Bombers would have missed finals

Remove this Banner Ad

Dave

Dave

Premium Platinum
Essendon Player Sponsor 2024 - Archie Perkins and Nic Martin Veteran Essendon Player Sponsor 2023 - Archie Perkins and Nic Martin 10k Posts Essendon Player Sponsor 2022 - Anthony McDonald-Tipungwuti and Archie Perkins Podcaster Sensible Type Essendon Player Sponsor 2021 - Anthony McDonald-Tipungwuti and Archie Perkins
Feb 8, 2000
20,896
17,166
Windy Hill
AFL Club
Essendon
Other Teams
Essendon

Log in to remove this ad.

As I have said before


Id I were a players and felt I had done no wrong. Seeing the evidence is the one way that I may very seriusly consider making a deal If I felt it was my b est wat out.

Even if I was not 100% convinced, but could see a strong case I was tricked, it would bet me to walk.
 
jenny61_99 said:
I wonder when the term aggravated comes in to play? How many times do you poke the bear before it rips your ******* head off?
Click to expand...

Not accepting a deal is poking the bear now? Wow.
 
Excellent, so we get to play a team that's going to be rubbed out, voluntary or not, for doping.

Yay AFL.
 
Dave said:
Not accepting a deal is poking the bear now? Wow.
Click to expand...
No, more referring to the other deal the afl and Essendon discussed without ASADAs knowledge. Know it's in the wrong thread but it's kinda related! :p And in a way, rejecting offers could also stir the bear up don't you think?
 
Dave said:
http://www.theage.com.au/afl/afl-ne...-finals-under-asada-deal-20140826-108qif.html
Click to expand...
That is a pretty interesting article:

1) Caro suggests that the AFL & Club were not involved in the offer provided to players by ASADA- hard to see that the club was not told by the players.
2) ASADA told the players they have evidence that they took TB4- but unwittingly.
3) Players rejected the offer of the last 4 games of this season, finals if they made them and ready for round 1 next year as ASADA did not agree to show them the evidence.
4) AFLPA maybe stepping up by suggesting the players will be deciding how they will be proceeding in the matter in response to the proposed meeting between Little & Gil.

Edit - wonder who it suits to have leaked the story of this deal?
 
good4footy said:
That is a pretty interesting article:

1) Caro suggests that the AFL & Club were not involved in the offer provided to players by ASADA- hard to see that the club was not told by the players.
2) ASADA told the players they have evidence that they took TB4- but unwittingly.
3) Players rejected the offer of the last 4 games of this season, finals if they made them and ready for round 1 next year as ASADA did not agree to show them the evidence.
4) AFLPA maybe stepping up by suggesting the players will be deciding how they will be proceeding in the matter in response to the proposed meeting between Little & Gil.
Click to expand...
So the offer sounds remarkably like the Cronulla deal. Except evidence wasn't provided.
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

jenny61_99 said:
So the offer sounds remarkably like the Cronulla deal. Except evidence wasn't provided.
Click to expand...

Seems so. Approx 4-7 weeks plus off season suspension from my reading.

Personally feel both deals are letting the players off lightly if ASADA have the evidence.

Can only mean off field instigators are the ones in the gun.
 
TBH I agree with the bombers here. If you truly believe you are innocent why taint your name and do a deal?
I am not sure if ASADA are doing the right thing here...

If ASADA think they are guilty and are satisfied with the evidence there should be no deal. Even if they have been duped they still took banned substances. There is no provision in the WADA code for duping. I keep hearing the only case someone got off is when they were under an anaesthetic and were given a banned substance without their permission.

So what's going on here? This is getting more bizarre by the moment!
 
Ancient Tiger said:
TBH I agree with the bombers here. If you truly believe you are innocent why taint your name and do a deal?
I am not sure if ASADA are doing the right thing here...

If ASADA think they are guilty and are satisfied with the evidence there should be no deal. Even if they have been duped they still took banned substances. There is no provision in the WADA code for duping. I keep hearing the only case someone got off is when they were under an anaesthetic and were given a banned substance without their permission.

So what's going on here? This is getting more bizarre by the moment!
Click to expand...

Getting off is different to getting reduced or back dated bans.
 
Armchair Critic said:
Alberto Contador did, served six months of a 2 year suspension. 18 months was backdated
Click to expand...
However he had all his victories and titles stripped. So he lost a lot!
If there is no punishment like that what are you achieving by backdating the punishment? How could this be a punishment for Essendon apart from staining their reputation?
 
jenny61_99 said:
I wonder when the term aggravated comes in to play? How many times do you poke the bear before it rips your ******* head off?
Click to expand...

It would seem the bear does not share your confidence
 
To me they either have the evidence or they don't.
If they have good evidence most of the Essendon posters here have said they'll cop their wack.
If they don't have the evidence, they walk (no matter what we all might think).

Backdating bans to entice a guilty plea is bizarre to me, sorry!
 
Ancient Tiger said:
However he had all his victories and titles stripped. So he lost a lot!
If there is no punishment like that what are you achieving by backdating the punishment? How could this be a punishment for Essendon apart from staining their reputation?
Click to expand...

But kept all his financial winnings . Who is to say the support staff will not be punished aswell
 
Ancient Tiger said:
To me they either have the evidence or they don't.
If they have good evidence most of the Essendon posters here have said they'll cop their wack.
If they don't have the evidence, they walk (no matter what we all might think).

Backdating bans to entice a guilty plea is bizarre to me, sorry!
Click to expand...

Depends who they are after and who they want to look after....that being the AFL they want to look after.
 
Ancient Tiger said:
To me they either have the evidence or they don't.
If they have good evidence most of the Essendon posters here have said they'll cop their wack.
If they don't have the evidence, they walk (no matter what we all might think).

Backdating bans to entice a guilty plea is bizarre to me, sorry!
Click to expand...
It's bizarre to anyone. Cronulla boys saw their evidence and pretty much folded. Does that tell us anything?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top