Great stuff the Pies

[Mutt]

hahaha.....

Here, try again:

Yes, and they can ONLY pursue those 34 players.

Perhaps you should acquaint yourself with exactly what authority to act WADA has.

Go on, give it a go.

Secion 22 of the AFL National Anti-Doping Code 2013 provides for unspecified team penalties at the discretion of the Commission in the event that two or more players are found to have breached the Anti-Doping provisions of the Code. The Code also allows for penalties against support staff.

http://www.afl.com.au/staticfile/AFL Tenant/AFL/Files/Schedule 6 - National Anti-Doping Code.pdf

The AFL Anti-Doping Code is WADA compliant and our sport's bible for the administration of our responsibilities under the WADA Code. Team penalties would be a possible and natural outcome if systematic doping by an AFL team was established by WADA.

Bet your balls WADA are coming after Essendon FC.

 

[threesixpio]

LoL

So according to you Lance there are 3 options

A-victims of drug dealers
B-rogues
C-club systematic doping

And of course C is the most believable option in your mind, anybody who picks options A or B has fallen for the brilliantly orchestrated CFC PR spin, and the AFL brilliant negotiation team who managed to get such a great 'deal' for Keeffe and Thomas.

I like Lance as a poster but it seems to me he is accusing others of hypocrisy (and might have a point btw) whilst pedalling a whole lot of crap which he would rip to bits if levelled at his club (thus also being hypocritical). Can you be doubly hypocritical? If so - that's him in this thread.








What's worse is I'm kind of enjoying it

 

[Mutt]

let me clarify this for you. I tend to avoid doing this because I don't believe I should have to make disclaimers with every post I make, because **** anyone who thinks I should. But maybe you aren't getting it.

I can't speak for "essendon supporters" in general like you seem to be able to. But I can speak for myself, as an essendon supporter.

1) I do not believe any club has engaged in a systematic supplement program like essendon did. Essendon went far further in bringing this kind of thing "in-house", and did in far more of a systematic way, than anyone has ever done before.
2) I am absolutely open to the possibility that, as a result of that systematic supplement program, essendon used banned ped's and cheated. In fact, I'll go further: I think it's quite a bit more likely than not that this is in fact what occurred, whether by accident or design, and it may well have been design.
3) I think it was at best utterly amateurish the way my club conducted itself during that period, and at worst it was deceitful and counter to what sport should be
4) I am livid at the way my club has been set back
5) I am also livid at the PR campaign waged by the AFL on my club, irrespective of who's fault it all is, and the interim report and subsequent action was a disgrace
6) I make no apologies for defending my club, albeit with an open mind and an appreciation of uncomfortable truths
7) I have no doubt there are informal networks of PED use and supply rife within the AFL, with varying degrees of support from some club officials and players
8) This week has been wonderful for displaying the bare-faced hypocrisy of other club supporters who reserve the right to defend their club against scurrilous accusations despite having spent 3 years excoriating efc supporters for doing the same
9) If our club is found to have cheated I have no doubt the majority of efc supporters will accept that decision, but we will not stand for a trial be media and **** you if you think we should
10) asada are utterly incompetent and anyone who mindlessly sticks up for them is either delusional about their support for clean sport within australia or they are just plain stupid.

Apparently though you seem to think it's only EFC who cheat so this might all be a bit lost on you

I don't think that only EFC cheat... but I am convinced that EFC are PEDs cheats. WADA agrees. There is a difference.

If you are convinced that other clubs have a systematic PEDS program then produce something to back up those claims Lance. There is plenty to suggest that EFC cheats and nothing of substance to support your smear campaign against the rest of the competition.

 

[LoungeLizard]

Secion 22 of the AFL National Anti-Doping Code 2013 provides for unspecified team penalties at the discretion of the Commission in the event that two or more players are found to have breached the Anti-Doping provisions of the Code. The Code also allows for penalties against support staff.

http://www.afl.com.au/staticfile/AFL Tenant/AFL/Files/Schedule 6 - National Anti-Doping Code.pdf

The AFL Anti-Doping Code is WADA compliant and our sport's bible for the administration of our responsibilities under the WADA Code. Team penalties would be a possible and natural outcome if systematic doping by an AFL team was established by WADA.

