Peptides! *The * Dopers: come smell the bull****! ESSENDON FANS NOT WANTED

[Wundo]

Tania's notes will be available as a 45,000 page Wikileaks download shortly.

Hird's wife has changed!

Tania is trying to avoid the spotlight

 

[eldorado]

Chip Le Grande has finger on the pulse, his toe in the water, his foot in both camps and his head up his arse. And he gets paid for this.

That's ******* gold!

 

[Procrastinator35]

Hird's wife has changed!

Fell asleep when it was her turn under the tanning-bed....All that dictation tires a gal out.

 

[BobDay]

Discussion on Offsiders Sunday re the OZ swimmer caught testing positive but FINA (read AFL Tribunal) refusing to act and WADA coming over the top some years later.
Gerard Whatley thought the delay was unfair to the swimmer. Then the conversation turned to the bigger picture
They referred to something to do with Australia's position re Koreans (...Don't know what??)
and Roy Masters who i understand claims ASADA/WADA connections commented the WADA intervention on the swimmer does not bode well for Essendon. Implying WADA are looking to strike against Australian exceptionalism.
Other thing I have heard is if WADA find allegations proved a team ban is still possible. If true what a great Xmas present

 

[Hawthorn United]

This is the very definition for why a team ban is neccessary. The team took the steps towards this program, not the players.

 

[Glorious couch life]

It's Ricky Nixon, so take this with more than a grain of salt. But he is still connected in AFL circles, so.., he claims to have the inside word from Tullamarine, and Golden Balls may be gorn!

 

[Glorious couch life]

Mods delete if this is not allowed:



My favourite part is the grade two literacy level. The guy is a bit nuts, so he could be s**t stirring I guess.

 

[Gold Member]

No no no no no no NO NOOOOOOO.

Not until after we host these *s at our home game

 

[Davo23]

No no no no no no NO NOOOOOOO.

Not until after we host these ****s at our home game

Exactly, they may appoint a coach for Essendon,.

I prefer James "I Don't Know What I'm Doing" Hird.

 

[Dewnior]

If * respond in the same way the Blues did when Malthouse was sacked, I'm all for it

 

[savagelunchbox]

Discussion on Offsiders Sunday re the OZ swimmer caught testing positive but FINA (read AFL Tribunal) refusing to act and WADA coming over the top some years later.
Gerard Whatley thought the delay was unfair to the swimmer. Then the conversation turned to the bigger picture
They referred to something to do with Australia's position re Koreans (...Don't know what??)
and Roy Masters who i understand claims ASADA/WADA connections commented the WADA intervention on the swimmer does not bode well for Essendon. Implying WADA are looking to strike against Australian exceptionalism.
Other thing I have heard is if WADA find allegations proved a team ban is still possible. If true what a great Xmas present

The highlighted is quite possible, but the team ban is only plausible if the 'ruling body of the event' make that decision. It's not a WADA/CAS call as far as I know.

This is from the WADA Code:
Consequences for Team Sports
If more than two members of a team in a Team Sport are found to have committed an anti-doping rule violation during an Event Period, the ruling body of the Event shall impose an appropriate sanction on the team (e.g., loss of points, Disqualification from a Competition or Event, or other sanction) in addition to any Consequences imposed upon the individual Athletes committing the anti-doping rule violation.


Unlikely to happen and the AFL, the ruling body, can say that in 2013, they deducted all of Essendon's points so they will backdate the team consequence.

 

[Gold Member]

Consequences for Team Sports
If more than two members of a team in a Team Sport are found to have committed an anti-doping rule violation during an Event Period, the ruling body of the Event shall impose an appropriate sanction on the team (e.g., loss of points, Disqualification from a Competition or Event, or other sanction) in addition to any Consequences imposed upon the individual Athletes committing the anti-doping rule violation.

Be interesting sav.
AFL are a signatory to the code and therefore are duty bound.
Not much ambiguity in the phrase "shall impose".
The 2013 finals series has been well documented as punishment for bringing the game into disrepute regarding governance issues.

Personally I believe there to be only 2 options when the AFL come to the crossroads on this..
Come down on * like a tonne of bricks and send them to the wolves.
or
Protect * and cushion the blow as much as possible.

One of these choices will allow the AFL to salvage what little bit of their tattered reputation remains and start afresh with a clean slate and implement world's best testing and blood passport regime.

The AFL do not need * to make money.
The broadcasters do not need * to make money.

The AFL gravely need to restore the faith that this is indeed a clean competition.

 

[aquila]

The highlighted is quite possible, but the team ban is only plausible if the 'ruling body of the event' make that decision. It's not a WADA/CAS call as far as I know.

This is from the WADA Code:
Consequences for Team Sports
If more than two members of a team in a Team Sport are found to have committed an anti-doping rule violation during an Event Period, the ruling body of the Event shall impose an appropriate sanction on the team (e.g., loss of points, Disqualification from a Competition or Event, or other sanction) in addition to any Consequences imposed upon the individual Athletes committing the anti-doping rule violation.


Unlikely to happen and the AFL, the ruling body, can say that in 2013, they deducted all of Essendon's points so they will backdate the team consequence.

LanceUppercut has been quite strong on this over the journey, that although the afl has signed up to the individual part of wada they didn't sign up to the team sport part. (Listed lance as i haven't looked at it myself)

 

[B&GBlood]

Can't imagine you can cherry pick your parts of the WADA code.

