Juddafideslenko
Club Legend
And he never stated that we had anything to do with Harold Holt's disappearance either.
F*** we're gone i tells ya
Dank decision is in: Almost not guilty!
- Thread starter Hawthorn United
- Start date
- Tagged users None
F*** we're gone i tells ya
gutsroy
Brownlow Medallist
Seems a neatly manufactured outcome, right down to delaying the announcement until so late in the appeal window. The AFL and consorts are nothing if not consistent.
Other than what was the purpose of the tribunal. Which if you believe the conspiracy theorists, is a carefully constructed outcome.
The lack of transparency, gives no other thought.
- Jun 28, 2013
- 31,803
- 48,018
- AFL Club
- Hawthorn
Sorry to explain this post more - both parties believe its heroin, it isn't = still trafficking. Like I said - will look into it
I've been around too long to not know what goes on. My issue is the cocktail of drugs that Dank was giving the players. Off label, not approved for human use drugs. He was a *ingg mad man. He was giving HGH type drugs to a young man in remission from cancer. Who does that s**t?
Given all of that, I had a beef with Hird. It's my belief he knew what Dank was doing and just let it slide. He may not have known the full cocktail of drugs that Dank was injecting into the players but he definitely knew. Charter came into the picture and that to me tells me Hird was ok with what Dank was doing.
Nailing the players...not my thing. They were pawns in all of this.
Nailing Hird...needs to happen and he needs to be kicked out of the game but it won't happen. The AFL is done and dusted with all of this.
ASADA...I don't believe they will appeal. They know what went down as they have seen ACC investigation evidence. Problem is they couldn't use it. And when they tried to get it themselves they couldn't.
WADA...wild card. I think they will appeal. I know quite a few on here (the rational EFC supporters like LU and Dons Rule) don't believe they will but I'm not so sure. If WADA appeal, EFC are at real risk. More so than having an AFL tribunal rule on comfortable satisfaction.
I was pleased for the players the other week and keen to move on. And if the covers are lifted across the league, there will be many devastated fans. How do people think players in their 30's are running PB's in training and having kids come in looking like men?
That is indeed a wild card. Kudos to the AFL to keep that under wraps for as long as they did.
Once again, it is not in the AFL's interests to investigate incidents that will potentially wipeout most of the competition. Those acting under the jurisdiction of the AFL have also served their masters well.
Think broom, sweep, carpet.
WADA will definitely appeal.
The AFL tribunal is either incompetent or corrupt or a little of both. The corrupt tactic of trying to undermine ASSADA by telling bare faced lies and deliberately releasing Dank's verdict much, much later that it promised, hopefully won't work.
WADA cannot allow a precedent where sporting bodies can get away with allowing systematic and very obvious drug cheating simply by employing incompetent and/or corrupt judges, as has obviously happened here.
The AFL tribunal is either incompetent or corrupt or a little of both. The corrupt tactic of trying to undermine ASSADA by telling bare faced lies and deliberately releasing Dank's verdict much, much later that it promised, hopefully won't work.
WADA cannot allow a precedent where sporting bodies can get away with allowing systematic and very obvious drug cheating simply by employing incompetent and/or corrupt judges, as has obviously happened here.
The problem is rampant. South African Schools Rugby ( schools !!!! ) is known to be riddled with steroid use. It is commonplace in rugby but the authorities turn away. It is widespread in MLB and NFL as we all know.
High impact pro sport is riddled with drug use. Essendon are a particularly egregious inept and stupid example and must be held properly to account.
High impact pro sport is riddled with drug use. Essendon are a particularly egregious inept and stupid example and must be held properly to account.
All the infringements against Dank coincide with the three months he was contracted to Gold Coast in late 2010 and early 2011 and the year he spent as Essendon’s sports scientist. During the period of his contract, he was considered an athlete support person under the AFL anti-doping code and prohibited from supplying banned substances to a third party.
Dank was originally charged with 34 breaches of anti-doping rules. He was not represented in the AFL tribunal hearing. His sanction will be announced after a hearing on May 5.
The infringements upheld against Dank include trafficking banned peptides and human growth hormone to Carlton’s high-profile tackling coach John Donehue and baseball coach John Deeble. Dank was also found guilty of attempting to traffic CJC-1295 to Suns high-performance coach Dean Robinson and complicity in the trafficking of Hexarelin to Essendon weights coach Suki Hobson.
Donehue, Deeble, Robinson and Hobson all made admissions to ASADA about their personal use of banned substances, which was both legal and permitted under anti-doping rules for them.
