Certified Legendary Thread 34 Essendon* Players suspended for doping violations - No opposition fans. Check OP for thread rules

[Just Kreuzing]

Surely he will only get done for poor record keeping....

 

[Keyza]

I'm not sure everybody agrees with that Lloyd.

Is he for real?

 

[The Flying Doormat]

'Independent' Tribunal

 

[Keyza]

The case presented by ASADA was either too narrow - and while they might be able to prove it was given to someone, they might not be able to prove to who. Its the only way I can see this working.

Why was the VFL player banned for 2 years for ordering something over the internet that contained a banned ingredient? He didnt take the substance, he may not have even INTENDED to take it. If gets banned then surely the Essendon players should have got done for intent.

 

[Keyza]

I keep hearing Tom Bell is in the clear. I expect he'll play round 1.

I hope so.

 

[ESKIE]

THE failure of the ASADA case is likely to have been caused by the 11th-hour decision by key witnesses to opt out of appearing at the tribunal.

http://www.heraldsun.com.au/sport/a...es-not-appearing/story-fni5f22o-1227286648242

 

[hoddo22]

THE failure of the ASADA case is likely to have been caused by the 11th-hour decision by key witnesses to opt out of appearing at the tribunal.

http://www.heraldsun.com.au/sport/a...es-not-appearing/story-fni5f22o-1227286648242

Sure you don't mean 'paid off by Essendon not to attend hearing'?

 

[LanceRomance]

THE failure of the ASADA case is likely to have been caused by the 11th-hour decision by key witnesses to opt out of appearing at the tribunal.

http://www.heraldsun.com.au/sport/a...es-not-appearing/story-fni5f22o-1227286648242

Such a disgrace

 

[KnobHead]

done & dusted

snort some lines & move on

 

[LanceRomance]

done & dusted

snort some lines & move on

I'd rather an appeal thanks

 

[Styxx]

Money talks. Justice walks.

 

[passmark]

I'd rather an appeal thanks

Not gunna happen.

Everyone is singing from the same hymn book, even ASADA sounding resigned to the fact it's over (with some phony outrage for appearances) .

We got screwed boys, take note and never believe again.

 

[The Smoking Gun]

Well..... that was unexpected.

Looking at your User Name I can totally understand how you've come to that decision.

 

[LanceRomance]

Not gunna happen.

Everyone is singing from the same hymn book, even ASADA sounding resigned to the fact it's over (with some phony outrage for appearances) .

We got screwed boys, take note and never believe again.

I think they will appeal.

 

[passmark]

I think they will appeal.

Hope so, but I reckon it's a thin chance.

The next few days will be about...

......moving on...
..player welfare.
..make sure it never happens again.
..thorough investigations..

....wada unhappy but unable to take it further without ASADA or some such drivel.

blah, blah, ******* blah.......

The whole sport just got ****ed in the freckle by it's administrators.

 

[KnobHead]

I think they will appeal.

I reckon too, but also depends on how tight the decision is.

if the decision is line ball, CAS will probably b more open to a finding of guilt - thing is comfortable satisfaction is a highish watermark, and the evidence is circumstantial

Armstrong went because a number of people dobbed him in

interesting to see the WADA comment, also.

 

[Thrawn]

What is clear that the evidence was given as minimal weight as possible, the tribunal members can weigh the evidence as they see fit. So while there might have been plenty of evidence, without sworn testimonies or a straight up confession on events, the evidence is graded a lot weaker. This would explain why ASADA wanted those subpoenas asap.

I have the feeling deep down that someone at ASADA ****ed up the investigation. Though it will be interesting if this gets to the CAS, as they can subpoena witnesses.

 

[The Old Dark Navy's]

I see the delusional pearlers thread has Bomber posters talking about the fun they are going to have over the next few days, dragging up posts from the North board, calling us cowards because this thread was taken down for a short while earlier.

I've got a message for you guys. Not one agency, judge, jury ... anywhere, has said that Essendon players did not take banned substances. What they said is that they can not prove they took it to a comfortable satisfaction. You blokes going on about having to endure 26 months of crap and being entitled to payback is blinkered rubbish.

Records were not kept or they were destroyed. There were dodgy dealings with a pharmacist, Shane Charters, and Dank. There were telling text messages that has not been explained to the public. There was a damning report commissioned by Essendon themselves. The AFL saw fit to impose severe penalties on the club.

The fact that it is very hard to suspend 34 players without a positive drug test when independent tribunals don't take into account the clauses in the code that would have buried individuals in the same circumstance, does not mean they are innocent.

You can console yourself that the evidence trail was hidden well enough to remove comfortable satisfaction, and you can think you have been hard done by. Most of the rest of us can rightly feel aggrieved that Essendon have dodged a bullet again, while the AFL set about getting rid of the low hanging fruit to appease the football gods.

A lot of people know more than they have told. Just takes a disgruntled one to come forward.

All findings must be released to end this but Essendon will still scream anonymity and block that in case there is more to play out.

 

[zeeCFC]

Bravo, well said

 

[Vamos Juddamente]

That is astounding. Proof of banned substance on premises but not guilty because of no records yet Dank was boasting a few weeks ago he would know if players missed injections because he had it all on a spreadsheet. I cannot believe they didn't get his computer from the start what a bunch of incompetent fools ASADA are. They gave not even interviewed him. No way you are going to egg a guilty verdict with people that incompetent running the case.

 

[Blue Warrior]

So what happens now if ASADA/WADA appeal? Do the players play until a verdict or if the CAS finds they have a case to answer do they have to stop playing? How long does it take to get to CAS?

 

[Chism]

I see the delusional pearlers thread has Bomber posters talking about the fun they are going to have over the next few days, dragging up posts from the North board, calling us cowards because this thread was taken down for a short while earlier.

I've got a message for you guys. Not one agency, judge, jury ... anywhere, has said that Essendon players did not take banned substances. What they said is that they can not prove they took it to a comfortable satisfaction. You blokes going on about having to endure 26 months of crap and being entitled to payback is blinkered rubbish.

Records were not kept or they were destroyed. There were dodgy dealings with a pharmacist, Shane Charters, and Dank. There were telling text messages that has not been explained to the public. There was a damning report commissioned by Essendon themselves. The AFL saw fit to impose severe penalties on the club.

The fact that it is very hard to suspend 34 players without a positive drug test when independent tribunals don't take into account the clauses in the code that would have buried individuals in the same circumstance, does not mean they are innocent.

You can console yourself that the evidence trail was hidden well enough to remove comfortable satisfaction, and you can think you have been hard done by. Most of the rest of us can rightly feel aggrieved that Essendon have dodged a bullet again, while the AFL set about getting rid of the low hanging fruit to appease the football gods.

A lot of people know more than they have told. Just takes a disgruntled one to come forward.

All findings must be released to end this but Essendon will still scream anonymity and block that in case there is more to play out.

Here here.

 

[MrsEddieBetts]

Dank decision due after Easter according to Gil.

Thrawn --If ASADA/WADA appeals, do the provisional suspensions apply or can the dopers play?

 

[MC_Doggy_Frog18]

Can't trust anyone anymore

 

[LanceRomance]

What is clear that the evidence was given as minimal weight as possible, the tribunal members can weigh the evidence as they see fit. So while there might have been plenty of evidence, without sworn testimonies or a straight up confession on events, the evidence is graded a lot weaker. This would explain why ASADA wanted those subpoenas asap.

I have the feeling deep down that someone at ASADA stuffed up the investigation. Though it will be interesting if this gets to the CAS, as they can subpoena witnesses.