 

[eldorado]

Unlikely to happen and the AFL, the ruling body, can say that in 2013, they deducted all of Essendon's points so they will backdate the team consequence.

I reckon they won't be able to do that.

Remember, they specifically stated that that penalty was for bringing the game into disrepute. Nothing to do with thye far more serious charge of running a systematic drug program.

I reckon the AFL will have to go to the well again, with a range of sanctions beyond what they hit Carlton with.

Bring it on!

 

[savagelunchbox]

I reckon they won't be able to do that.

Remember, they specifically stated that that penalty was for bringing the game into disrepute. Nothing to do with thye far more serious charge of running a systematic drug program.

I reckon the AFL will have to go to the well again, with a range of sanctions beyond what they hit Carlton with.

Bring it on!

I'm not 100% sure on this, but I don't think the ruling body have to impose a team penalty. As the wording says, they "shall" impose a penalty. Then again, I think 'shall' means they are obliged to in a legal sense.

If the AFL are obliged to, you can imagine the AFL will avoid a team being suspended from competition and should a draw be made, forfeits being awarded to their opposition.

 

[eldorado]

I certainly don't want them suspended.

I want a big fine, and, most importantly, draft pick sanctions...

 

[Off The Couch]

I certainly don't want them suspended.

I want a big fine, and, most importantly, draft pick sanctions...

And the medal taken off Watson and Hird sacked

 

[Stranglers]

I'm not 100% sure on this, but I don't think the ruling body have to impose a team penalty. As the wording says, they "shall" impose a penalty. Then again, I think 'shall' means they are obliged to in a legal sense.

If the AFL are obliged to, you can imagine the AFL will avoid a team being suspended from competition and should a draw be made, forfeits being awarded to their opposition.

My understanding is "shall" represents an obligation (otherwise it would be "should"). No word on what the penalty need be though, which gives the AFL an out. Even though the stripping of points in 2013 was for bringing the game into disrepute through 'mismanagement', I'm sure they'll find a way in the event of a guilty WADA funding to tie that penalty to it somehow.

 

[Blaze Storm]

My understanding is "shall" represents an obligation (otherwise it would be "should"). No word on what the penalty need be though, which gives the AFL an out. Even though the stripping of points in 2013 was for bringing the game into disrepute through 'mismanagement', I'm sure they'll find a way in the event of a guilty WADA funding to tie that penalty to it somehow.

Shall is equivalent to will
Should to would
Both are stronger than terms like can/could or may/might

I think if it were an obligation, they would specify "shall be obligated to" or "shall make all intents to" or "shall do so to the best of their ability"

 

[Bedi]

bit concerned about all this and the implications it has for the movie Brendon Goddard promised us when Essendon win the flag

 

[Brishawk]

And the medal taken off Watson and Hird sacked

I did some regression analysis of Jobe Watson and you wouldn't believe it but his performance in 2012 was the peak of his career. So much so that regression analysis against several statistics (kicks, clearances etc) indicates that the variable that explains most of the improvement in 2012 was 'drug use'. While it is possible that this is simply a coincidental performance peak the 'drug use' variable is significant to 95% confidence and as such the coincidence would only exist in approximately 5 out of 100 samples. 95% is a typical level of confidence used in science so the relationship is very strong.

I will never recognize him as a Brownlow medalist.

 

[Blaze Storm]

I did some regression analysis of Jobe Watson and you wouldn't believe it but his performance in 2012 was the peak of his career. So much so that regression analysis against several statistics (kicks, clearances etc) indicates that the variable that explains most of the improvement in 2012 was 'drug use'. While it is possible that this is simply a coincidental performance peak the 'drug use' variable is significant to 95% confidence and as such the coincidence would only exist in approximately 5 out of 100 samples. 95% is a typical level of confidence used in science so the relationship is very strong.

I will never recognize him as a Brownlow medalist.

*alleged drug use

... no wait, he admitted to being injected with AOD-9604 and is only getting off due to technicalities.

...carry on

 

[Argy]

I did some regression analysis of Jobe Watson and you wouldn't believe it but his performance in 2012 was the peak of his career. So much so that regression analysis against several statistics (kicks, clearances etc) indicates that the variable that explains most of the improvement in 2012 was 'drug use'. While it is possible that this is simply a coincidental performance peak the 'drug use' variable is significant to 95% confidence and as such the coincidence would only exist in approximately 5 out of 100 samples. 95% is a typical level of confidence used in science so the relationship is very strong.

I will never recognize him as a Brownlow medalist.

You should forward your work to the media...!

 

[Rushed_Behind]

I did some regression analysis of Jobe Watson and you wouldn't believe it but his performance in 2012 was the peak of his career. So much so that regression analysis against several statistics (kicks, clearances etc) indicates that the variable that explains most of the improvement in 2012 was 'drug use'. While it is possible that this is simply a coincidental performance peak the 'drug use' variable is significant to 95% confidence and as such the coincidence would only exist in approximately 5 out of 100 samples. 95% is a typical level of confidence used in science so the relationship is very strong.

I will never recognize him as a Brownlow medalist.

Any chance you can post your findings in here. Even if you don't send in your results to the media I'm sure they'll see it in here.