Ryan Crowley tests positive to banned substance (Opposition supporters tread carefully)

[Seppo]

Case Dates:
ASADA Submission 2/4/15
Player Submission 17/4/15
AFL Submission 21/4/15
ASADA Submission reply 24/4/15
Hearing Date 1/5/15

Don't see Crowley playing until the 2nd week of May at the earliest.

 

[yoong]

Interesting.
I was expecting a gap in case ASADA or Essendon wanted to appeal the tribunal results.

 

[Taylor]

Interesting.
I was expecting a gap in case ASADA or Essendon wanted to appeal the tribunal results.

That two week window between submissions looks like you could fly a bomber through it.

 

[yoong]

Don't see Crowley playing until the 2nd week of May at the earliest.

He'll be just in time to terrorize boomer

 

[Okinakashi]

I'm sorry, but this is a multi Billion Dollar industry and they can't get a freakin tribunal sorted out for over 6 months.

Seriously AwFL - this is a joke!

 

[Wizard]

So i think we should get a "top up player" or at worst be able to elevate a rookie in his place until such time as we have a result.

 

[clogged]

I'm sorry, but this is a multi Billion Dollar industry and they can't get a freakin tribunal sorted out for over 6 months.

Seriously AwFL - this is a joke!

If it was up to them there would be no tribunal.

 

[Agenfrida]

He'll be just in time to terrorize boomer

I hope he's growing his nails as we speak.

 

[GilG]

I'm sure someone has posted this, about the May 1 hearing date, but in case you missed it: https://au.news.yahoo.com/thewest/a/26818749/crowley-drug-test-hearing-date-set/

 

[eastfreo75]

Why has it taken so long?

 

[Taylor]

See the Bombers fly up, up


That's why.

 

[Tazmania]

Got told is week it was Pethidine tablets. Don't know if that is true 100% but seems feasible.

 

[holy diver]

I suppose whatever sanctions they impose against the Bombers players with give some sort of guideline to what Crowley should expect. At a guess - 1-2 years suspension.

 

[Arcassius]

They will need to tread carefully - if they are light on the bombers they will need to be light on Crowley, if they are harsh on Crowley but light on the Bombers it'll be a shitfight

 

[Rockford]

They will need to tread carefully - if they are light on the bombers they will need to be light on Crowley, if they are harsh on Crowley but light on the Bombers it'll be a shitfight

Just playing devil's advocate, but they could go harsh on Crowley (failed test) and easy on the Bombers (no "evidence" of what was injected) if they wanted to.

 

[Arcassius]

Just playing devil's advocate, but they could go harsh on Crowley (failed test) and easy on the Bombers (no "evidence" of what was injected) if they wanted to.

You're right, they could - it'll be a frikkin annoying conclusion though, given the intent behind each event. One for sketchy performance enhancement across a team, and one for pain management.

 

[Fred Ziffel]

Interesting you bring up his scaly mates given Caro mentioned in an article today that Crowley has been cautioned about the company he was hanging around with. I know she's a gossip columnist, but there's usually some element of truth to it, and WA journos are generally either too gutless or too incompetent to publish that stuff themselves.

Makes you wonder if the scaliest of his mates were of the Cousins/Gardiner underworld ilk or something a little tamer.

So, the inference is his scaly mates are doctors
His specified substance category is now being termed Banned for sensationalism and being linked in with unlawfulness.
What happened to a prescribed painkiller ?

 

[Fred Ziffel]

Just playing devil's advocate, but they could go harsh on Crowley (failed test) and easy on the Bombers (no "evidence" of what was injected) if they wanted to.

But the AFL are unable to corrupt this like they do everything else.
This tribunal is beyond AFL manipulation, is it not?

 

[DJ Dupree]

Just would like to wish Crowley all the best. Tough what he's going through, and I hope he gets through and continues his career, as he found his niche as one of the game's best villains (particularly in 2013).

Saw him on the Footy Show last year, and gained a lot of respect for him.

He's not a drug cheat and **** anyone who says he is. He's just a good guy who wanted to continue making the most of his one shot at the big league, and perhaps was a bit silly in how he did it, but completely understandable. I'd be gutted for him if this meant curtains.

All the best to him, and you guys, for the year and beyond.

 

[Frank J Moose]

I suppose whatever sanctions they impose against the Bombers players with give some sort of guideline to what Crowley should expect. At a guess - 1-2 years suspension.

The two cases are so different as to have absolutely no impact on each other.

 

[Taylor]

But the AFL are unable to corrupt this like they do everything else.
This tribunal is beyond AFL manipulation, is it not?

It's an AFL tribunal.

 

[holy diver]

The two cases are so different as to have absolutely no impact on each other.

They are obviously different in many ways (Hird's Soviet era type program was insane) however the main issue remains the same - alleged use of a banned substance.

Crowley is in the s**t.

 

[Tazmania]

Just would like to wish Crowley all the best. Tough what he's going through, and I hope he gets through and continues his career, as he found his niche as one of the game's best villains (particularly in 2013).

Saw him on the Footy Show last year, and gained a lot of respect for him.

He's not a drug cheat and **** anyone who says he is. He's just a good guy who wanted to continue making the most of his one shot at the big league, and perhaps was a bit silly in how he did it, but completely understandable. I'd be gutted for him if this meant curtains.

All the best to him, and you guys, for the year and beyond.

Far out! A north supporter who doesn't diss Crowley. Respect.

 

[DJ Dupree]

Far out! A north supporter who doesn't diss Crowley. Respect.

Haha..he's annoying, but nothing he's done ever comes close to the category of 'dog act'. And as I said, seeing his personality on the panel of TFS last year surprised me. Very humble, self-deprecating humour. Honestly thought he'd be a bit arrogant.
I always respect someone who plays their role paricularly well, and makes the most of their chances, which he certainly has done.

 

[yoong]

Just playing devil's advocate, but they could go harsh on Crowley (failed test) and easy on the Bombers (no "evidence" of what was injected) if they wanted to.

Agreed. Putting on my tin foil hat, it could be used to proof a point to asada. "See our tribunal is fair. We hit that Crowley guy really hard. Essendon players got off because..."