Armchair Critic
Cancelled
- Feb 8, 2013
- 9,566
- 11,241
- AFL Club
- Sydney
It had nothing to do with his conviction though. Those tests were sorted with a backdated TUE
Play Nice The CAS Appeal thread - update: appeal fails (11/10/16)
- Thread starter The_Wookie
- Start date
- Tagged users None
It had nothing to do with his conviction though. Those tests were sorted with a backdated TUE
Does it make you suspicious though of a backdated TUE?
There was also this
Though, fair enough that there was no B sample to let that fly.
As Abasi a co incidence,
Or TerryWallet a coverup is hardy yacca.
it all started with a disgruntled Floyd Landis. 'Whistle blower' lawsuit and away it went from there.
I think he had dodgy blood samples in 09-010 too but essentially the reason for his ultimate downfall were his states dobbing him in.
Once ol' General George Hincapie was sworn in it was lights out for Lance.
Check out 'The Armstrong Lie' on YT. Eye opening viewing.
Possible but why tell someone lies like that? It would hardly make his business look better. Couple this to Dr Harcourt's presentation and it shows that the AFL, at least, had full belief that this actually went down. Dr Harcourt probably never imagined his presentation on the other side of the world would make it back to Oz, so he spoke what he obviously believed was the truth. I can tell you that when you present at an International Conference, you generally make sure your facts are 100% correct.
My view was he thought TB4 was only S0 banned, could get around it but at some point in time discovered it was S2. Then he switched to calling it thymomodulin, a drug he had read about but one he knew would be useless. He just then asked for a backdated spreadsheet to document thymomodulin's use to cover his tracks. Relabelled vials and started calling TB4 thymomodulin around the club.
- Banned
- #1,055
its quite strange and even comical that they suggest the "
It was confirmed on Thursday that a last-ditch bid to clear the names of the Essendon 34 found guilty of an anti-doping breach by the Court of Arbitration for Sport would go ahead through an appeal before the Swiss Federal Tribunal.
then they will clear their names because the appeal would be fought on a legal technicality.
So they did all that s**t and all the stuff that WADA suggests went down, but they are clear because WADA couldnt appeal because the rules said so and that now translates to clearing their names??? Get the f**k outta here with that s**t FFS...
It was confirmed on Thursday that a last-ditch bid to clear the names of the Essendon 34 found guilty of an anti-doping breach by the Court of Arbitration for Sport would go ahead through an appeal before the Swiss Federal Tribunal.
then they will clear their names because the appeal would be fought on a legal technicality.
So they did all that s**t and all the stuff that WADA suggests went down, but they are clear because WADA couldnt appeal because the rules said so and that now translates to clearing their names??? Get the f**k outta here with that s**t FFS...
Why?
Because dodgy people have all kinds of games they like to play. As dumb as it sounds some get a thrill out of playing people like that seeing what they can get them to believe. I'm not saying this is the case with Dank here. And I accept CAS's findings on Tb4.
From the pov of an honest person yeah your point is well made.
But then you get to (and I think was a dumb statement) Hirds comment the other night with Tracey he doesn't see why Dank would break protocol and use something prohibited. From an honest persons pov thats fair.
But I think it is fair to say that isn't Dank, and for Dank their is a good reason to d it, good results, a new contract, or a contract elsewhere.
Mine too. Which is why the players feel duped. Major stuff up on Dank's Behalf.
jenny61_99
Premium Platinum
They don't really have the opportunity to try to clear the names (that time is long gone), so they are fighting on a legal technicality, which is the only appeal option available to them.
- Banned
- #1,059
yeah and the appeal is successful so what does that achieve? like what is the outcome that this Paul Marsh is after, outside his own boost in the ratings.
Armchair Critic
Cancelled
- Feb 8, 2013
- 9,566
- 11,241
- AFL Club
- Sydney
Does it make you suspicious though of a backdated TUE?
There was also this
Though, fair enough that there was no B sample to let that fly.