Dank was found complicit in the supply of Humanofort, a product that contains various banned substances, to Essendon staff, and trafficking banned substances to customers of the Medical Rejuvenation Clinic. Dank is a director of the anti-ageing clinic.
The tribunal, chaired by retired Victorian County Court judge David Jones, threw out all charges against Dank relating to his dealings with footballers at Essendon and Gold Coast. This included allegations that he administered Essendon players with two banned peptides, Thymosin Beta 4 and Hexarelin, and that he assisted in Gold Coast recruit Nathan Bock being injected with CJC-1295.
The sports scientist has not been charged with an anti-doping offence relating to his work with NRL players. The question of whether Bock was injected with a banned peptide has remained unanswered throughout the entire saga. The Weekend Australian can reveal that ASADA failed to pursue doping charges against the All Australian defender despite its own investigators recommending he had a case to answer.
Dean Robinson told ASADA investigators that Bock was treated with CJC-1295, at Dank’s instructions, in December 2010. Bock admits to receiving an amino acid injection from Robinson. Robinson says it was Dank who administered the injection. Dank maintains that CJC-1295 was a permitted substance at the time.
Armed with Bock and Robinson’s testimony, ASADA investigators recommended in October 2013 that anti-doping proceedings be initiated against Bock. The recommendation is contained in a previously undisclosed report investigating Gold Coast.
It is understood that ASADA’s lawyers declined to take action against Bock, citing the need to first run the case against Dank. ASADA chief executive Ben McDevitt yesterday failed to explain why the case against Bock had since been abandoned. ASADA’s case against 34 current and former Essendon players for taking another banned peptide, Thymosin Beta-4, was last month rejected by the AFL tribunal.
McDevitt brought the case against the Essendon players after ASADA’s investigators warned the case faced ‘‘insurmountable obstacles’’ to prove. The investigators also questioned the public interest in pursuing footballers who, if they did take a banned substance, only did so after being lied to by club officials. McDevitt believes he was duty-bound to proceed with the case.
The anti-doping authority has until Tuesday to decide whether to appeal the finding in the case of the Essendon players. The World Anti-Doping Agency can ask for the case to be reheard by the Court of Arbitration for Sport.
http://www.theaustralian.com.au/spo...-banned-peptides/story-fnca0u4y-1227308591762
Dank was originally charged with 34 breaches of anti-doping rules. He was not represented in the AFL tribunal hearing. His sanction will be announced after a hearing on May 5.
The infringements upheld against Dank include trafficking banned peptides and human growth hormone to Carlton’s high-profile tackling coach John Donehue and baseball coach John Deeble. Dank was also found guilty of attempting to traffic CJC-1295 to Suns high-performance coach Dean Robinson and complicity in the trafficking of Hexarelin to Essendon weights coach Suki Hobson.
Donehue, Deeble, Robinson and Hobson all made admissions to ASADA about their personal use of banned substances, which was both legal and permitted under anti-doping rules for them.
Dank was found complicit in the supply of Humanofort, a product that contains various banned substances, to Essendon staff, and trafficking banned substances to customers of the Medical Rejuvenation Clinic. Dank is a director of the anti-ageing clinic.
The tribunal, chaired by retired Victorian County Court judge David Jones, threw out all charges against Dank relating to his dealings with footballers at Essendon and Gold Coast. This included allegations that he administered Essendon players with two banned peptides, Thymosin Beta 4 and Hexarelin, and that he assisted in Gold Coast recruit Nathan Bock being injected with CJC-1295.
The sports scientist has not been charged with an anti-doping offence relating to his work with NRL players. The question of whether Bock was injected with a banned peptide has remained unanswered throughout the entire saga. The Weekend Australian can reveal that ASADA failed to pursue doping charges against the All Australian defender despite its own investigators recommending he had a case to answer.
Dean Robinson told ASADA investigators that Bock was treated with CJC-1295, at Dank’s instructions, in December 2010. Bock admits to receiving an amino acid injection from Robinson. Robinson says it was Dank who administered the injection. Dank maintains that CJC-1295 was a permitted substance at the time.
Armed with Bock and Robinson’s testimony, ASADA investigators recommended in October 2013 that anti-doping proceedings be initiated against Bock. The recommendation is contained in a previously undisclosed report investigating Gold Coast.
It is understood that ASADA’s lawyers declined to take action against Bock, citing the need to first run the case against Dank. ASADA chief executive Ben McDevitt yesterday failed to explain why the case against Bock had since been abandoned. ASADA’s case against 34 current and former Essendon players for taking another banned peptide, Thymosin Beta-4, was last month rejected by the AFL tribunal.
