A hypothetical scenario

[andrewb]

Posing a hypothetical scenario:

If WADA is able to prove its case against the players and a 12 month suspension is handed down (2 years less 50% for no significant fault nor negligence) - note, I believe it unlikely that WADA will be able to prove their case but we all have our own opinions on that.

Given:

1. The players have already taken approximately six months of 'provisional suspension' between 2014 and 2015
2. There are delays not attributable to the players (not sure how much, but let's say it's a month or two at a minimum)
and
3. The off-season goes for approximately six months

One would have to think that it is entirely plausible that even if the players are found guilty they will not miss a single match.

 

[compact72]

Posing a hypothetical scenario:

If WADA is able to prove its case against the players and a 12 month suspension is handed down (2 years less 50% for no significant fault nor negligence) - note, I believe it unlikely that WADA will be able to prove their case but we all have our own opinions on that.

Given:

1. The players have already taken approximately six months of 'provisional suspension' between 2014 and 2015
2. There are delays not attributable to the players (not sure how much, but let's say it's a month or two at a minimum)
and
3. The off-season goes for approximately six months

One would have to think that it is entirely plausible that even if the players are found guilty they will not miss a single match.

I think they will escape any suspensions, even if they are found guilty.

WADA are not after suspending the players (that we know of), they only want them guilty. It also depends on players involvement in the saga, as I reckon some players knew more than others

 

[Reality rules]

I think they will escape any suspensions, even if they are found guilty.

WADA are not after suspending the players (that we know of), they only want them guilty. It also depends on players involvement in the saga, as I reckon some players knew more than others

All we need now is Ings tweet!

 

[Akka76]

1. The players have already taken approximately six months of 'provisional suspension' between 2014 and 2015

Che?

 

[Laphroaig]

Posing a hypothetical scenario:

If WADA is able to prove its case against the players and a 12 month suspension is handed down (2 years less 50% for no significant fault nor negligence) - note, I believe it unlikely that WADA will be able to prove their case but we all have our own opinions on that.

Given:

1. The players have already taken approximately six months of 'provisional suspension' between 2014 and 2015
2. There are delays not attributable to the players (not sure how much, but let's say it's a month or two at a minimum)
and
3. The off-season goes for approximately six months

One would have to think that it is entirely plausible that even if the players are found guilty they will not miss a single match.

Some of your reasoning is questionable, but the result seems quite possible.

And as far as I can tell, all WADA has to do to get the case across the line is convince the CAS that an independent chemical analysis is NOT required at every change of possession to demonstrate that a substance is what it is said to be.

 

[Reality rules]

Some of your reasoning is questionable, but the result seems quite possible.

And as far as I can tell, all WADA has to do to get the case across the line is convince the CAS that an independent chemical analysis is NOT required at every change of possession to demonstrate that a substance is what it is said to be.

I fully agree. The WADA Appeal is all about the destination, not the journey. It's a typical 'procedural' outcomes based case.

 

[Muggs]

I think they will escape any suspensions, even if they are found guilty.

WADA are not after suspending the players (that we know of), they only want them guilty. It also depends on players involvement in the saga, as I reckon some players knew more than others

Agree think they go for a headline penalty, 12-18 months to act as a deterrent but have time served and back dating to effectively eliminate any suspension in terms of games missed.

Time served and back dating are a case by case scenario and need not set a precedent for future cases, but headline penalties do.

 

[andrewb]

Some of your reasoning is questionable, but the result seems quite possible.

And as far as I can tell, all WADA has to do to get the case across the line is convince the CAS that an independent chemical analysis is NOT required at every change of possession to demonstrate that a substance is what it is said to be.

Agree that's what WADA has to do in order to prove that Dank received TB4 from Alavi. It's a big step from there to Dank received TB4 from Alavi in his capacity as an Essendon support person, and a further big step from there to Dank injected player A with TB4.

 

[Lavender Bushranger]

Agree that's what WADA has to do in order to prove that Dank received TB4 from Alavi. It's a big step from there to Dank received TB4 from Alavi in his capacity as an Essendon support person, and a further big step from there to Dank injected player A with TB4.

I don't think it's a big step at all.

 

[TedDougChris]

I don't think it's a big step at all.

I'm sure Dank has plenty of 'evidence' that will link someone else to the TB4, rather than his primary employer at the time, who he was in detailed discussions about the supply of TB4 to - for the use by the Essendon players...

 

[coryne]

WADA would not go through the whole appeal process if the end result is the players serving 0 game suspensions.

 

[Laphroaig]

WADA would not go through the whole appeal process if the end result is the players serving 0 game suspensions.

I don't agree. If the tribunal decision is allowed to stand, particularly given the reasoning used by the tribunal, the WADA code is pretty much * ed for anything but failed piss tests.

Whether the players serve time or not is small potatoes.

 

[Thrawn]

I don't agree. If the tribunal decision is allowed to stand, particularly given the reasoning used by the tribunal, the WADA code is pretty much **** ed for anything but failed piss tests.

Whether the players serve time or not is small potatoes.

CAS could very well make an example out of them.

 

[coryne]

I don't agree. If the tribunal decision is allowed to stand, particularly given the reasoning used by the tribunal, the WADA code is pretty much **** ed for anything but failed piss tests.

Whether the players serve time or not is small potatoes.

And what message does the world get when players can be systematically doped by their club and get off without a suspension by keeping no paperwork and delaying the process as much as possible.

 

[Reality rules]

And what message does the world get when players can be systematically doped by their club and get off without a suspension by keeping no paperwork and delaying the process as much as possible.