Bet your balls WADA are coming after Essendon FC.

It was discussed many moons ago, i asked questions about the ruling, and the answer to that is.
The AFL make that decision, them and them only.

 

[Jade]

Secion 22 of the AFL National Anti-Doping Code 2013 provides for unspecified team penalties at the discretion of the Commission in the event that two or more players are found to have breached the Anti-Doping provisions of the Code. The Code also allows for penalties against support staff.

http://www.afl.com.au/staticfile/AFL Tenant/AFL/Files/Schedule 6 - National Anti-Doping Code.pdf

The AFL Anti-Doping Code is WADA compliant and our sport's bible for the administration of our responsibilities under the WADA Code. Team penalties would be a possible and natural outcome if systematic doping by an AFL team was established by WADA.

Bet your balls WADA are coming after Essendon FC.

HAHAHAHA..... oh how I love the obtuse....

WADA are pursuing 34 athletes who were all EFC players at the time of the program and therefore there will be incredibly serious implications for your club. If you don't think that WADA is coming after EFC then you are very, very naive.

Yes, and they can ONLY pursue those 34 players.

Perhaps you should acquaint yourself with exactly what authority to act WADA has.

Has it yet occurred to you how remarkably ill informed you are?

 

[threesixpio]

HAHAHAHA..... oh how I love the obtuse....





Has it yet occurred to you how remarkably ill informed you are?

Wada you saying

 

[PicaBoo]

let me clarify this for you. I tend to avoid doing this because I don't believe I should have to make disclaimers with every post I make, because **** anyone who thinks I should. But maybe you aren't getting it.

I can't speak for "essendon supporters" in general like you seem to be able to. But I can speak for myself, as an essendon supporter.

1) I do not believe any club has engaged in a systematic supplement program like essendon did. Essendon went far further in bringing this kind of thing "in-house", and did in far more of a systematic way, than anyone has ever done before.
2) I am absolutely open to the possibility that, as a result of that systematic supplement program, essendon used banned ped's and cheated. In fact, I'll go further: I think it's quite a bit more likely than not that this is in fact what occurred, whether by accident or design, and it may well have been design.
3) I think it was at best utterly amateurish the way my club conducted itself during that period, and at worst it was deceitful and counter to what sport should be
4) I am livid at the way my club has been set back
5) I am also livid at the PR campaign waged by the AFL on my club, irrespective of who's fault it all is, and the interim report and subsequent action was a disgrace
6) I make no apologies for defending my club, albeit with an open mind and an appreciation of uncomfortable truths
7) I have no doubt there are informal networks of PED use and supply rife within the AFL, with varying degrees of support from some club officials and players
8) This week has been wonderful for displaying the bare-faced hypocrisy of other club supporters who reserve the right to defend their club against scurrilous accusations despite having spent 3 years excoriating efc supporters for doing the same
9) If our club is found to have cheated I have no doubt the majority of efc supporters will accept that decision, but we will not stand for a trial be media and **** you if you think we should
10) asada are utterly incompetent and anyone who mindlessly sticks up for them is either delusional about their support for clean sport within australia or they are just plain stupid.

Apparently though you seem to think it's only EFC who cheat so this might all be a bit lost on you

Glad to have that out of the way. I hope you feel better now And here is my disclaimer.
I don't speak for Collingwood supporters. None of the other Collingwood supporters would claim that.
1) I don't believe Collingwood has engaged in any systematic PED program
2) I do believe that the 2 Collingwood players were taking illicit substances. And more then those 2 too. Evidence of that in 2014 and I doubt it would be rubbed out by 2015
3) There is NO evidence of between the found results of the players and CFC. No doubt the club would have tried to make sure the media didn't report on something that was not there.
4) Like you , I will not stand a trial by media nor speculation
5) If there was a serious indication of substance abuse, hang them high. This is the message from Eddie himself too. Already they have done significant damage just by banned this and the next season. They should be glad to be 'forgiven'.
6) ASADA are indeed incompetent / anyone related to the EFC have been very successful in thwarting the process

Grey area's are :
Their side of the story how the PED's got into their system and whether the club knew that or not....
See my point 2. Worst cases scenario, they did both. And they received maximum penalties for it.

