Essendon uncover peptides invoice.

[nineteen eighty]

Really? I seriously doubt it.
People involved in AFL football are more often than not interested in staying in the game (the industry) for as long as they can - a career.
For the love of the Club and or the game itself.

Although one or two might, most will not jepordise their career and reputation by cheating, knowing very well that if caught they will be sacked and shamed.

If Essendon or Melbourne or any other club were taking performance enhancing drugs then why wouldn't they still be doing it?

I think you will find the answer to that question will be a pointer to where the truth lies in this whole mess.

It's likely a few rogues have overstepped the mark and there has possibly been an attempt to cover it up as they know WADA won't hand out an exception if the wrong thing has been done.

Yeah sorry mate but my thinking has been changed over the last 12-24 months. I used to think like you across all sports but I now believe that most sports people are on the juice...in one way, shape or another. It doesn't affect my love of all sports and for AFL. It's just that I've reconciled in my mind that most are on PED's. There are some excellent threads and posts from some of the more educated on PED's within the BF community (RussellEbertHandball to name one but he's one of a number) who state the case very well.

It's sad but it is what it is.

Essendon got caught this time and probably wouldn't have if they controlled it better than what they did. Others over time will follow. Demetriou is well aware of all of this and said as much last year when he came out and slammed these so called quacks (sports scientists). Note that real sports scientists are worth their weight in gold. However, most of the quacks posing as sports scientists are exactly that...fakes. They're the ones that are dangerous.

 

[Tombowler]

With skills as both a senior coach and seasoned drug-peddler, is Prop Joe the perfect fit for Windy Hill?

 

[Ned_Flanders]

Mxett is a great example of the quality of thinking inside EFC.

The ACC already have Mr Alavi's copy of that invoice.

Think around those implications.

Whether the chemist has an invoice addressed to EFC is interesting, but not a death sentence. The chemist is involved in a project to make distributing PED's to multiple clients appear legal, so IMO they have as much cred right now as Dank and Charter. That means take everything with a grain of salt, and back up everything they say with something from a more reliable source before you bank it.

Firstly, you want to see the EFC copy. This is gold because it will confirm EFC actually received it, and it will show who approved the payment. As such, it gives us a much clearer idea of who at EFC was in the know.

Secondly, if the above has occurred, (EFC bought the supplements) there will be stock and usage records elsewhere in EFC, as they needed to record all supplement use. Even stuff given to coaches should have been recorded, just to make sure it was very clear it wasnt going to players. If no use record is available, yet EFC have internal docs confirming payment made and approved, they are in big trouble IMO.

Finally, falsifying invoices is an old trick, which is why I want the above info before hanging anyone on this. I have personally seen a number of importers have the exporter invoice them under a different name. They pay the invoice, so the importer doesnt care where the money is coming from, but it allows the item to pass through Customs under a name that won't raise red flags (do a few dodgys and your name triggers automatic inspections of every shipment).

If (IF IF IF IF IF) Dank was doing the dodge, having the chemist invoice EFC for non-EFC stuff is a smart move. Dank burns the invoices, pays the chemist, and everyone smiles. If busted though, the paper trail from the chemist leads to EFC, not Dank and not his "colourful motoring identity" business partners.

Remember we still don't know what game Dank is playing with his selected leaking, and until we do, I wouldn't trust anything him or his network tell us unless its verified independently.

 

[CoggaRules]

I agree with absolutely everything you have stated. I believe IMO Essendon went out of their way to cheat by doping. I believe officials knew it was happening.

I STRONGLY BELIEVE THE PLAYERS ARE INNOCENT IN ALL OF THIS AND SHOULD BE PROVIDED WITH AMNESTY ON ALL OF THIS. THEY WERE USED AND ABUSED BY CLUB OFFICIALS...OF WHICH DANK WAS ONE OF THOSE CLUB OFFICIALS GIVEN HE WAS EMPLOYED BY THEM.

It is not just Dank though...he was acting with others in the know. Did Hird know? I think he did after he lied about not seeing Charter (other than a bump in) for many years. Charter seems to have been in attendance at a meeting between Hird and Dank. Hence I call bullshit on Hird. Hird has history with Charter. Charter is a well known PED user / provider / expert. He got Hird "fit" and bulked up years ago. Hird has history.

Or is Hird innocent and Hamilton knew and approved of what was going on? Someone other than Dank knew. Hird in my eyes was innocent until he lied about Charter. Or what seems to be a lie about his level of contact.

I also believe this is happening at many if not all other clubs. I am not naive enough to think this is only happening at Essendon...and maybe Melbourne.

Sorry dude. There have been well documented cases throughout the history of drugs in sport where athletes have been "innocently involved", but there was no amnesty, because at the end of the day, in the cold light of day, have enhanced perfomance by using illegal drugs. There is no grey area with this law. You and others need to get your head around the fact that this aint an AFL thing where as we know is riddled with grey areas to allow for leniency and hand slapping. It is what it is, you use you are gaaaaawn, whether you knew it or not, its bad luck..2 years is locked in and to the chagrin of essendon supporters, retrsospective s**t comes into play too. So watch this space..

