Monfries and Ryder may separate from Gang of 34

Some interesting comments from one of the lawyers representing the players, Tony Hargreaves.

http://www.theage.com.au/afl/afl-ne...-hits-back-at-asada-boss-20141024-11b6lt.html

"It is disingenuous for McDevitt to tell us to read the 12,000 pages of evidence. We've seen this before and it's not the evidence, it's a summary of what ASADA says is the evidence. We are not talking about 12,000 pages. We are talking about roughly 105 pages for each individual player, which are virtually identical."

"The delays, in our view, are inexcusable. Even allowing for the appeals by Essendon and (James) Hird, we would respectfully say that ASADA completed their interviews with the players in May 2013. The first show-cause letters arrived in June 2014. ASADA has been dealing with this for the past 18 months."

"The AFL cannot decide whether or not to deliver infraction notices against the players until they have been delivered the evidence against those players."

Why would ASADA be dragging its feet if it has compelling evidence that they players took banned substances?
Surely it would be in their best interests to get this over with quickly.
 
Mar 10, 2014
9,166
10,769
AFL Club
Port Adelaide
Other Teams
Man Utd, Celtic, Tanunda
Agree with Wrinkles in part in today's 'Tiser.
Players are the scapegoats (reckon Hird/Dan/EFC, etc are culpable though), and are being set up as fall guys for ASADA to gain credibility through convictions because ASADA can't pin anything (yet) on the guilty parties and are getting desperate.
Players admitted to a similar sounding named (but legal) drug, Thymosin - ASADA interpreting that as admission of the illegal drug, Thymosin Beta+ or some such thing.
 
Sep 20, 2007
8,115
12,244
Dungeon
AFL Club
Port Adelaide
Agree with Wrinkles in part in today's 'Tiser.
Players are the scapegoats (reckon Hird/Dan/EFC, etc are culpable though), and are being set up as fall guys for ASADA to gain credibility through convictions because ASADA can't pin anything (yet) on the guilty parties and are getting desperate.

Wrinkles view is completely swayed by his personal relationship with Dank. How can the players be scapegoats / fall guys? The WADA code is set up to penalise atheletes not coaches etc because at the end of the day they are the ones gaining an illegal advantage on the field. ASADA doesn't have an option currently to penalise other guilty parties other than via team sanctions. WADA will be changing this from January next year though.

Players admitted to a similar sounding named (but legal) drug, Thymosin - ASADA interpreting that as admission of the illegal drug, Thymosin Beta+ or some such thing.

Except there is no paper trail showing the legal Thymosin anywhere near the club but there is for the banned version. That and the effects of the program described by Dank could only be acheived through Thymosin Beta 4.
 
Sep 20, 2007
8,115
12,244
Dungeon
AFL Club
Port Adelaide
Some interesting comments from one of the lawyers representing the players, Tony Hargreaves.

http://www.theage.com.au/afl/afl-ne...-hits-back-at-asada-boss-20141024-11b6lt.html



Why would ASADA be dragging its feet if it has compelling evidence that they players took banned substances?
Surely it would be in their best interests to get this over with quickly.

They haven't. They have been conducting a thorough investigation as is their role. All of Essendon's and Hird's legal posturing has delayed them by months. Even still the timeframe has still been shorter than the Armstrong investigation. Without positive test results an investigation is always likely to be more drawn out.
 
Mar 1, 2014
13,892
17,510
People's Republic of Onkaparinga
AFL Club
Port Adelaide
Other Teams
Cronulla Sutherland Sharks
Brendan Schwab is the man who called for the AFL to break ties with WADA.

Below is the article in which he makes his case. About halfway down Schwab raises some very good examples of how individuals have been unfairly penalised through WADA's 'one size fits all' policy. The Stan Lazaridis case reeks of injustice. I would add that the AFL has backed away from Schwab's suggestion and Schwab may have his own agenda but the article makes interesting reading and shows that the one rule fits all approach from WADA is simply unfair on individuals.

One salient point that Schwab makes is that World Government's have been coerced into adopting WADA policy for fear of being banned from the Olympics and that focuses the spotlight on the Federal Minister as it must surely be approaching the time when the Federal Government lights a fire under ASADA and WADA and insists that they get on with it.

Before anyone jumps the gun I am not necessarily agreeing with Schwab but this article does show that fairness is not always uppermost in the WADA view and we should not expect a 'fair' outcome should the ASADA case ever be proved.

http://www.smh.com.au/sport/why-australian-sports-must-cut-ties-with-wada-20140615-zs8k1.html
 
They haven't. They have been conducting a thorough investigation as is their role. All of Essendon's and Hird's legal posturing has delayed them by months. Even still the timeframe has still been shorter than the Armstrong investigation. Without positive test results an investigation is always likely to be more drawn out.