 

[tesla1962]

That I still don't know much about that evidence. You?

As for the "well we can't be totally super duper certain it was TB4 despite everyone in the chain believing it was and stating as much on invoices and more because hey look some doco has an incorrect number on it" that has got to be one of the biggest loads of shit I've heard in the whole debacle.

Why did you besmirch the competence of the tribunal members on a point you knew nothing about then LOL
Go and read all about it, it doesn't take that long - it was pretty strange evidence

As for 'what you have heard' I reckon you should actually read the thing, it's all there.

 

[Lance Uppercut]

LoL

So according to you Lance there are 3 options

A-victims of drug dealers
B-rogues
C-club systematic doping

And of course C is the most believable option in your mind, anybody who picks options A or B has fallen for the brilliantly orchestrated CFC PR spin, and the AFL brilliant negotiation team who managed to get such a great 'deal' for Keeffe and Thomas.

no, A and B are possible. I just think they are less likely

 

[Mutt]

HAHAHAHA..... oh how I love the obtuse....





Has it yet occurred to you how remarkably ill informed you are?

I'm not ill-informed - the contrary. You are just engaging in wishful thinking.

The AFL has an obligation to produce a WADA compliant code to meet it's obligations as a WADA compliant sport. The code allows for team penalties and WADA will expect that the AFL administers it's Anti-Doping Code appropriately. To think that the AFL will abrogate its' WADA obligations is just an exercise in closing your eyes and hoping it all goes away on your part.

 

[LoungeLizard]

I'm not ill-informed - the contrary. You are just engaging in wishful thinking.

The AFL has an obligation to produce a WADA compliant code to meet it's obligations as a WADA compliant sport. The code allows for team penalties and WADA will expect that the AFL administers it's Anti-Doping Code appropriately. To think that the AFL will abrogate its' WADA obligations is just an exercise in closing your eyes and hoping it all goes away on your part.

I used to think the same, but the AFL has their own anti-drug code, you best read it

 

[Jade]

Wada you saying

Ha ha... yeah I'm getting a little over the stringing along.

Listen up you frothy little peoples:

The AFL CAN act to penalise the club and/or officials if successful prosecutions are made against two or more players. WADA can not.

WADA can ONLY pursue 34 Essendon players, because they cannot issue the necessary SCNs against other parties. In simple terms, they can appeal, they cannot initiate the action (hence no pursuing EFC coaches).

I sit and watch poster after poster post factual inaccuracies - I rather enjoy pointing them out.

 

[Jade]

I used to think the same, but the AFL has their own anti-drug code, you best read it

There is no doubt I could have said the same thing earlier, but a twisted part of me likes the long extraction.....

 

[threesixpio]

no, A and B are possible. I just think they are less likely

Cmon Lance - you be trolling now (keep going)

 

[Mutt]

I used to think the same, but the AFL has their own anti-drug code, you best read it

The AFL Anti-Drug code is a requirement to be considered a WADA compliant sport. WADA does not write a specific code for each sport - the sports themselves write one to supplement the WADA Code.

 

[LoungeLizard]

The AFL Anti-Drug code is a requirement to be considered a WADA compliant sport. WADA does not write a specific code for each sport - the sports themselves write one to supplement the WADA Code.

The afl has complete discretion when handing out penalties, that is signed off by WADA.
Best if you read their code.

 

[threesixpio]

Ha ha... yeah I'm getting a little over the stringing along.

Listen up you frothy little peoples:

The AFL CAN act to penalise the club and/or officials if successful prosecutions are made against two or more players. WADA can not.

WADA can ONLY pursue 34 Essendon players, because they cannot issue the necessary SCNs against other parties. In simple terms, they can appeal, they cannot initiate the action (hence no pursuing EFC coaches).

I sit and watch poster after poster post factual inaccuracies - I rather enjoy pointing them out.

I sit and watch and laugh my head off

 

[doppleganger]

I like Lance as a poster but it seems to me he is accusing others of hypocrisy (and might have a point btw) whilst pedalling a whole lot of crap which he would rip to bits if levelled at his club (thus also being hypocritical). Can you be doubly hypocritical? If so - that's him in this thread.

