Footy Classified special 9:30pm EST 27/08 - better Episode in OP

Remove this Banner Ad

Was certainly an interesting interview.

Bomber was all over the shop, he waffled on at times and said some pretty bizarre things like how the AFL should have stopped them going down the peptide path after they'd been warned not to (wtf?) but he still looked like he was trying to give a more honest account of things than most people at Essendon. Not sure if he was being totally honest though as he still tried to deflect and shift blame at times and some of his answers didn't make much sense but he also seemed like he was genuinely confused and in the dark about some of the stuff that went on.

Have to give him credit for at least fronting up and trying to provide some answers about what went on.
 
The 747 said:
Kudos to Bomber, he didnt come off well and if he was a vain bloke all about his own self image he wouldnt have gone on the show. But he is the only bloke from Essendon willing to front up and talk, which says something.

Was surprised at how deficient Essendons club structure is, the line about Robinson having the same job as at GFC but EFC not being able to control him was interesting. And I dont think GFC are ahead of the other strong clubs either.
Click to expand...

At Geelong all Robinson was in charge of was strength and conditioning only, Paul Haynes, Steven Hocking, Neil Balme and the two club doctors oversaw everything he was doing whereas at Essendon it seems as if Robinson has free rein to do as he wished
 
Cheshire Cat said:
He definitely appeared that way. I hate to even suggest this (and I'm not) - but his manner and demeanour was consistent with someone high on coke or speed.
Click to expand...

Consistent with someone who is stressed, upset and exhausted perhaps?

No, you are right, straight after the hearing Bomber laid out some lines and then went on TV. Didnt bother to wipe off the makeup, went straight to the clubz afters.
 

Log in to remove this ad.

CF said:
Fair point. But he said the environment at Essendon wasn't right for Robinson and inferred that's why things deteriorated for him at that Club. If Bomber knew the environment at Essendon wasn't suitable for someone like Dean Robinson, why did he push them to hire him? It just doesn't really make sense, as many of the contradictions Bomber made in that interview didn't make sense.
Click to expand...
can't just look at 2011 to the present here. ESS had recently come out of a period where they had just one coach in nearly 30 years. furthermore, Sheeds didn't step down and had no intention of leaving the club at the time. his contract wasn't renewed. this tells me that setting up the club for the future without him wasn't a priority at the time and so this sort of planning didn;t happen. contrast this with Manchester United where SAF and the board planed for succession and life without the influential manager.

Knights didn't have the personality to impose himself, and certainly didn't have the respect that Sheedy had. he was never wholly accepted into the Essendon family so front office could easily control him. but the governance inadequacies that existed at the tail end of sheedy's tenure were not improved. the environment was ripe for a club legend with the character of hird to come in and take over the joint.

finally, even though Bomber was aware that policies and procedures weren't as strong at Essendon as they are at Geelong under Cook, he probably never thought that such a scenario could occur at a club. seriously, would anyone in the AFL world? particularly bomber who came from such a strong environment where contemplation of such a program would never have been considered.

He also said Robinson had the same role at Essendon as he did at Geelong which is pure baloney. Robinson was only the strength & conditioning coach at Geelong, at Essendon he ran the whole fitness program. This is common knowledge. So why push Robinson into running a whole fitness department when you knew the unprofessional environment of the club was something that would be a detriment to the man?
Click to expand...
what does a strength & conditioning manager do?

I think Bomber told a number of lies during that interview because he found himself getting asked questions that cut to the bone. It was a colossal mistake for him to go on that show so soon after the sanctions were handed down and I don't think he did much in restoring the faith of Bomber supporters.
Click to expand...

they were firing questions, not letting him finish what he was saying but instead seizing on things he was saying before he could explain them. bomber isn't the best of speakers and choosing words, but they had him answering one thing and questioning him over something else mid-thought. and yeah, he'd had already had a fairly ****ed couple of days.
 
I've watched the interview a couple of time now and I actually think he did alright. I think it was the first time he really felt let off the chain so to speak and thus he let loose a little. His answers were at times unclear and I think his general thoughts on all of this are all over the place so it's probably not surprising that he came off as confused at times etc. I get the impression that very few open and honest conversations have gone on between a lot of these guys in the last few months, to me that's one of the reasons for the frustration and confusion still radiating out of Bomber. I just don't get the impression that people have stood up and asked the hard questions of each other.

