No Oppo Supporters The ASADA Thread... from a Tiger perspective

Remove this Banner Ad

Status
Not open for further replies.
Apparently They don't want to deal with Port as they see themselves as
Flag rivals,So are threatning to take Ryder to court.
I dare them.HeHeHeHe.
Apparently They don't want to deal with Port as they see themselves as Flog rivals,So are threatning to take Ryder to court.
I dare them.HeHeHeHe.

Typo fixed.
You're welcome.
 

Log in to remove this ad.

A one year ban is something I could live with. what I could not live with is if they decide to backdate the suspension.

My understanding is if players are sanctioned and banned, they cannot have anything to do with that particular sport for the duration of the ban. Considering they did Pre-season training, and most likely will again this season, backdating should not even be considered and they should be forced to endure the full sentence. As a result any personal accolades accrued during the period under investigation stripped (Watson's Brownlow and all Australian selection, Heppell's Rising Star etc.)
 
A one year ban is something I could live with. what I could not live with is if they decide to backdate the suspension.

My understanding is if players are sanctioned and banned, they cannot have anything to do with that particular sport for the duration of the ban. Considering they did Pre-season training, and most likely will again this season, backdating should not even be considered and they should be forced to endure the full sentence. As a result any personal accolades accrued during the period under investigation stripped (Watson's Brownlow and all Australian selection, Heppell's Rising Star etc.)

Doubt that Essendon would accept any bans without (a form of) back dating them - especially on the back of the Cronulla Sharks players getting similar treatment.

For what its worth I agree with you - they should be held accountable for the exact duration of the ban. But the reality is, the AFL need to get this issue out of the mainstream (a presentation the Good ole Gil did illustrated that 50% of the ill general feeling of fans in relation to the AFL was due to the Essendon supplements scandal) and look to move on.

Furthermore, the AFL do not want a season without Essendon in the AFL. The revenue the Bombers generate due to average attendance, merchandise and membership sales etc. is fairly significant - greater than that of North Melbourne, Melbourne, St Kilda and the Western Bulldogs.

I think we should all prepare ourselves for deals which severely favour Essendon (in comparison to the charges) to just put this issue behind them. I am personally expecting it to be around a maximum of 10 games.

In saying all that though, the current form of Essendon may make that more difficult.
 
Doubt that Essendon would accept any bans without (a form of) back dating them - especially on the back of the Cronulla Sharks players getting similar treatment.

For what its worth I agree with you - they should be held accountable for the exact duration of the ban. But the reality is, the AFL need to get this issue out of the mainstream (a presentation the Good ole Gil did illustrated that 50% of the ill general feeling of fans in relation to the AFL was due to the Essendon supplements scandal) and look to move on.

Furthermore, the AFL do not want a season without Essendon in the AFL. The revenue the Bombers generate due to average attendance, merchandise and membership sales etc. is fairly significant - greater than that of North Melbourne, Melbourne, St Kilda and the Western Bulldogs.

I think we should all prepare ourselves for deals which severely favour Essendon (in comparison to the charges) to just put this issue behind them. I am personally expecting it to be around a maximum of 10 games.

In saying all that though, the current form of Essendon may make that more difficult.
say your right 10 games supposed to be approx. 16 players still playing do they have the numbers ? and if so who makes up their vfl side ??
 
Doubt that Essendon would accept any bans without (a form of) back dating them - especially on the back of the Cronulla Sharks players getting similar treatment.

For what its worth I agree with you - they should be held accountable for the exact duration of the ban. But the reality is, the AFL need to get this issue out of the mainstream (a presentation the Good ole Gil did illustrated that 50% of the ill general feeling of fans in relation to the AFL was due to the Essendon supplements scandal) and look to move on.

Furthermore, the AFL do not want a season without Essendon in the AFL. The revenue the Bombers generate due to average attendance, merchandise and membership sales etc. is fairly significant - greater than that of North Melbourne, Melbourne, St Kilda and the Western Bulldogs.

I think we should all prepare ourselves for deals which severely favour Essendon (in comparison to the charges) to just put this issue behind them. I am personally expecting it to be around a maximum of 10 games.

In saying all that though, the current form of Essendon may make that more difficult.
What do you mean by this, a 17 team comp or essendope down the bottom of the ladder, firstly they wont be kicked out of the comp and secondly the afl will hardly go broke if Essendon are s**t or their supporters don't turn up, getting pretty sick of reading that the afl can't have an uncompetitive Essendon, the afl got along just fine with the tigers being s**t, I'm sure they'll get along just as well with Essendon crap for a while.
 
does anyone know where i can find the original thread from the bloke talking about how he heard essendon were going to get done months and months before it happened, i think it might have been on the rumours and scandals board??

edit: he may not have mentioned a club, but that a big ped issue was about to arise.
 
does anyone know where i can find the original thread from the bloke talking about how he heard essendon were going to get done months and months before it happened, i think it might have been on the rumours and scandals board??

edit: he may not have mentioned a club, but that a big ped issue was about to arise.

I remember it from about October 2012 but can't give you more than that. I showed people at work and they were amazed how accurate it was. Especially with the shock elsewhere in the sporting media. A bigfooty first for sure.
But sorry, can't give you details.
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

After Tiges smashed bombers in aug 2012 listening to Lloyd whining about why Ess were crap I tweeted 3aw.
Said they looked very heavy in the bum region, too big and slow. Mate and I thought they'd put on huge amount of weight in the upper thigh/arse region. From that day on, and when I saw that rumour on bigfooty I was convinced the bombers had taken something/done something weird to bulk up/strengthen up.
 
How can Saad get 2 full years for an energy drink while Essendon implement a club-wide elaborate, experimental doping program and want only a few weeks off?

To be consistent with everything except for the Sharks' penalty, you would expect 2 years.

Saad tested positive. Essendon haven't.
 
does anyone know where i can find the original thread from the bloke talking about how he heard essendon were going to get done months and months before it happened, i think it might have been on the rumours and scandals board??

edit: he may not have mentioned a club, but that a big ped issue was about to arise.
I believe that poster was fishardansin.
 
does anyone know where i can find the original thread from the bloke talking about how he heard essendon were going to get done months and months before it happened, i think it might have been on the rumours and scandals board??

edit: he may not have mentioned a club, but that a big ped issue was about to arise.

Ancient tiger brought it up, one of our own.....makes proud
 
Doesn't matter, Armstrong never tested positive.

Armstrong was faced with sworn testimony stating he'd doped. And pleaded guilty when faced with it.

Essendon might be in same boat and when they are, sure, but at this stage there's nothing concrete. Matter of time maybe but you can't convict yet.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top