- Moderator
- #1
No allegations, these are the facts we know.
General References
On February 5th, the Essendon Football club held a press conference calling for the assistance of the AFL and ASADA to investigate the possibility their players had been given unknown substances.
2013.02.05 - Essendon press conference
Gold Coast, Brisbane, and Geelong all issued statements saying they were clear not long after.
On February 6th, the ACC held a press conference with the heads of the AFL, NRL and other codes present to announce the investigation into Drugs and Organised Crime in Sport. The report as is publicly available does not specifiy clubs or individuals.
2013.02.06 - Government press conference
The AFL responded by changing its policies to including mandatory reporting, removal of the self reporting loop, banning injections of anything without a doctor, and requiring bankground checks for all staff. An audit of all supplements being taken by all players.
2013.02.06 - AFL Press conference
On February 10th, the AFL announced that as far as it is aware of just two instances involving AFL clubs. One involves a sole player, the other involved a club with several players. Essendon is specifically cited as the club involved, although that is not contained in the clip below.
2013.02.10 - AFL press conference
On February 11th, Stephen Dank had his say on the matter on the 7.30 report. His lawyer also announced he would be launching a massive defamation action.
2013.02.11 - 7.30 report - Stephen Dank Interview
On February 27th, Essendon announced the appointment of Ziggy Switowski, former Telstra chairman, to head its internal investigation into the crisis at the club. (2013.02.27 - Essendon to review drug crisis - The Age)
On March 14th, the AFL website claimed that the penalties would be decided by the AFL in line with WADA guidelines. (2013.03.14 - AFL tribunal, not ASADA to decide drug penalties - AFL.com.au)
On April 16th, James Hird gave his testimony in front of ASADA. His statement, as shown on AFL 360 is below.
On April 18th, the 7.30 report alleged that Melbourne players had been involved with Stephen Dank. This is apparently linked to a series of text messages that also include Essendon. While they have not been proved as to their origin, and no party has officially recognised them, Melbournes reaction to the revelation is what makes it into the "Facts" section.
As a result of these revelations and pending its own investigations, on April 19th Melbourne has accepted its club doctors offer to stand aside effective immediately.The Club issued the following statement.
On April 22nd, WADA issued a media release that confirmed the anti obesity drug AOD-9604 is a banned substance, falling under rules governing substances not approved for human use by any Government regulatory body. This drug is specifically claimed to have been used by Stephen Dank at Essendon.
Specifically, WADA cites the S.O clause in its rules
WADA later confirmed that it had not given any authorisation to use any substance, that it didnt talk to individuals and released an email exchange confirming this.
Essendon released parts of its internal report to the media on May 6th.Dr. Switowski specifically says
The Essendon football club full statement is here and identifies the following issues:
The reports first recommendation is that
The club says it cannot release the entire report for legal reasons.
David Evans went on to apologise for the entire situation on his watch and reiterated that the Club had not conceded that banned substances had been taken.
Those ladies and gentlemen are the facts of the case as they stand. updated May 21
General References
- The Australian Crime Commission report
- The AFL Anti Doping Code
- The ASADA Code
- The ASADA Regulations
- WADA Prohibited List
- ACC Appendix: Overview of Peptides
- ACC Appendix: Sources of Peptides and Hormones
- WADA Statement on substance AOD-9604
- WADA rule changes for 2012 (affecting unspecified non therapeutic treatment)
- The AFL Charge sheet
- James Hird Supreme Court Writ
- Richard Ings [Former ASADA Chair] Twitter
- Gary Wittert [Doctor who conducted the trials on AOD9604] Twitter
On February 5th, the Essendon Football club held a press conference calling for the assistance of the AFL and ASADA to investigate the possibility their players had been given unknown substances.
2013.02.05 - Essendon press conference
Gold Coast, Brisbane, and Geelong all issued statements saying they were clear not long after.
On February 6th, the ACC held a press conference with the heads of the AFL, NRL and other codes present to announce the investigation into Drugs and Organised Crime in Sport. The report as is publicly available does not specifiy clubs or individuals.
2013.02.06 - Government press conference
The AFL responded by changing its policies to including mandatory reporting, removal of the self reporting loop, banning injections of anything without a doctor, and requiring bankground checks for all staff. An audit of all supplements being taken by all players.