As Abasi a co incidence,
Or TerryWallet a coverup is hardy yacca.
It was not just suspicious it was a dead set cover up.
Armchair Critic
Cancelled
- Feb 8, 2013
- 9,566
- 11,241
- AFL Club
- Sydney
Yeah once the feds were on to Lance he was going to get screwed one way or another. If Lance had just given Floyd a ride once he returned from his suspension then none of this probably occurs.
Armchair Critic
Cancelled
- Feb 8, 2013
- 9,566
- 11,241
- AFL Club
- Sydney
You have to first believe that the protocol was ever intended to be followed though. When you are involving convicted drug dealers I would be more inclined to believe it was all just window dressing to cover their arses.
Maybe and a point that could be made. I think it;s a case you could theorize many aspects the saga and no one is ever likely to agree. No one is ever likely to be wrong.
jenny61_99
Premium Platinum
And one the AFL was trying to manufacture in this situation. If it hadn't been for that pesky ACC, they may well have got away with it.
- Banned
- #1,065
i have a sneaky suspicion that all this crap playing out is purely to cloud over the one thing that WADA havent done, can do and might do...ban the club because more than 2 of its playing list were found guilty for doping...so the players are being used as a front for that...
TheArchivist
Debutant
- Nov 18, 2014
- 108
- 199
- AFL Club
- Richmond
Your point is? Armstrong was not ultimately charged nor convicted (nor confessed to cheating) because of those 4 positive tests. What it does show is that technicalities prevented Armstrong from being charged in 2005 with those 1999 positive tests. Technicalities. The things Essendon are trying to use now to overturn a doping conviction. So which is it? Do you consider Armstrong a drug cheat based on those 4 positives, depsite the technicalities that prevented him for being charged? Yes you do. Essendon are drug cheats too, despite the technicalities they are trying to argue.
That is not what I am arguing at all.
CAS I've said elsewhere many times I accept CAS's findings. Do I have to prewarn every post of that?
- Jun 17, 2014
- 12,877
- 20,386
- AFL Club
- Western Bulldogs
- Other Teams
- ASADA
Its up to the AFL, not WADA to ban teamsi have a sneaky suspicion that all this crap playing out is purely to cloud over the one thing that WADA havent done, can do and might do...ban the club because more than 2 of its playing list were found guilty for doping...so the players are being used as a front for that...
- Banned
- #1,069
if you think this is about "clearing the players" and not about the club manufacturing a way out of this in a way that will be beneficial to them come next year then you live in lala land and believe media crap....this is all about next year and how the drug cheating club recovers re. drafts etc
We know he was a cheat but was never convicted of on those tests due to clever Dank-style backdating on those TUE's. Hence he have to be nailed on other evidence.
jenny61_99
Premium Platinum
WADA can't do that. It is agreed that the AFL have this option should they so chose to use it. They won't.i have a sneaky suspicion that all this crap playing out is purely to cloud over the one thing that WADA havent done, can do and might do...ban the club because more than 2 of its playing list were found guilty for doping...so the players are being used as a front for that...
cfc to aufc
Senior List
No, it's not mentioned at all so the CAS reverts to it's default position, which is de novo. The 2010 code never made any mention of how the AFL Appeals Board should should hear an appeal, hence it was "error of law" as it was it's default position. in the 2015 Code it specifically mention that the AFL Appeals Board is now de novo but still no mention on how an a appeal to the CAs applies, hence it's still it's default position of de novo.
- Banned
- #1,074
ok..so the AFL have option to ban but wont because 34 have been found guilty correct? lmaooo....FFS, what a farce this is...like why is there a rule for then?
Charters sourced TB4
Testing of that substance sourced found the molecular weight to be that of TB4
6 players admitted they were injected with thymosin
Dank admitted in an age interview he administered TB4 to the players
Texts between Dank and Hird regarding thymosin injections
Consent forms with thymosin, including the exact protocol for administering TB4
Player conversations about receiving "thymo"
How much more guilty of drug cheating would you like to be.