All that said, I think Bomber comes out of this ok. I obviously don't know what his role has been inside the club but he has come off as pretty credible in his media stuff from what I've seen. Certainly more credible than anyone else at the club bar Evans (and maybe doc reid if we heard from him). He seems genuine, he seems concerned, he seems sensible. He is still coming across as somewhat defiant in his beliefs but it seems genuine to me, there's not the belligerence or arrogance that others seem to be employing to mask everything and anything. He doesn't seem to have the bunkered down attack at all costs mentality. His comments seem at times thoughtful - he looks like he struggles with a lot of this. It doesn't look like blind defiance and loyalty from him. It also helps that he's not so often playing semantics and word games and half truths with things, that's my impression anyway.

It may also be that he comes out looking ok simply because Hird comes out looking so bad. I really struggle to understand how badly his PR people etc have been reading the situation, that or he wasn’t listening early on and so they resorted to telling him what he wanted to hear. That maybe has credence after hearing Bomber say his lawyers told him to stand down in round 3. It seems like since then he’s taken everything personally and has decided any sign of weakness from him and he’ll be stood down, thus the belligerent defiance. The problem with that though is he lost all credibility. He showed no doubt in situations where there was plenty and that’s why Bomber survives this better – he showed his fallibility and uncertainty, he let us see his doubts and thus it’s easier for us to continue to believe him or in him.

I almost forgot but the other thing I noticed in the interview is Bomber saying Dank has a problem with ASADA and the AFL but he spoke to the ACC several times. People seem to forget when the ACC want to talk you don't have a choice, you also don't have the option of saying nothing. You say everything and no matter what it can't be used against you. My take on all that is when Dank was talking to the ACC candidly and with no fear he probably started to realise (or it was spelled out to him) the problem he had with some of the substances he was administering and so he now knows he can't talk to ASADA and the AFL because he will then have problems. ASADA's new powers are still substantially weaker than ACC's coercive powers and so they will never get the same depth of information as the ACC has. People who criticise the "darkest day in sport" press conference need to understand the ACC is by far the best placed to get the full picture and report it (because people can talk fully without fear). Whether other agencies like ASADA can ever replicate enough of the evidence independently to bring charges (and it as to be independently as the ACC evidence cannot be used for anything but intelligence) though should not discredit the ACC report, nor bring any comfort in terms of the games links with PEDs and organised crime etc.
 
kickazz said:
Disagree on the drunk/drugged opinions. I think we saw a man who's been dying to speak for a long time but was not allowed to, combined with confusion and a lot of stress. His mind is in overload, that's all.
Click to expand...

I thought given there was a sense of reflection now available, he might have been able to relax a bit. He has been composed throughout, and no doubt his mind is in over load, but in my opinion it was either, drugs/ alcohol or a man about to have a complete breakdown.

My observations are more about skipping from one train of thought to the next, answering and talking very quickly and not making much sense, over the top hand gestures, inability to keep arms still, eratic blinking and mouth movements and a sense of general 'high and eratic energy'. I fail to see how a few more tough questions would see him desend into that type of behavior, when on 360 he is measured, self assured, composed, thoughtful and generall passive in his responses.

I am not presuming drugs, though the behavior was totally consistant with cocain use, I would more presume alcohol as that can have similar effects especially if mixed with stress.

I don't see the big deal if he has had 5-6 strong whiskeys after all he has been through, he indicated his Wife was 'over there' and gestured to his left which can me the sense of a designated driver being needed, If it was me i'd be putting a few back for sure.

I just think, assuming this was the case, it led to some horribly unclear and eratic answers, i think he would wake up and regret parts of what were said.
 
mcgarnacle said:
finally, even though Bomber was aware that policies and procedures weren't as strong at Essendon as they are at Geelong under Cook, he probably never thought that such a scenario could occur at a club. seriously, would anyone in the AFL world? particularly bomber who came from such a strong environment where contemplation of such a program would never have been considered.
Click to expand...