The investigation was concluded in June.
Why are they still refusing to present the AFL with the evidence?
 
Brendan Schwab is the man who called for the AFL to break ties with WADA.

Below is the article in which he makes his case. About halfway down Schwab raises some very good examples of how individuals have been unfairly penalised through WADA's 'one size fits all' policy. The Stan Lazaridis case reeks of injustice. I would add that the AFL has backed away from Schwab's suggestion and Schwab may have his own agenda but the article makes interesting reading and shows that the one rule fits all approach from WADA is simply unfair on individuals.

One salient point that Schwab makes is that World Government's have been coerced into adopting WADA policy for fear of being banned from the Olympics and that focuses the spotlight on the Federal Minister as it must surely be approaching the time when the Federal Government lights a fire under ASADA and WADA and insists that they get on with it.

Before anyone jumps the gun I am not necessarily agreeing with Schwab but this article does show that fairness is not always uppermost in the WADA view and we should not expect a 'fair' outcome should the ASADA case ever be proved.

http://www.smh.com.au/sport/why-australian-sports-must-cut-ties-with-wada-20140615-zs8k1.html

Love the logic. Let's cherry pick individual errors to try to prove the whole system is broken.

How many doping-violating individuals have been treated "justly" by the WADA system?

And Brendan's only alternative suggestion to WADA was ... standing out of the Olympics. Fairly unhelpful.

Why would the government interfere with a statutory body unless it patently wasn't performing its function? And don't get sucked in by that lawyer's comments earlier - just because a defendant's lawyer complains about a timeframe that there's anything untoward about the timeframe. That it's inconvenient for the players has nothing at all to do with ASADA's function.
 
Sep 20, 2007
8,115
12,244
Dungeon
AFL Club
Port Adelaide
The investigation was concluded in June.
Why are they still refusing to present the AFL with the evidence?

They are following their process of issuing SCN's. You will recall they were in the process of doing the same when Essendon effectively placed an injunction through challenging the legality of the joint investigation. Now that the players have elected not to respond it will move quickly to the next stage and I expect the AFL will see the full evidence shortly. Remember they were part of the joint investigation so will already be aware of much of it anyway.
 
Sep 20, 2007
8,115
12,244
Dungeon
AFL Club
Port Adelaide
Love the logic. Let's cherry pick individual errors to try to prove the whole system is broken.

How many doping-violating individuals have been treated "justly" by the WADA system?

And Brendan's only alternative suggestion to WADA was ... standing out of the Olympics. Fairly unhelpful.

Why would the government interfere with a statutory body unless it patently wasn't performing its function? And don't get sucked in by that lawyer's comments earlier - just because a defendant's lawyer complains about a timeframe that there's anything untoward about the timeframe. That it's inconvenient for the players has nothing at all to do with ASADA's function.

This. Examples can pretty much be found in any legal system of injustices.
 
The investigation was concluded in June.
Why are they still refusing to present the AFL with the evidence?

um,

1) because Essendon's appeal against the legality of the evidence-gathering process only finished in October?
2) because the process is the SCNs go to the players first and then there's a time where the players can respond if they want?
3) because at a hearing, which is effectively what the next stage ADVR panel is, it determines whether there is a case to answer, you don't present all the evidence you would at a trial.

just a quick couple of guesses there.
 
Some interesting comments from one of the lawyers representing the players, Tony Hargreaves.

http://www.theage.com.au/afl/afl-ne...-hits-back-at-asada-boss-20141024-11b6lt.html



Why would ASADA be dragging its feet if it has compelling evidence that they players took banned substances?
Surely it would be in their best interests to get this over with quickly.

Reads more like a lawyer trying to poke holes. "It's a summary of what ASADA says is the evidence" - what a bullshit thing to say.

It appears this lawyer still has his criminal law hat on.
 
Some interesting comments from one of the lawyers representing the players, Tony Hargreaves.

http://www.theage.com.au/afl/afl-ne...-hits-back-at-asada-boss-20141024-11b6lt.html



Why would ASADA be dragging its feet if it has compelling evidence that they players took banned substances?
Surely it would be in their best interests to get this over with quickly.

Investigations overseas show they drag on because the lawyers are always trying to take this outside the "WADA legal system'. I find it funny that a lawyer is complaining about delays and appeals. Lawyers will always tell you there is the correct process that you have to go thru. Well the players rejected the SCN's so its up to the process.
 
