may be able to say we have found you guilty , you are suspended , for life or years or whatever penalty they have available that is suitable.

That won't stop appeals , will it , I see this getting dragged out over years with nothing gained , I also see an opportunity for higher authorities to have a closer look at the AFL from the bottom to the top. So now for me let us have the reckoning with WADA and we can all see how right or wrong we are.

Its the chance to see openly inside the AFL and their secret little kingdom, its a chance to see if other clubs were involved , so it is a chance.

Perhaps the chance is good perhaps its a wrecker for the AFL, and will hurt all of us.

One thing more , if WADA are ready to go to extremes of time to prove the case, then speculation will end and who knows , Essendon may not exist after all.

I would welcome that , if Essendon are drug tacking cheats and it can be proved with out doubt they were.

AND THIS.
News this morning suggesting other clubs were involved with these sports medicos, so it goes on.

Well for a start, WADA need to appeal the AFL tribunal to CAS. They don't just decide Essendon are guilty.

Secondly, It appears a whole host of evidence was simply not considered and thus if they can successfully appeal the inclusion on the evidence and get a guilty verdict, the players are then suspended until a successful appeal is made. Appeals beyond CAS have to go to a single court in Switzerland where they largely only rule on procedural matters so overturning such cases is reasonably rare and Essendon and its players would have to consider whether it is worth the money. Also it provides a finite level to which this can be appealed.

Thirdly the application of reasonable comfort appears to be higher in this case than other cases. It is another area that is grounds for appeal that doesn't require any specific new evidence.

So basically WADA could be very successful without any additional evidence, they just need to get the evidence available included and ensure that reasonable comfort is set to the intended level not the level set by the AFL tribunal.

 

[Strapping Young Lad]

Brishawk is correct.

Essentially what the AFL tribunal did was question the authenticity of the TB4 from its initial point of contact with the supply chain(Charter).

They then used this as their reasoning to either overlook or query all further evidence from that point. Landing at "we can't be comfortably satisfied that the drug was TB4 so we didn't even attempt to look at whether it was injected into players".

 

[QuietB]

Brishawk is correct.

Essentially what the AFL tribunal did was question the authenticity of the TB4 from its initial point of contact with the supply chain(Charter).

They then used this as their reasoning to either overlook or query all further evidence from that point. Landing at "we can't be comfortably satisfied that the drug was TB4 so we didn't even attempt to look at whether it was injected into players".

And that is plainly ridiculous

 

[crazywildhorse]

Will the WADA really bother with this thing, it's not a huge worldwide sport, and by the time it all gets sorted out most of the players that have taken the drugs will be finished.

 

[Brishawk]

Have a read of this, people.

It raises plenty of questions.


http://www.bigfooty.com/forum/threads/bomber-thompsons-aod-comments.1092035/page-7

Ok that is quite disturbing!

Reminds me of this article . . .
http://www.smh.com.au/sport/game-changer-20130412-2hr82.html


And this one . . .
http://www.theage.com.au/afl/afl-ne...layers-secretly-passed-on-20130729-2qu51.html

So I guess we knew about this already.

 

[savagelunchbox]

Well for a start, WADA need to appeal the AFL tribunal to CAS. They don't just decide Essendon are guilty.

Secondly, It appears a whole host of evidence was simply not considered and thus if they can successfully appeal the inclusion on the evidence and get a guilty verdict, the players are then suspended until a successful appeal is made. Appeals beyond CAS have to go to a single court in Switzerland where they largely only rule on procedural matters so overturning such cases is reasonably rare and Essendon and its players would have to consider whether it is worth the money. Also it provides a finite level to which this can be appealed.

Thirdly the application of reasonable comfort appears to be higher in this case than other cases. It is another area that is grounds for appeal that doesn't require any specific new evidence.

So basically WADA could be very successful without any additional evidence, they just need to get the evidence available included and ensure that reasonable comfort is set to the intended level not the level set by the AFL tribunal.

Nailed it.

For those who TL;DR it, read it.

Ok that is quite disturbing!

Reminds me of this article . . .
http://www.smh.com.au/sport/game-changer-20130412-2hr82.html


And this one . . .
http://www.theage.com.au/afl/afl-ne...layers-secretly-passed-on-20130729-2qu51.html

So I guess we knew about this already.

The top link can be tied in what has been conveniently passed over by the media about what James Hird kept appealing to keep hushed from the public and keep his golden boy image intact along with Paul Little's reputation.

 

[threesixpio]

Well for a start, WADA need to appeal the AFL tribunal to CAS. They don't just decide Essendon are guilty.

