The Bombers ASADA/WADA Saga

[Skoob]

An exception is expected to be made for skipper Jobe Watson and veteran Dustin Fletcher, who are members of the International Rules team that is playing the Irish.

One of the most disgusting things I have read in the last couple of years.
"The players deserve a ban for such a serious breach, but these 2 have a game on Saturday".
What a crock of s**t.
Worst of all, no-one in football will want to, or have the balls to say a thing about it. No players or coaches will be allowed to say anything, and the lot will be forgotten by April.

 

[Hollow Knight]

One of the most disgusting things I have read in the last couple of years.
"The players deserve a ban for such a serious breech, but these 2 have a game on Saturday".
What a crock of s**t.
Worst of all, no-one in football will want to, or have the balls to say a thing about it. No players or coaches will be allowed to say anything, and the lot will be forgotten by April.

Hope the Perth crowds boo Jobe again. Aussie or not.

Edit: on second thought, that's pretty gross... But still...

 

[Skoob]

Hope the Perth crowds boo Jobe again. Aussie or not.

Edit: on second thought, that's pretty gross... But still...

If Fletcher and Watson had any integrity, they'd sit out Saturday's game (if the provisionals eventuate). Although they will want to maintain their innocence, they should show some respect for their mates and say "If they're suspended, then so are we".
Of course if it eventuates as reported, then I have a bigger problem with the AFL than those individuals, but it is about time some of these pricks took responsibility.
The whole idea of 6 month bans for seasonal sports is outrageous, and I bet they get an even further discount to avoid missing any more than one or two games.

 

[Skoob]

Hope the Perth crowds boo Jobe again. Aussie or not.

Edit: on second thought, that's pretty gross... But still...

Thinking more about the booing aspect, Watson is a tough one. On one hand, I believe he is not stupid enough to not have smelled a rat at the time of the programme, but who knows. The booing incidents were off the back of his admissions that all might not have been right. To me, he was probably streets ahead of his coach, club, president and teammates who were all maintaining the "Nothing to see here, we've done nothing wrong" line. At least he faced the public with a "Not sure" and "I agreed to it". Still, my overriding feeling is that he (and most of them) should have known better.
BOOOOO.

 

[T Factor]

Hope the Perth crowds boo Jobe again. Aussie or not.

Edit: on second thought, that's pretty gross... But still...

I hope they don't, as a lions supporter here is WA we don't want to encourage it, I am still getting over them boooing Browny...Browny of all people, they will though.

 

[alscotoz2]

One of the most disgusting things I have read in the last couple of years.
"The players deserve a ban for such a serious breech, but these 2 have a game on Saturday".
What a crock of s**t.
Worst of all, no-one in football will want to, or have the balls to say a thing about it. No players or coaches will be allowed to say anything, and the lot will be forgotten by April.

breech
briːtʃ/
noun
noun: breech; plural noun: breeches

1. 1.
   the part of a cannon behind the bore.
   • the back part of a rifle or gun barrel.
     "the 47-round ammunition drum fits over the breech"
2. 2.
   archaic
   a person's buttocks.

verb
archaic
verb: breech; 3rd person present: breeches; past tense: breeched; past participle: breeched; gerund or present participle: breeching

1. 1.
   dress (a boy) in breeches after he has been in petticoats since birth.
   "in those days it wasn't customary to breech a boy until he was about four"

Are you talking about where people were injected?

 

[Skoob]

*Breach.

 

[The Golfing Lion]

I read that the AFL is ignoring the Hird appeal. This will most likely mean the tribunal is completed by Christmas. I would find that hard to understand.

Hird could win the appeal and if the players have been found guilty (which I feel is more likely than less likely), then surely it opens the AFL up to litigation.

I know they wish to expidite this but they must wait to the appeal is determined even if it delays things. The worst case for them is that the angst will be directed at Hird.

It just seems to be a disaster at every turn

 

[Full Wingspan]

I doubt the appeal will be successful after Justice Middleton's original verdict virtually rubbished the whole scheme.

 

[jackess]

I read that the AFL is ignoring the Hird appeal. This will most likely mean the tribunal is completed by Christmas. I would find that hard to understand.

Hird could win the appeal and if the players have been found guilty (which I feel is more likely than less likely), then surely it opens the AFL up to litigation.

I know they wish to expidite this but they must wait to the appeal is determined even if it delays things. The worst case for them is that the angst will be directed at Hird.

It just seems to be a disaster at every turn

They need to do it before Christmas to suspend the players for 3 months so they don't miss any games.

 

[Viceregal]

They need to do it before Christmas to suspend the players for 3 months so they don't miss any games.