 

[evo]

No, Im the chorus, which explains what is going on, but is powerless to act.

haha, pay that.

 

[nineteen eighty]

Sorry dude. There have been well documented cases throughout the history of drugs in sport where athletes have been "innocently involved", but there was no amnesty, because at the end of the day, in the cold light of day, have enhanced perfomance by using illegal drugs. There is no grey area with this law. You and others need to get your head around the fact that this aint an AFL thing where as we know is riddled with grey areas to allow for leniency and hand slapping. It is what it is, you use you are gaaaaawn, whether you knew it or not, its bad luck..2 years is locked in and to the chagrin of essendon supporters, retrsospective s**t comes into play too. So watch this space..

I get that. My words clearly state that in my opinion, I believe the players should be given amnesty on this one. Not what will happen. What will happen and what I want to happen are two very distinct things.

 

[teknodeejay]

Jake Carlisle is having a break out season.

Ban him before he becomes too good!

 

[Chameleon75]

Supporters represent clubs do they mate? What a ridiculous thing to say

Unfortunately many football fans think that they are stakeholders, they haven't quite realised that they're consumers of a product. They're as much representatives of their club as I am of Nike for buying their shoes.

 

[I Rock]

Unfortunately many football fans think that they are stakeholders, they haven't quite realised that they're consumers of a product. They're as much representatives of their club as I am of Nike for buying their shoes.

True, also s**t's me when you get the "you guys suck or we are the best". fans. No the team I supports sucks and the team you follow are playing well etc. Your not actually in the side. Having said that though the fans are the most important aspect to league, no fans, no support. No support, no product. No product, no money.

 

[TheGreatBarryB]

Wasn't sure which thread to post this but just curious....what if Dank is maybe discredited or deemed unrelaible? Or even question marks remain.

For example, Dank says I administered AOD, EFC say yes our players were given AOD but what if it wasn't AOD? Not sure how they would find this out of course as most WADA cases are prosecuted on testing etc.

What if it was a placebo and Dank maybe kept all the AOD for private practice?
Basically without any testing we're relying on the word of one man.
And yes maybe we rec'd something worse. I mean would they have been able to ban Armstrong on just one person's evidence?

Not trying to excuse EFC but just want to know more about how ASADA prosecutes without physical evidence.

 

[Tombowler]

True, also s**t's me when you get the "you guys suck or we are the best". fans. No the team I supports sucks and the team you follow are playing well etc. Your not actually in the side. Having said that though the fans are the most important aspect to league, no fans, no support. No support, no product. No product, no money.

Very true, although it's fair enough that the massive industry of the AFL is ignored in favour of the romanticism of the old VFL days when you'd find your 'elites' working in a garage by day and you'd buy your heroes a beer if you ran into them and they'd be genuinely grateful, because they weren't earning 300k a year.

In a sense though, the fans drive so much of the game; there's a real distinction between U.S style supporting and the buying into the club that occurs with AFL; it's fair to say that AFL clubs and their affiliate clubs are more 'clubs' than 'teams' and the mere fact that the fans say talk in the collective personal pronoun is a testament of itself to the importance of our game and the symbiotic relationship between fans and clubs.

In my view, sports betting will eventually kill this. Talking about everything in terms of oddsmaking dehumanises the fan experience; it's not an inspiring win, it becomes the US 'beating the spread' etc.. Tear rolls down cheek as rant ends.

 

[Ned_Flanders]

Wasn't sure which thread to post this but just curious....what if Dank is maybe discredited or deemed unrelaible? Or even question marks remain.

For example, Dank says I administered AOD, EFC say yes our players were given AOD but what if it wasn't AOD? Not sure how they would find this out of course as most WADA cases are prosecuted on testing etc.

What if it was a placebo and Dank maybe kept all the AOD for private practice?
Basically without any testing we're relying on the word of one man.
And yes maybe we rec'd something worse. I mean would they have been able to ban Armstrong on just one person's evidence?

Not trying to excuse EFC but just want to know more about how ASADA prosecutes without physical evidence.

It would be the paper trail, EFC have invoices for AOD, AOD listed on their records, they're done. If substitution has occurred, EFC would need to show how this has occurred.

The easiest way is testing any residual samples you may still have on hand. Other than that, you are relying on someone to break ranks with Dank.

I think this would be very tough to prove unless you have stock on hand for re-testing.

 

[I Rock]

Wasn't sure which thread to post this but just curious....what if Dank is maybe discredited or deemed unrelaible? Or even question marks remain.

For example, Dank says I administered AOD, EFC say yes our players were given AOD but what if it wasn't AOD? Not sure how they would find this out of course as most WADA cases are prosecuted on testing etc.

What if it was a placebo and Dank maybe kept all the AOD for private practice?
Basically without any testing we're relying on the word of one man.
And yes maybe we rec'd something worse. I mean would they have been able to ban Armstrong on just one person's evidence?

Not trying to excuse EFC but just want to know more about how ASADA prosecutes without physical evidence.

