Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Essendon Football Club will plead guilty to two charges of risking its players' health and failing to provide a safe working environment over its supplements program, a court heard on Monday.
In a short hearing in the Melbourne Magistrates Court, the club's lawyer Garry Livermore said they would enter a formal plea to two charges of breaching the Occupational Health and Safety Act.
Court documents released to the media on Monday stated the club's supplement program, between December 2011 to 15 January, 2012 and 15 January to September, 2012, exposed its players to risks to their health and safety and failed to provide a safe working environment.
James Hird, right, as he announces his retirement. Photo: Getty Images
The charge sheets stated that the club failed to comply to the following in order to reduce risk to its players:
- Provide the club doctor with a summary of literature about the supplement that included the scientific and common name, all clinical findings both positive and negative, known or potential side-effects and a statement saying it did not contravene any World Anti-Doping Authority guidelines.
- The club doctor failed to make a recommendation about the suitability of the substance for the players.
- The players were not given a letter of informed consent to sign by the club doctor if they were recommended to use the substance.
Are you this stupid away from the keyboard?B-b-b-b-but no evidence!
Club doctor does not look too positive in the charges
Club doctor does not look too positive in the charges
The charge sheets stated that the club failed to comply to the following in order to reduce risk to its players:
- Provide the club doctor with a summary of literature about the supplement that included the scientific and common name, all clinical findings both positive and negative, known or potential side-effects and a statement saying it did not contravene any World Anti-Doping Authority guidelines.
- The club doctor failed to make a recommendation about the suitability of the substance for the players.
- The players were not given a letter of informed consent to sign by the club doctor if they were recommended to use the substance.
Actually disagree, to me that first charge is the doctor was sidelined, as such the next two occurred.
So the Doc is relying on the "Hey, I'm so crap at my job I didn't even know what was going on!" defence.
My God. NO wonder they are so shithouse.
You're thinking of worm farms, not Pandora's box.A fine of up to 600,000 odd will be cheaper than pleading not guilty and having the likes of a hall of famer (Dr Reid) in the witness box and be cross examined. That would open up pandora's box of worms. Hal's lawyers would be front row in the public area
A fine of up to 600,000 odd will be cheaper than pleading not guilty and having the likes of a hall of famer (Dr Reid) in the witness box and be cross examined. That would open up pandora's box of worms. Hal's lawyers would be front row in the public area
Heard this morning that the max fine is $309k.
Will try find link to source.
Could is not the word to use. SHOULD is more appropriate. He knew enough crap was going on that forced him to write a letter... and then promptly never followed up.Agree he could have been more proactive, don't dispute this. Just not sure where the line is between a proactive doctor and a patients / clubs informing him of what is happening.
Per charge , 2 chargesHeard this morning that the max fine is $309k.
Will try find link to source.
Per charge , 2 charges
Per charge , 2 charges
Siding with you on this one. Article states that in no uncertain terms.It's still clearly a maximum fine of $305k...
Even cheaper then to plead guiltyAgain, as I understand, the maximum fine is for pleading guilty to both charges.