So I guess you think that Bombers appraisal of Robinson's tenure at Essendon was in hindsight. Maybe, he gave me the impression he knew it was going to be difficult for Robinson at Essendon and the fact that proper HR practices were not followed in hiring him then Bomber should take a good proportion of the blame for what happened to Robinson at that club.


mcgarnacle said:
what does a strength & conditioning manager do?
Click to expand...

My understanding he was in charge of weight training/physical strength and getting the players bodies to a size that could handle the rigours of the game. I also believe he worked with the boys on tackling with what he knew from his NRL days. Paul Haynes was fitness co-ordinator at the club and Robinson worked under him.



mcgarnacle said:
they were firing questions, not letting him finish what he was saying but instead seizing on things he was saying before he could explain them. bomber isn't the best of speakers and choosing words, but they had him answering one thing and questioning him over something else mid-thought. and yeah, he'd had already had a fairly ****** couple of days.
Click to expand...

Which just underscores the fact that he should never have of appeared in the first place. Today would've have been a better time to make a public statement, not a few hours after the sentence was handed down. This was not 360 where the boys looked after him and asked him soft questions. Caro hammered him and made him look bad.
 
That was very uncomfortable to watch. Thompson seemed very twitchy and unsure of himself and was getting more and more confused as the interview went on. I've never thought he was a very accomplished speaker but last night was about the worst I've seen.
 
royalsfan said:
That was very uncomfortable to watch. Thompson seemed very twitchy and unsure of himself and was getting more and more confused as the interview went on. I've never thought he was a very accomplished speaker but last night was about the worst I've seen.
Click to expand...
Surprised the club let him or anyone involved with the club on the show. They would have all been too highly strung to speak rationally.
 
La Vache said:
There is no doubting that he was a mess but I feel as a lover of footy it was in some ways exactly the type of exchange I have been hanging out for. No prepared statements, no council, no lawyers, just a raw unadulterated emotional man spilling his guts. I guess somehow, paradoxically, Bomber's own mental disintegration stripped the issue down a bit for me and what I saw was a bloke, and I reckon a club, in turmoil. A toxic mixture of defiance, shame, guilt, fury and most of all total confusion.
Click to expand...

Yep. All along we've heard that Essendon want to tell their story but can't/won't. They've said there is more you need to know, but they can't/won't tell us.

One thing about last night is that it's the first time we've actually heard what this story may be. And despite the fact that Bomber looked like he was a coked-up stockbroker, the story was all over the place.
 
Pretty sure Essendon FC wont be happy with the interview. He seemed to bring it all back to the newly extended future coach J Hird. The AFL told him not to do it. he said not to do it and asked them to stop. The Doc wrote saying they shouldnt do it. But Hird went ahead and did it anyway... Oh, and the AFL should have come and checked that Hird wasnt doing what they warned him not to do.
Fascinating.
 
royalsfan said:
That was very uncomfortable to watch. Thompson seemed very twitchy and unsure of himself and was getting more and more confused as the interview went on. I've never thought he was a very accomplished speaker but last night was about the worst I've seen.
Click to expand...

I got the impression that he was reaching the point were cognative dissonance and reality were crashing together.

I feel he honestly believed that Hird and Doc Reid would not and could not just let Dank run a dodgy programme. And since the fact that Dank seems to have had carte-blanche with the players treatment regime and Hird got caught up in that, it is the first time he has been able to stop and reflect on the harsh reality.

He struggled when confronted with facts like "the AFL warned Hird away from peptides". He really stopped and thought about the real implications. Which are "Well, we might have actually injected our players with banned substances". He still could not accept this and his ultimate answer was about 'we do not know what went into our players'. He could see how even that situation is untenable, but was reluctant to comprehend the implication of the 1st thought that player did get banned substances.

I ignored the fidgety and uncomfortable stuff, that is a by-product of the stressful situation he has found himself in. I never got the impression that he was drunk/on drugs. I listened to the answers he gave and I came away with the impression that he is a conflicted man. He didn't want the injection regime to continue and found it beyond his control to stop it and was disappointed in himself. I also feel that he isn't yet ready to accept that the club was responsible for banned substances being injected into players. He was clearly distressed about the proceedings of the previous week and he did a very good job holding things together. I didn't get the impression he was lying or trying to dodge the truth, rather that he did not know what the real truth was and that the truth was too confronting to deal with.