Just guessing; the players if didn't know they were supposed to get a banned substance and ni the end didn't get one, then no problem for them. If people at Essendon thought they were getting AOD and ran a program to do it, they just got shafted one way or another. They still planned and implemented a program banned under ASADA/WADA guidelines. Penalties still apply.

 

[I Rock]

Very true, although it's fair enough that the massive industry of the AFL is ignored in favour of the romanticism of the old VFL days when you'd find your 'elites' working in a garage by day and you'd buy your heroes a beer if you ran into them and they'd be genuinely grateful, because they weren't earning 300k a year.

In a sense though, the fans drive so much of the game; there's a real distinction between U.S style supporting and the buying into the club that occurs with AFL; it's fair to say that AFL clubs and their affiliate clubs are more 'clubs' than 'teams' and the mere fact that the fans say talk in the collective personal pronoun is a testament of itself to the importance of our game and the symbiotic relationship between fans and clubs.

In my view, sports betting will eventually kill this. Talking about everything in terms of oddsmaking dehumanises the fan experience; it's not an inspiring win, it becomes the US 'beating the spread' etc.. Tear rolls down cheek as rant ends.

I think that what you write is a fair post, AFL clubs depend on Membership, if you ask for money from someone to support the club. Then they are entitled to have an emotion investment in the club and have opinons and expectations beyond a follower of the club. Although some supporters over vaule their importance/role in a club, I will say this to the cows come how we as the fans of AFL are the most important part of the game. Without us the game is nothing.

 

[I Rock]

With skills as both a senior coach and seasoned drug-peddler, is Prop Joe the perfect fit for Windy Hill?

Props also for "The Wire" reference.

 

[Baldur]

Wasn't sure which thread to post this but just curious....what if Dank is maybe discredited or deemed unrelaible? Or even question marks remain.

For example, Dank says I administered AOD, EFC say yes our players were given AOD but what if it wasn't AOD? Not sure how they would find this out of course as most WADA cases are prosecuted on testing etc.

What if it was a placebo and Dank maybe kept all the AOD for private practice?
Basically without any testing we're relying on the word of one man.
And yes maybe we rec'd something worse. I mean would they have been able to ban Armstrong on just one person's evidence?

Not trying to excuse EFC but just want to know more about how ASADA prosecutes without physical evidence.

Well if the records show that AOD was given then it is considered proven unless it can be shown that the stuff was not AOD.

Has happened in criminal drug cases. Police break in and arrest somebody for possession. Turns out that they purchased very expensive baking soda. So if Essendon still have the vials, they should have the contents tested. Maybe Dank sold them salt water.

 

[Chameleon75]

I think that what you write is a fair post, AFL clubs depend on Membership, if you ask for money from someone to support the club. Then they are entitled to have an emotion investment in the club and have opinons and expectations beyond a follower of the club. Although some supporters over vaule their importance/role in a club, I will say this to the cows come how we as the fans of AFL are the most important part of the game. Without us the game is nothing.

Clubs market on the idea of members being part of the club, it illicits the passion that keeps the cash flowing. But at their core memberships are today a loyalty rewards program. Just like racv club they come with a cap and an annual subscription fee.

 

[Satan]

o

Well if the records show that AOD was given then it is considered proven unless it can be shown that the stuff was not AOD.

Has happened in criminal drug cases. Police break in and arrest somebody for possession. Turns out that they purchased very expensive baking soda. So if Essendon still have the vials, they should have the contents tested. Maybe Dank sold them salt water.

or flush them down the toilets in the outer at WH

 

[Tombowler]

Well if the records show that AOD was given then it is considered proven unless it can be shown that the stuff was not AOD.

Has happened in criminal drug cases. Police break in and arrest somebody for possession. Turns out that they purchased very expensive baking soda. So if Essendon still have the vials, they should have the contents tested. Maybe Dank sold them salt water.

Yes but, in the criminal law at least, owning that baking soda is illegal by virtue of intent...

 

[I Rock]

Clubs market on the idea of members being part of the club, it illicits the passion that keeps the cash flowing. But at their core memberships are today a loyalty rewards program. Just like racv club they come with a cap and an annual subscription fee.

True, however if nobody is supporting the game the product aint selling, if the product aint selling then it's scraped.

 

[Baldur]

Yes but, in the criminal law at least, owning that baking soda is illegal by virtue of intent...

No

 

[blackshadow]

o
or flush them down the toilets in the outer at WH

Has a thorough search of the bowls club been done?

 

[Satan]

Has a thorough search of the bowls club been done?

the "good stuff "was hidden in the jacks

 

[Tombowler]

No

Yes. You're gone under conspiracy. Of course predicated on there being some commercial element, which the raiding of a house would suggest. Doors don't get taken over a gram or two. So you're talking trafficable or commercial quantity. A guy in South Australia did six years over a whole load of re-pressed sugar substitute.

 

[Jimthegreat]

Has a thorough search of the bowls club been done?

Just look for huge, muscle-bound 80yo lawn bowlers...lol!