Sometimes things are sacrificed / forgone for a bigger picture. A win can be the one who has lost the least, WADA manage anti doping on a world wide level and I'm sure that's the intention here to eliminate loop holes.

 

[BobDay]

Agree that's what WADA has to do in order to prove that Dank received TB4 from Alavi. It's a big step from there to Dank received TB4 from Alavi in his capacity as an Essendon support person, and a further big step from there to Dank injected player A with TB4.

And its a big step to suggest the players didn't suspect they were in a pharmacological experiment to improve their bodies and capacity.
And its a big step to suggest the players didn't go along with the Essendon assurances to quietly tow the line and they will get off.
So sick of this "players didn't know" rubbish..... this is 34 players and coaches who were in a football club getting jabbed daily and changing body shape suddenly playing like Shane Woewodin. But they didn't know???? Inject the other one

 

[Muggs]

And what message does the world get when players can be systematically doped by their club and get off without a suspension by keeping no paperwork and delaying the process as much as possible.

A guilty verdict and the headline suspension is what matters, that sets the precedent for future cases.

Actual penalty after time deducted for provisional suspension is allowed, within the rules so no problems there.
Given a back dated penalty for some of the delays caused by the government bringing Downes in to review and the WADA extension is also allowed and is a case by case issue and would be sold that way.

 

[andrewb]

CAS could very well make an example out of them.

You think that an independent arbiter is out to make an example of the players?????

 

[andrewb]

And its a big step to suggest the players didn't suspect they were in a pharmacological experiment to improve their bodies and capacity.
And its a big step to suggest the players didn't go along with the Essendon assurances to quietly tow the line and they will get off.
So sick of this "players didn't know" rubbish..... this is 34 players and coaches who were in a football club getting jabbed daily and changing body shape suddenly playing like Shane Woewodin. But they didn't know???? Inject the other one

This is utterly irrelevant so I won't bother arguing its veracity.

 

[Big Sim]

I don't agree. If the tribunal decision is allowed to stand, particularly given the reasoning used by the tribunal, the WADA code is pretty much **** ed for anything but failed piss tests.

Whether the players serve time or not is small potatoes.

I'm on this train of thought. Its all about closing loop holes, and the AFL, God bless them, opened one big enough to drive a systematic doping program through.

I actually see the CAS appeal as dealing with the AFL rather than the players, who I think will be found guilty but not serve time.

The AFL will be shown to the world as the shameless, unaccountable fixers we all know them to be, but as that also means they know no shame, it will be water off a duck's back.

The interesting question for me is this: if the players are found to have been doped, what then happens to the club that doped them but has not yet been held accountable for it? Penalties for appalling governance are not the same thing.

 

[andrewb]

I'm on this train of thought. Its all about closing loop holes, and the AFL, God bless them, opened one big enough to drive a systematic doping program through.

I actually see the CAS appeal as dealing with the AFL rather than the players, who I think will be found guilty but not serve time.

The AFL will be shown to the world as the shameless, unaccountable fixers we all know them to be, but as that also means they know no shame, it will be water off a duck's back.

The interesting question for me is this: if the players are found to have been doped, what then happens to the club that doped them but has not yet been held accountable for it? Penalties for appalling governance are not the same thing.

Wow that is a massive accusation against tribunal members with fairly impeccable records.

Are you suggesting that the tribunal members deliberately fixed the outcome? Oh boy wowee Big Boy McEvoy that is a massive statement

If anything the tribunal members have misjudged the comfortable satisfaction burden of proof, it is tin-foil hat CRAZY to suggest that the result was fixed.

 

[Laphroaig]

And what message does the world get when players can be systematically doped by their club and get off without a suspension by keeping no paperwork and delaying the process as much as possible.

I think you are getting confused between the players and the Club.

I have a foot in both camps regarding the players. I kinda suspect that they were either actively or tacitly in on it. But on the other hand I try never to forget how capable you average footballer is of being a complete numbnuts.

Reduced fault provisions exist for a good reason. So do discounts for consequences already suffered and for extended delays. Unless WADA shows the players were in it up to their eyeballs rather than just stupid - and I don't think WADA will even go there - then a heavily reduced penalty is entirely appropriate. That reduction may even make it all the way to zero.

 

[Thrawn]

I think you are getting confused between the players and the Club.

I have a foot in both camps regarding the players. I kinda suspect that they were either actively or tacitly in on it. But on the other hand I try never to forget how capable you average footballer is of being a complete numbnuts.

Reduced fault provisions exist for a good reason. So do discounts for consequences already suffered and for extended delays. Unless WADA shows the players were in it up to their eyeballs rather than just stupid - and I don't think WADA will even go there - then a heavily reduced penalty is entirely appropriate. That reduction may even make it all the way to zero.

Isn't there a limit to what they can backdate though?

They may end up missing half a season instead if found guilty.

 

[Proper Gander]

Posing a hypothetical scenario:

If WADA is able to prove its case against the players and a 12 month suspension is handed down (2 years less 50% for no significant fault nor negligence) - note, I believe it unlikely that WADA will be able to prove their case but we all have our own opinions on that.

Given:

1. The players have already taken approximately six months of 'provisional suspension' between 2014 and 2015
2. There are delays not attributable to the players (not sure how much, but let's say it's a month or two at a minimum)
and
3. The off-season goes for approximately six months

One would have to think that it is entirely plausible that even if the players are found guilty they will not miss a single match.

Yep. Well possible and I wouldnt be personally outraged by such a decision.

I think the ruling that WADA is seeking is about more than individual suspensions in this case.

 

[Proper Gander]

Che?

Wot is Che?

(Languages & nuance not my forte)