ASADA need to either come out and say "not enough evidence to suspend players" or "Dank did the dirty and "x" infractions apply". This is the only way for the Football community to get final closure on this issue.
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

The biggest thing for me was the continuing diffusion of responsibility. The AFL should have stopped us. We didn't know exactly what Dank was doing so you can't blame us. I was concerned enough to demand an immediate stop to injections, but once I said it in a meeting I'd done my bit. It's not my fault players weren't informed because speaking to players isn't my job.

The buck doesn't actually stop with anyone.
 
evo said:
He was extra schizo last night though. Almost reminded me of some of Zizek's performances.

blackcat
Click to expand...

how is Kent Kingsley's current girlfriend. last i saw of kent kingsley, he was an extra in the middle low brow middle age mom show Offspring. like clint bizzel and andrew welsh, is he now joined theatre players agency?

i think bomber needs some of that smack Slavo is on.

last academic semester he and unlce Noam have been having an academic hubris off. after reading a precis, i left them to themselves
 
royalsfan said:
That was very uncomfortable to watch. Thompson seemed very twitchy and unsure of himself and was getting more and more confused as the interview went on. I've never thought he was a very accomplished speaker but last night was about the worst I've seen.
Click to expand...

Thompson was probably juiced up on Peptides :)
 
Caesar said:
The biggest thing for me was the continuing diffusion of responsibility. The AFL should have stopped us. We didn't know exactly what Dank was doing so you can't blame us. I was concerned enough to demand an immediate stop to injections, but once I said it in a meeting I'd done my bit. It's not my fault players weren't informed because speaking to players isn't my job.

The buck doesn't actually stop with anyone.
Click to expand...


Hang on Caesar, he does have a point here re the AFL Warning them off.

If the AFL Warned James Hird off the peptides, it would have been prudent of the AFL to ensure that he had not engaged in an exotic supplement program.

As such they didnt follow up on the warning till they were too far down the garden path.

The AFL has a duty to the game to follow up on that.

I would say the AFL has a culpability in this, but you won't hear them discuss that.

The rest of your points I agree with.
 
Whether or not the AFL should have followed it up isn't the point. It isn't remotely relevant to what Essendon's duty was to their own freaking players.

That's what I fundamentally have a problem with. This pervading idea that if you can point the finger at someone else, it diminishes or abrogates your own responsibility. Everyone stands around pointing fingers at everyone else and says its a governance failure. Everybody is at fault, thus nobody is.

Just once - once! - when something like this happens I would love someone to stand up and say: no matter what everybody else did and should and could have done, I had the opportunity to stop this, and I had a responsibility to stop it, and I didn't stop it. It is my fault.

Responsibility for good governance is joint and several. Everybody forgets the 'and several' bit.
 
Yeah I agree with you, it doesn't abrogate Essendon's responsibility whatsoever, they have the ultimate responsibility for all of this.

But if the governing body sees its responsibilities as to just warn the club and not follow through to see if the warning is heeded, they are culpable as well.
 
Believe me, I have no problem with people criticising the AFL's conduct in this matter. I have a big problem with Bomber bringing it up in an interview as a deflection tactic, that's all. It's an attitude that shows he doesn't get it.
 
Did love it when Bomber continually put Caro back in her box. She always does that -
a guest is answering a question or talking and she always tries to butt in
 
Caesar said:
The biggest thing for me was the continuing diffusion of responsibility. The AFL should have stopped us. We didn't know exactly what Dank was doing so you can't blame us. I was concerned enough to demand an immediate stop to injections, but once I said it in a meeting I'd done my bit. It's not my fault players weren't informed because speaking to players isn't my job.

The buck doesn't actually stop with anyone.
Click to expand...

Perfectly summarised.
 
CakeEater said:
If the AFL Warned James Hird off the peptides, it would have been prudent of the AFL to ensure that he had not engaged in an exotic supplement program.

As such they didnt follow up on the warning till they were too far down the garden path.

The AFL has a duty to the game to follow up on that.

I would say the AFL has a culpability in this, but you won't hear them discuss that.
Click to expand...

Are these five-year-olds we're talking about? Or a coaching staff at a 60 million dollar a year business?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Satan
Pharmacist involved in essendon saga sadly found dead
Replies
3
Views
728
Satan
Satan

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top