Certified Legendary Thread Sympathy for *essendon - congratulations on '16 Wooden Spoon (RIP The Scales)

Remove this Banner Ad

Status
Not open for further replies.
Seem to be running straight out of the now well worn Essendon Drug Case Handling Playbook.

Set Play 1: Dispute the legality/jurisdiction of "whoever" to be running the case/appeal the way they are.

Set Play 2: Concurrent with 1 (above), plead for reduced/no penalty in case of a guilty finding.

Noted absence from the initial actions seems to be:

Set Play (X): Plead/prove innocence.
 

Log in to remove this ad.

Save me the trouble finding it Mutts, what's the exchange been ?
Someone E-mailed him a screenshot of Big Footy *essendon page with someone abusing him, and he called them out, sorry Hoj, i don't know how to post tweets here, but one of our tech savvy brothers will probably do the honours :p
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

the Essendon players have already stood out of footy last off season which count in any penalty wada may hit them with, can the players do the same again this off season ?
May end up with a no games penalty
They didn't stand out of s**t.

They had their break as per the EBA and then trained together as per normal under the guidance of the club, like every other team in the competition. This is not standing out of the game for a period.

If there are any bans from WADA they will not take any of that into consideration. They may take the duration of the process into account however. There has been media speculation that 'sources' are indicating that the bans if any will be minor, but no one has inside knowledge at this stage and this is just the usual stage setting that has occurred at each step of the process to date to get the public used to the likely outcome.
 
They didn't stand out of s**t.

They had their break as per the EBA and then trained together as per normal under the guidance of the club, like every other team in the competition. This is not standing out of the game for a period.

If there are any bans from WADA they will not take any of that into consideration. They may take the duration of the process into account however. There has been media speculation that 'sources' are indicating that the bans if any will be minor, but no one has inside knowledge at this stage and this is just the usual stage setting that has occurred at each step of the process to date to get the public used to the likely outcome.
It was a joke about how s**t Essendon are, he wasn't legitimately talking about Essendon already copping their punishment.
 
mate I got a bit of detail wrong
wada are appealing so it will be a cas suspention.
cyclists in the armstrong case dobbed him in ,stood out of cycling during the off season , then had that period as part of their penalty same for ess
Same as pinchey from freo , stood out of footy until his b sample and tribunal hearing occurred and it counted in his time /penalty
I am not sure if they can stand out a number of times ?
 
mate I got a bit of detail wrong
wada are appealing so it will be a cas suspention.
cyclists in the armstrong case dobbed him in ,stood out of cycling during the off season , then had that period as part of their penalty same for ess
Same as pinchey from freo , stood out of footy until his b sample and tribunal hearing occurred and it counted in his time /penalty
I am not sure if they can stand out a number of times ?
I hear ya, but they didn't stand out of footy at all. To stad out of the game they would have needed to not train at the club during the pre season, which did not occur. They claimed it was standing out of the game but it wasn't. Now, if they decide not to go back to training in November for the few weeks before the CAS hearing, then that can count. However, they could go down the path of claiming that playing for a team coached by *Hirdy is as good as not playing at all.
 
wada are appealing so it will be a cas suspention.
cyclists in the armstrong case dobbed him in ,stood out of cycling during the off season , then had that period as part of their penalty same for ess
Same as pinchey from freo , stood out of footy until his b sample and tribunal hearing occurred and it counted in his time /penalty
I am not sure if they can stand out a number of times ?
If it was up to * or the AFL they'd claim the bye round as standing out of competition for two weeks.

They trained as a group pretty much all of last pre-season so I fail to see how they've stood themselves out of competition. In comparison Pinchy has missed the entire season... very different.
 
the Essendon players have already stood out of footy last off season which count in any penalty wada may hit them with, can the players do the same again this off season ?
May end up with a no games penalty
Looks like most of the current * listed players of the 34 have been standing out of footy since about round 6. Ironically, Floggard isn't even one of the 34 yet has been standing out of any form of physical contest since he joined *.

pointingseagullwithscumbagcap.jpg
 
There has been media speculation that 'sources' are indicating that the bans if any will be minor, but no one has inside knowledge at this stage and this is just the usual stage setting that has occurred at each step of the process to date to get the public used to the likely outcome.

With Hird* gone, I really don't care one way or another from here how many games they may be suspended for, but it is truly nonsense for anyone in the media to be talking about sources indicating lengths of the bans in the event of a guilty finding. WADA is prosecuting the case but it will come down to the the three CAS judges to decide. I just don't see them being silly enough to speculate on sentences before they have even heard the case. Therefore the media sources are made up bullshit.
 
With Hird* gone, I really don't care one way or another from here how many games they may be suspended for, but it is truly nonsense for anyone in the media to be talking about sources indicating lengths of the bans in the event of a guilty finding. WADA is prosecuting the case but it will come down to the the three CAS judges to decide. I just don't see them being silly enough to speculate on sentences before they have even heard the case. Therefore the media sources are made up bullshit.

..speaking sense as usual LT. :thumbsu:
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top