What if the Port players plead guilty and the Essendon players are acquitted? Do Essendon get sanctioned then for having two players banned?

BFL - Bad Flaming Luck
 
Agree with Wrinkles in part in today's 'Tiser.
Players are the scapegoats (reckon Hird/Dan/EFC, etc are culpable though), and are being set up as fall guys for ASADA to gain credibility through convictions because ASADA can't pin anything (yet) on the guilty parties and are getting desperate.
Players admitted to a similar sounding named (but legal) drug, Thymosin - ASADA interpreting that as admission of the illegal drug, Thymosin Beta+ or some such thing.

You need to read the Baker and McKenzie article either in April 2013, or the interview was in April but they didn't go to press until a couple of months later, in the Age went all through the interview calling the drug Thymosin Beta 4 but he then said it was Thymoloid
 

Hinkley Effect

Team Captain
Mar 20, 2014
569
1,050
Melbourne
AFL Club
Port Adelaide
Latest article from theage.com.au explaining some of the circumstantial evidence that ASADA have presented pointing towards the use of the banned thymosin beta 4 peptide. They have records of 'thymosin' being administered once every day for 10 weeks which is in line with the administration of thymosin beta 4 whereas the legal thymosin is typically administered once every week for 6 weeks.

"ASADA's case against 34 past and present Essendon players rests heavily on evidence that points to a perfect match between the injection regime at the AFL club in 2012 and the protocol for administering the banned drug, thymosin beta 4."

"According to sports science sources, the standard protocol for the banned synthetic peptide is one injection each weekday for 10 weeks, compared with the injection regime for the natural substance, thymomodulin, which is one injection per week for six weeks."

Apologies if this has already been touched on, but the article mentions that 2 players have sought alternative legal council away from the Essendon group. Could these 2 people be Monfries and Ryder? I remember hearing that Crameri was also considering alternative council...

"Two players have their own legal representation, breaking from the 32 represented by the AFL Players Association."

http://www.theage.com.au/afl/afl-ne...ests-on-injection-regime-20141027-11cgku.html
 

MrMeaner

Brownlow Medallist
Jan 15, 2004
11,268
20,208
Melbourne
AFL Club
Port Adelaide
Apologies if this has already been touched on, but the article mentions that 2 players have sought alternative legal council away from the Essendon group. Could these 2 people be Monfries and Ryder? I remember hearing that Crameri was also considering alternative council...

"Two players have their own legal representation, breaking from the 32 represented by the AFL Players Association."

http://www.theage.com.au/afl/afl-ne...ests-on-injection-regime-20141027-11cgku.html

Crameri and Prismall have hired Rob Stary.
 

Jim Dixon

Club Legend
Aug 5, 2013
2,946
4,110
Canada
AFL Club
Port Adelaide
Latest article from theage.com.au explaining some of the circumstantial evidence that ASADA have presented pointing towards the use of the banned thymosin beta 4 peptide. They have records of 'thymosin' being administered once every day for 10 weeks which is in line with the administration of thymosin beta 4 whereas the legal thymosin is typically administered once every week for 6 weeks.

"ASADA's case against 34 past and present Essendon players rests heavily on evidence that points to a perfect match between the injection regime at the AFL club in 2012 and the protocol for administering the banned drug, thymosin beta 4."

"According to sports science sources, the standard protocol for the banned synthetic peptide is one injection each weekday for 10 weeks, compared with the injection regime for the natural substance, thymomodulin, which is one injection per week for six weeks."

Apologies if this has already been touched on, but the article mentions that 2 players have sought alternative legal council away from the Essendon group. Could these 2 people be Monfries and Ryder? I remember hearing that Crameri was also considering alternative council...

"Two players have their own legal representation, breaking from the 32 represented by the AFL Players Association."

http://www.theage.com.au/afl/afl-ne...ests-on-injection-regime-20141027-11cgku.html

From this Age article.....

Should players come forward within the next few days, volunteer guilt and provide solid evidence, it is expected ASADA will recommend they receive sanctions of less than six months under the substantial assistance provision.
 

MrMeaner

Brownlow Medallist
Jan 15, 2004
11,268
20,208
Melbourne
AFL Club
Port Adelaide
Any info on Stary MrM.?

He is a very effective criminal solicitor. He's probably the best known criminal soli in Victoria.

He has acted for those accused of terrorism, Carl Williams (many other solicitors have done so over time) and Julian Assange (see the Williams comments) amongst others.
 
Someone should appoint Zarah Garde-Wilson as their solicitor. That would send the media into a frenzy.
 
Back