Secondly, It appears a whole host of evidence was simply not considered and thus if they can successfully appeal the inclusion on the evidence and get a guilty verdict, the players are then suspended until a successful appeal is made. Appeals beyond CAS have to go to a single court in Switzerland where they largely only rule on procedural matters so overturning such cases is reasonably rare and Essendon and its players would have to consider whether it is worth the money. Also it provides a finite level to which this can be appealed.

Thirdly the application of reasonable comfort appears to be higher in this case than other cases. It is another area that is grounds for appeal that doesn't require any specific new evidence.

So basically WADA could be very successful without any additional evidence, they just need to get the evidence available included and ensure that reasonable comfort is set to the intended level not the level set by the AFL tribunal.

Additional evidence might be Charter and Alavi being present. Have been swayed that this is a possibility. This makes me VERY happy. Biggest problem for ASADA possibly overcome

 

[B&GBlood]

I find it difficult to believe WADA operate by a different standard? Surely the standard is consistent otherwise every man and his dog would appeal, if it got harder to convict the higher up the chain you went?

It should get easier to convict though.

 

[rdhopkins2]

anyone who thinks Alavi and Dank didn't know what the substance was are kidding themselves.

As a hypothetical it could have been deadly nightshade otherwise.

Nobody would take a risk at injecting pro footy players with an unknown substance.

They'd be facing the Supreme Court not the AFL tribunal otherwise.

The danger for WADA is that they let this pass and all of a sudden on a world stage, loss/destruction or non existence of records becomes fair game. If Essendon were to pull that off they'd need to burn down the footy club, chemist and Dank's premises.

 

[eldorado]

Will the WADA really bother with this thing, it's not a huge worldwide sport, and by the time it all gets sorted out most of the players that have taken the drugs will be finished.

Might not be the best look for WADA, to ignore (possibly) one of the most systematic doping programs in sport. Some might say it might provide a blueprint for every other athlete and sport in the world..."it'll be ok, just lose the records"

 

[savagelunchbox]

Might not be the best look for WADA, to ignore (possibly) one of the most systematic doping programs in sport. Some might say it might provide a blueprint for every other athlete and sport in the world..."it'll be ok, just lose the records"

And this ties into what I've been saying in previous posts.

In sport, Australia is a powerhouse. WADA have been watching us and every other sporting organisation in the world would have people watching WADA and how they handle it.

 

[Off The Couch]

Can't even imagine what "super power" sporting organisations would get up to if all they had to answer to was poor governance issues and purchasing heavy duty shredders

WADA would be a laughing stock

 

[Blaze Storm]

I wonder if, in the process of appealing the decision, WADA can turn around and say

"Wait a minute... AOD-9604 WAS a banned substance at the time you were investigated... We don't give two shits if (whatever reason ASADA decided not to pursue it)!"

 

[Bonscott1980]

Bonscott1980
It's entirely possible that imbibing like your namesake may be affecting your diction. That aside, I understang your exasperation. However this could be one of the rare occasions where the AFL's broom isn't big enough to sweep the mess away.
Within 3 weeks we'll know. Maybe you'll be proven right, and the case is fundamentally flawed, letting EFC* off the hook.
But if WADA do appeal, I really think they'll win. And should all of these things happen, it's going to create a shitstorm the likes of which our game has never seen. It'll make the previous three years seem like the cover of a Frenté album in comparison.
Sit tight, we'll see.

Fail English in school

 

[Strapping Young Lad]

I wonder if, in the process of appealing the decision, WADA can turn around and say

"Wait a minute... AOD-9604 WAS a banned substance at the time you were investigated... We don't give two shits if (whatever reason ASADA decided not to pursue it)!"

Ahh, but now ASADA have released that they believe AOD was never injected into players at the dopers. They received it via a cream.

 

[Blaze Storm]

I would also subtly put it out there that there is a heraldic symbol known as a "Barre Sinister" (i.e. a bar slanted to the left) which is the symbol for a bastard son that is placed over the normal family crest.

In other words, it is a symbol for "Illegitimacy".

Here is an example of a Barre Sinister Gules on a Field Argent. (red Bar Sinister on a silver field)

Now where does that red sash look familiar... hmmm....

 

[Strapping Young Lad]

That's hilarious.

 

[B0SK]

I think it's just as silly on our board when erroneous information is posted and it's not rebutted, I usually do exactly the same there.

Another subtle Lance troll. You're a douchebag mate, and aren't camouflaging it nearly as well as you think.

The amount of aliases who 'erroneously' spam the Essendon* board when WADA lays the smack down on your players will probably crash the server.