He is certainly doing plenty of pedalling.

Main premise seems to be that Keeffe and Thomas, the AFL and CFC have somehow manipulated a good outcome....despite the two players in question copping maximum suspensions for PED use.

His position also appears to be if you believe the drug story, you're a fool and naive.

If you're smart enough to see through the drug story, but believe that they acted out of their own interest with no club involvement, you're a fool and naive.

The only believable outcome according to Lance is that Collingwood were doping ALL of its players, and these two were offered up as sacrificial lambs in an orchestrated move with the AFL to get action on the illicit drug problem, of which Collingwood also has the biggest issue with....if you don't agree with this, you're a fool and naive.

Amirite Lance.

 

[Mutt]

The afl has complete discretion when handing out penalties, that is signed off by WADA.
Best if you read their code.

I've read the Code - yes the AFL Commission has the discretion when handing out team penalties. The AFL will be held to account if it doesn't act appropriately. At no point did I say that WADA can directly penalise the club but the AFL has an obligation to uphold and appropriately administer it's Code. WADA will expect it to; the Federal Government will expect it to; the public will expect it to and I have no doubt that there will be further team sanctions if 34 players are found to have breached the WADA anti-doping rules.

 

[Tiger2709]

HAHAHAHA..... oh how I love the obtuse....





Has it yet occurred to you how remarkably ill informed you are?

Are you talking to yourself, its just you've quoted yourself then asked if you're uninformed?

 

[LoungeLizard]

I've read the Code - yes the AFL Commission has the discretion when handing out team penalties. The AFL will be held to account if it doesn't act appropriately. At no point did I say that WADA can directly penalise the club but the AFL has an obligation to uphold and appropriately administer it's Code. WADA will expect it to; the Federal Government will expect it to; the public will expect it to and I have no doubt that there will be further team sanctions if 34 players are found to have breached the WADA anti-doping rules.

well that's another debate, if you believe what was said a while ago (can't remember who) from the AFL, then there will be no more penalties handed out to the "club"

 

[Stumpy Pete]

I like Lance as a poster but it seems to me he is accusing others of hypocrisy (and might have a point btw) whilst pedalling a whole lot of crap which he would rip to bits if levelled at his club (thus also being hypocritical). Can you be doubly hypocritical? If so - that's him in this thread.








What's worse is I'm kind of enjoying it

I suspect everyone who has posted more than 5 times on this issue could easily be accused of being a hypocrite.

(Except me of course).

Regards

S. Pete

 

[Mutt]

well that's another debate, if you believe what was said a while ago (can't remember who) from the AFL, then there will be no more penalties handed out to the "club"

WADA has changed everything by intervening. The AFL won't be able to sweep this under the carpet if the WADA appeal gets up.

 

[LoungeLizard]

WADA has changed everything by intervening. The AFL won't be able to sweep this under the carpet if the WADA appeal gets up.

Yes but that's a completely different issue.

 

[Tiger2709]

He is certainly doing plenty of pedalling.

Main premise seems to be that Keeffe and Thomas, the AFL and CFC have somehow manipulated a good outcome....despite the two players in question copping maximum suspensions for PED use.

His position also appears to be if you believe the drug story, you're a fool and naive.

If you're smart enough to see through the drug story, but believe that they acted out of their own interest with no club involvement, you're a fool and naive.

The only believable outcome according to Lance is that Collingwood were doping ALL of its players, and these two were offered up as sacrificial lambs in an orchestrated move with the AFL to get action on the illicit drug problem, of which Collingwood also has the biggest issue with....if you don't agree with this, you're a fool and naive.

Amirite Lance.

Over the course of this saga a few Essendon supporters have put themselves on a pedestal thinking they have superior knowledge to everyone else and that the rest of us are fools for not seeing the conspiracy's, while at the same time desperately trying to drag anyone else down with them, they cant see it is this that causes the animosity against them and their club.

Collingwood imo dealt with their issue well, up front and accept what occurred, Essendon on the other hand are still finger pointing like a load of traffic cops and looking for undeserved sympathy no matter how high the evidence stacked against them is, this could have all been over with a year ago but to Hird and Little etc its everyone's fault but their own.