McDevitt brought the case against the Essendon players after ASADA’s investigators warned the case faced ‘‘insurmountable obstacles’’ to prove. The investigators also questioned the public interest in pursuing footballers who, if they did take a banned substance, only did so after being lied to by club officials. McDevitt believes he was duty-bound to proceed with the case.
The anti-doping authority has until Tuesday to decide whether to appeal the finding in the case of the Essendon players. The World Anti-Doping Agency can ask for the case to be reheard by the Court of Arbitration for Sport.
http://www.theaustralian.com.au/spo...-banned-peptides/story-fnca0u4y-1227308591762
The AFL anti-doping Tribunal comfortably accepted:
So which "thymosin" are they "comfortably satisfied" was on the consent forms?
Which "thymosin" are receipted (paper trail) to Dank or the club?
Which "thymosin" do they believe (some) players admitted to have received?
Who paid for which "thymosin"? Dank or the club?
Have any of the players released their copy of the tribunals findings? I can't see "player confidentiality" as a issue (seeing as they have been outed by even some essendon supporters) and have been let off by the tribunal. Maybe they are waiting for the Appeal deadlines to expire first.
There are still plenty of questions. Not many answers to be had. So much for the afl's "transparency".
- Charter purchased what he believed to be TB4 and arranged to have it sent to Alavi;
- Alavi believed that what he was compounding was TB4;
- Alavi dispensed 26 vials of a substance he believed to be TB4 to Dank;
- Correspondence between Alavi and Dank regarding “thymosin” refers to TB4;
- And Alavi’s lab technician Vania Giordani compounded 15 vials of a substance she believed to be TB4 for Mr Dank.
- But at every stage the Tribunal failed to be comfortably satisfied that what was purported to be was in fact Thymosin Beta 4.
So which "thymosin" are they "comfortably satisfied" was on the consent forms?
Which "thymosin" are receipted (paper trail) to Dank or the club?
Which "thymosin" do they believe (some) players admitted to have received?
Who paid for which "thymosin"? Dank or the club?
Have any of the players released their copy of the tribunals findings? I can't see "player confidentiality" as a issue (seeing as they have been outed by even some essendon supporters) and have been let off by the tribunal. Maybe they are waiting for the Appeal deadlines to expire first.
There are still plenty of questions. Not many answers to be had. So much for the afl's "transparency".
one of the findings against dank relate to baseball, how can the afl tribunal make a finding for what he did in another code, bit confusing
thirsty camel 1
Debutant
- Nov 22, 2014
- 139
- 108
- AFL Club
- Adelaide
granted but its an afl anti doping tribunal, it looks at breaches of the afl anti doping code
thirsty camel 1
Debutant
- Nov 22, 2014
- 139
- 108
- AFL Club
- Adelaide
I believe it has something to do with dank being employed under afl athe time of breach .
Oh we'll, just got to wait
One Carlton coaching staff does not make Carlton, unlike 34 *EFC players. I wonder what's going on with poor Hal Hunter.
Hey,Look over there!! tactic
- Nov 21, 2013
- 5,149
- 3,756
- AFL Club
- Melbourne
The Suns wont. The AFL want to gift them a premiership as soon as possible
34 players at *EFC, 1 Carlton staffer. How old are you.
- Apr 27, 2014
- 6,350
- 9,583
- AFL Club
- Richmond
Why is everybody forgetting that the 'TB4' was tested at Bio21 by Alavi before being sent to Dank, and the mass spectrometry results were consistent with TB4. (this would be standard practice I imagine, you'd want to check what you thought was TB4 was in fact TB4 before sending it to your client).
Hard. Scientific. Evidence. no 'thought' about it.
BigJoeD_
Brownlow Medallist
- Sep 21, 2013
- 19,084
- 40,246
- AFL Club
- Essendon
- Other Teams
- Coney Island - The Benchmark™
Bet the Cronulla players are really happy they blinked, it's even more clear now that deal making was McDevitts 'charter'
- Nov 21, 2013
- 5,149
- 3,756
- AFL Club
- Melbourne
How do we know that they were legal when the records got lost/destroyed?
tesla1962
Premiership Player
Or even better, the supposed lawyers who can't see past their bias and continue to get it wrong again and again - muppets
I'm almost 100% confident they will. They didn't give a s**t about Cycling when they went after the King, regardless of how the code tried everything to stop them. Why would they care about a tiny little code only Australians care about?