I wonder how many of the people on the ASADA board who said they would be giving up AFL if wet lettuce penalties (ie guilty but none or mostly off season or back dated so they got to retrospectively play in games they otherwise would not have etc) will actually do so.

From my own perspective I can't get my head around how on earth any of the above constitute the slightest deterrent to another club doing the same thing ... now Essendon being deregistered for two years as a club now *that* would be a deterrent!

 

[lionshine]

As someone who has not followed this whole saga, could somebody please explain to me the potential suspensions that up to 34 players could face? Is it a 6 month to 1 year ban? If so, how does that ban work? Is it a ban from playing matches or will they be banned from training as well?

 

[Skoob]

As someone who has not followed this whole saga, could somebody please explain to me the potential suspensions that up to 34 players could face? Is it a 6 month to 1 year ban? If so, how does that ban work? Is it a ban from playing matches or will they be banned from training as well?

While the players theoretically face bans of up to two years if found guilty ASADA is likely to offer heavily discounted penalties, since the players are expected to qualify for a no significant-fault, no significant-negligence defence. This reduces two years to 12 months and this can be halved again if a player provides substantial co-operation to ASADA.

The charge has to be proved to the "comfortable satisfaction" of the AFL's anti-doping tribunal. Backdating of penalties, which occurred in the Cronulla NRL suspensions, is also a strong chance, which could lead to players only missing a small number of games even if they are found guilty.
http://www.theage.com.au/afl/afl-ne...-with-infraction-notices-20141114-11n2zb.html

2 years gets halved because "they didn't do it on purpose", it gets halved again for answering questions nicely. Dunno on what grounds they can backdate. My understanding is they can't train with the club while suspended, but that's what backdating is for.
The system is designed to "let off" teams, as opposed to individuals so that billion dollar competitions aren't messed around. If it were one fringe player, he'd be gone, but stars of the game, let alone whole teams, are protected in the interest of the myriad of the sport's investors.

 

[The Golfing Lion]

As much as I fear you are right Skoob, I hope for the sake of young kids coming into sport that it is not the case.

 

[Chezzalenko Reborn]

Hope the Perth crowds boo Jobe again. Aussie or not.

Edit: on second thought, that's pretty gross... But still...

Then again, West Coast supporters only know one word.... 'BOOOOOOOOOO'

 

[Full Wingspan]

The decision made against Ahmed Saad sets a precedent of sorts as to kind of punishment that should be issued. But as we know and as mentioned above, what incentive does the AFL have to mess around with an entire team within their billion dollar organization?

 

[Panthera]

The decision made against Ahmed Saad sets a precedent of sorts as to kind of punishment that should be issued. But as we know and as mentioned above, what incentive does the AFL have to mess around with an entire team within their billion dollar organization?

WADA is the issue for the Bombers...they can't be seen to allow a minor national sporting competition (which is what the AFL is on a global scale) to go easy on a club and its players who have used banned substances; it would set a very dangerous precedent

 

[KissKiss]

WADA is the issue for the Bombers...they can't be seen to allow a minor national sporting competition (which is what the AFL is on a global scale) to go easy on a club and its players who have used banned substances; it would set a very dangerous precedent

or the NRL...

 

[jackess]

Surely Watson loses his Brownlow as well.

 

[MacMum]

Don't hold your breath waiting for that to happen...unfortunately.

Poor Ahmed Saad. If ever there was an example of one set of rules for one and one set for another, his case was it.

I really couldn't care less if all players get done.....but the one big fish is still swimming around grandly like an untouchable. Hope they throw the book at Hird, and he is never seen in AFL circles again.

...I better take my own advice, I won't hold my breath either.

 

[JasRulz63]

Saad was easy for ASADA though, he had a positive test. This Essendon saga would've been over a lot quicker if that was the case for Essendon.

 

[T Rick]

Saad was easy for ASADA though, he had a positive test. This Essendon saga would've been over a lot quicker if that was the case for Essendon.

Did Lance Armstrong ever have a positive test?

 

[Football Pope]

Don't hold your breath waiting for that to happen...unfortunately.

Poor Ahmed Saad. If ever there was an example of one set of rules one and one set for another, his case was it.

I really couldn't care less if all players get done.....but the one big fish is still swimming around grandly like an untouchable. Hope they throw the book at Hird, and he is never seen in AFL circles again.

...I better take my own advice, I won't hold my breath either.

Reason being A.Saad is an anagram of ASADA.....Spooky hey?

 

[tate13]

Did Lance Armstrong ever have a positive test?

He had Oprah.

 

[JasRulz63]

Did Lance Armstrong ever have a positive test?

Yes, but USADA didn't base it's case on it because the evidence and testimony was so strong.