2013.02.06 - AFL Press conference
On February 10th, the AFL announced that as far as it is aware of just two instances involving AFL clubs. One involves a sole player, the other involved a club with several players. Essendon is specifically cited as the club involved, although that is not contained in the clip below.
2013.02.10 - AFL press conference
On February 11th, Stephen Dank had his say on the matter on the 7.30 report. His lawyer also announced he would be launching a massive defamation action.
2013.02.11 - 7.30 report - Stephen Dank Interview
On February 27th, Essendon announced the appointment of Ziggy Switowski, former Telstra chairman, to head its internal investigation into the crisis at the club. (2013.02.27 - Essendon to review drug crisis - The Age)
On March 14th, the AFL website claimed that the penalties would be decided by the AFL in line with WADA guidelines. (2013.03.14 - AFL tribunal, not ASADA to decide drug penalties - AFL.com.au)
On April 16th, James Hird gave his testimony in front of ASADA. His statement, as shown on AFL 360 is below.
On April 18th, the 7.30 report alleged that Melbourne players had been involved with Stephen Dank. This is apparently linked to a series of text messages that also include Essendon. While they have not been proved as to their origin, and no party has officially recognised them, Melbournes reaction to the revelation is what makes it into the "Facts" section.
As a result of these revelations and pending its own investigations, on April 19th Melbourne has accepted its club doctors offer to stand aside effective immediately.The Club issued the following statement.
THE MELBOURNE Football Club today accepted an offer by Club doctor Dan Bates to stand aside, effective immediately, pending the outcome of an investigation by ASADA and the AFL into a pre-season supplements program at the Club.
MFC President Don McLardy said that the Club felt it was appropriate that Dr Bates stand aside while the details of the program and the circumstances under which it was administered are independently reviewed.
"We have sufficient concerns about an identified breakdown in reporting protocols that we believe it is appropriate that Dr Bates stands aside until these matters are further investigated," McLardy said.
On April 22nd, WADA issued a media release that confirmed the anti obesity drug AOD-9604 is a banned substance, falling under rules governing substances not approved for human use by any Government regulatory body. This drug is specifically claimed to have been used by Stephen Dank at Essendon.
Specifically, WADA cites the S.O clause in its rules
S0. NON-APPROVED SUBSTANCES
Any pharmacological substance which is not addressed by any of the subsequent sectionsof the List and with no current approval by any governmental regulatory health authority for human therapeutic use (e.g drugs under pre-clinical or clinical development ordiscontinued, designer drugs, substances approved only for veterinary use) is prohibited at all times.”
WADA later confirmed that it had not given any authorisation to use any substance, that it didnt talk to individuals and released an email exchange confirming this.
Essendon released parts of its internal report to the media on May 6th.Dr. Switowski specifically says
..a rapid diversification into exotic supplements, sharp increase in the number of injections, the shift to treatment off site in alternative medical clinics, emergence of unfamiliar suppliers, the marginalisation of traditional medical staff (which) combined to create a disturbing picture of a pharmacologically experimental environment never adequately controlled or challenged or documented within the Club in the period under review.
The Essendon football club full statement is here and identifies the following issues:
- A culture of competitive performance practices under cloak of secrecy – with the sports science team wanting protection of their intellectual property.
- Failure in structure and accountability – with problems occurring in the club’s selection and recruitment processes, management of contractors, hierarchy and decision making in the football department and administration.
- Use of external doctors not known to our club or to the medical staff of the club.
- Failure to oversee guidelines and processes instituted by the Coach and the Medical staff.
The reports first recommendation is that
Pioneering work with supplements and exotic treatments should be left to the Australian Sports Commission. This is not an area for risk management but for zero tolerance. A club's pharmacology skills should not normally be independently and secretly developed as a source of competitive advantage. And an arms race for the most sophisticated molecules must be prohibited.
The club says it cannot release the entire report for legal reasons.
David Evans went on to apologise for the entire situation on his watch and reiterated that the Club had not conceded that banned substances had been taken.
Those ladies and gentlemen are the facts of the case as they stand. updated May 21
Last edited: