Oppo Camp WADA appealing Essendon decision

[AlcoaCat]

Well dazbroncos what is the answer?

Cmon boxy! You know the "Greg the stop sign" lyrics.

 

[Boxhead_31]

Cmon boxy! You know the "Greg the stop sign" lyrics.

I'm banking on a comet coming before I have to answer that

 

[Catastic82]

I have read the CAS summaries and recommended it. I asked you to refer to which section claims the players lied, you have not. There is a difference between knowingly providing disinformation and unknowingly doing so, that is one of the players defense. "Try and use some critical thinking next time" I see you cannot resist the use of meaningless ad hominem rather than logic.

Along with their Stat Declarations and ASADA documentations.

 

[Art Vandelay_]

View attachment 209653

Along with their Stat Declarations and ASADA documentations.

I love how Hird tried to say that their medical declarations were not at the request or instruction of the club. Hogwash.

Damning either way though really. Either they weren't told what to do but consciously knew it was wrong and collectively reported false medical intakes;

or they were told to at the request of the club in which case they had a lack of curiosity and due care in asking what exactly they were ingesting. They were naive in the extreme.

In both scenarios the players are as guilty as sin for falsely declaring what they were being given.

 

[Go Hoops]

You appear confused between the ban on performance enhancing drugs such as Thymosin TB-4 which is what the WADA case was about and the AFL's Illicit Drug Policy which concerns the use of illegal drugs such as ice, cocaine, marijuana etc.

So what did I fabricate?

Oh dear, someone a bit sensitive on this matter? I do not understand how any Cat supporter can be so concerned over a different opinion on a matter which has nothing to do with our club and players. The off-season getting to you? Same here, can't wait for round one.

WADA has not uncovered any corruption regarding the topic we are discussing.

I am glad you understand that.
Ah the old 'Argument from Personal Incredulity Fallacy', you may as well have said "Anyone who disagrees with me is ignorant". Although protecting their brand may include strict oversites regarding the abuse of performance enhancing substances and severe penalties. I have no problem with either the AFL doing it, or arranging another independent body. I have a major problem with WADA as primarily they took three years to reach the situation we are in and our league's image is under the pump.

When you make a clear claim but can't support it facts it's fabrication.


It 's at least pleasing to see you accept organisations have a vested interest in protecting their brand and have no problem with an independent organisation overseeing the AFL integrity area. Because they have a long record of not being truthful. The lack of acceptance of tanking being a glaring example.

WADA has something like 650 sporting organisations it covers. Reckon all things considered they do quite well and they quite speedily dealt with - and in my view resolved - the Essendon situation when they became involved.

 

[steady2]

When you make a clear claim but can't support it facts it's fabrication.
.

Your relentless resort to personal attacks indicates an inability to argue the case based on what I stated. Since you are unable to support your claim that I was fabricating I assume you are simply being mendacious.

Your claim that WADA dealt with the Essendon doping incident "speedily" is hilarious - three years later. As I stated earlier, in 2005 the AFL signed on to WADA as a consequence the Essendon scandal has been dealt with under WADA's rules and WADA has been the key player although they did not wish to show their hand and were happy for their junior branch ASADA to push WADA's barrow for them. Only after ASADA screwed up did WADA set its machine in motion, hurling untold millions at the appeal, fixing the tribunal, outspending the AFL who were already exhausted and outgunned and fixed the decision as the one they wanted.

WADA's complex processes are not suitable to a professional team sport and fails to acknowledge the crucial commercial aspect of such an industry, perhaps you should see what sports lawyer Darren Kane has to say.

 

[David the Cat]

"fixed the decision"......hmmm...me thinks the Emperor has no clothes.

 

[vinum coupe]

Your relentless resort to personal attacks indicates an inability to argue the case based on what I stated. Since you are unable to support your claim that I was fabricating I assume you are simply being mendacious.

Your claim that WADA dealt with the Essendon doping incident "speedily" is hilarious - three years later. As I stated earlier, in 2005 the AFL signed on to WADA as a consequence the Essendon scandal has been dealt with under WADA's rules and WADA has been the key player although they did not wish to show their hand and were happy for their junior branch ASADA to push WADA's barrow for them. Only after ASADA screwed up did WADA set its machine in motion, hurling untold millions at the appeal, fixing the tribunal, outspending the AFL who were already exhausted and outgunned and fixed the decision as the one they wanted.

WADA's complex processes are not suitable to a professional team sport and fails to acknowledge the crucial commercial aspect of such an industry, perhaps you should see what sports lawyer Darren Kane has to say.

Mate. There's a full bloody forum on why or why nots on big footy re: this subject.
Head over there for your fill.

I'd rather we kept this for updates.

 

[steady2]

Mate. There's a full bloody forum on why or why nots on big footy re: this subject.
Head over there for your fill.

I'd rather we kept this for updates.

There are 33 pages discussing the WADA/CAS decision under the title "WADA appealing Essendon decision", don't like it? want it for updates? raise your concern with the moderators. At any rate my post was a response to someone else, raise your concern with them not me.

 

[Go Hoops]

Your relentless resort to personal attacks indicates an inability to argue the case based on what I stated. Since you are unable to support your claim that I was fabricating I assume you are simply being mendacious.

Your claim that WADA dealt with the Essendon doping incident "speedily" is hilarious - three years later. As I stated earlier, in 2005 the AFL signed on to WADA as a consequence the Essendon scandal has been dealt with under WADA's rules and WADA has been the key player although they did not wish to show their hand and were happy for their junior branch ASADA to push WADA's barrow for them. Only after ASADA screwed up did WADA set its machine in motion, hurling untold millions at the appeal, fixing the tribunal, outspending the AFL who were already exhausted and outgunned and fixed the decision as the one they wanted.

WADA's complex processes are not suitable to a professional team sport and fails to acknowledge the crucial commercial aspect of such an industry, perhaps you should see what sports lawyer Darren Kane has to say.

For someone making accusations about others being critical you aren't behind anyone when it comes to put-downs as your post shows.

You appear to not appreciate the difference between ASADA's role and that of WADA. WADA became involved in a fully hands-on way when ASADA drew them in to be front and centre. They were quite expeditious in the way they got the CAS organised, the issues considered, and the report released. No doubt you'll re-aim at ASADA for the delay. ASADA offered Essendon a similar deal to Cronulla. Look at the two predicaments and you'll see who the fools are.

Added to that the Bombers pfaffing around, lack of documented data - or unwillingness to produce it - and Hird's love of the courts were at least as much to do with the delay as anything ASADA did.

As for the capacity to look after their own when it comes to issues of integrity generally, the current tennis predicament speaks volumes for the misconception that sports bodies can be trusted. Just another example of a sporting body having to be brought kicking and screaming to act on issues of integrity. Even to fully recognise the issue.

WADA has over 650 bodies is oversees. They make mistakes but generally speaking they do a more than satisfactory job. When it comes to trust I'd pick them over the AFL any day of the week.

 

[goyoucatters]

WADA...make mistakes but generally speaking they do a more than satisfactory job. When it comes to trust I'd pick them over the AFL any day of the week.

Damning WADA with faint praise there, Go Hoops.

When it comes to trust, I'd pick the most disreputable used-car salesman in the country over the AFL.

Integrity is a word they like to 'use'.

But lucre is a concept they are far more familiar with.

 

[Go Hoops]

Damning WADA with faint praise there, Go Hoops.

When it comes to trust, I'd pick the most disreputable used-car salesman in the country over the AFL.

Integrity is a word they like to 'use'.

But lucre is a concept they are far more familiar with.

No organisation is perfect so suggesting they do a more than satisfactory job given the size of their task and remit is reasonably favorable. I thought their handling of the issue via CAS was very good. The AFL has a far smaller remit yet they stuff things up year after year. Have they acknowledged tanking exists yet?

Speaking of used car salemen, would you have bought one from Demetriou?

 

[goyoucatters]

No organisation is perfect so suggesting they do a more than satisfactory job given the size of their task and remit is reasonably favorable. I thought their handling of the issue via CAS was very good. The AFL has a far smaller remit yet they stuff things up year after year. Have they acknowledged tanking exists yet?

Speaking of used car salemen, would you have bought one from Demetriou?

The 'damning with faint praise' was definitely a line written in jest. I agree that WADA handled the matter swiftly and expeditiously once it became apparent no other body was going to deal with the trainwreck of lies, stalling, obfuscation and deplorable governance that had characterised so much of what had gone before.

Ultimately, the stark difference between the two organisations is pretty much obviated by their actual reasons for existence.

WADA exists to attempt as best it can to remove the scourge of performance-enhancing drugs from sporting endeavours around the world.

The AFL exists to attempt to promote the game of Australian Rules Football as broadly and effectively as it can. Its interest in removing the scourge of drugs from the game only exists to the degree where this assists its messaging around the virtuous nature of the game.

Where there is conflict between the ongoing existence (and success) of a key stakeholder like the Dons and the overall integrity of the code, the AFL is entirely unable to do anything more than collude with a key contributing partner in trying to manufacture an outcome that primarily serves the purpose of advancing the game and its 'image'. This is an implicit priority for the organisation and will always outweigh the significance of maintaining integrity regarding matters such as the verifiable existence of an experimental and uncontrolled injection regime operating unchecked at one of its member clubs.

And the alleged call from AD to Evans before Essendon 'self-reported' (pretty much the only thing the golden boy has said through the entire saga that I believe to be entirely credible) is the clearest indication you could ever have that the AFL is far more interested in its continued reign as a financial powerhouse than any focus on making certain that performance-enhancing drugs were not rattling around in a certain fridge at Windy Hill.

And, by the way, I wouldn't buy a used car salesman (or even a used car, for that matter) from Andrew.

 

[steady2]

For someone making accusations about others being critical you aren't behind anyone when it comes to put-downs as your post shows.

You appear to not appreciate the difference between ASADA's role and that of WADA. WADA became involved in a fully hands-on way when ASADA drew them in to be front and centre. They were quite expeditious in the way they got the CAS organised, the issues considered, and the report released. No doubt you'll re-aim at ASADA for the delay. ASADA offered Essendon a similar deal to Cronulla. Look at the two predicaments and you'll see who the fools are.

Added to that the Bombers pfaffing around, lack of documented data - or unwillingness to produce it - and Hird's love of the courts were at least as much to do with the delay as anything ASADA did.

As for the capacity to look after their own when it comes to issues of integrity generally, the current tennis predicament speaks volumes for the misconception that sports bodies can be trusted. Just another example of a sporting body having to be brought kicking and screaming to act on issues of integrity. Even to fully recognise the issue.

WADA has over 650 bodies is oversees. They make mistakes but generally speaking they do a more than satisfactory job. When it comes to trust I'd pick them over the AFL any day of the week.

Dear oh dear! You are the one who accused me of fabrication, I requested evidence, you produced nothing! You are like a guy who pushes someone and when pushed back point the finger and squeal "Look he pushed me". If you can't take it, don't dish it out!

Regarding your other comments you have said nothing new, you seem to think by repeating the same assertions it will make them more profound. You are entitled to your opinion, which I respect, however I beg to differ on many points, most of them I have already said. Have a good day.

 

[Go Hoops]

The 'damning with faint praise' was definitely a line written in jest. I agree that WADA handled the matter swiftly and expeditiously once it became apparent no other body was going to deal with the trainwreck of lies, stalling, obfuscation and deplorable governance that had characterised so much of what had gone before.

Ultimately, the stark difference between the two organisations is pretty much obviated by their actual reasons for existence.

WADA exists to attempt as best it can to remove the scourge of performance-enhancing drugs from sporting endeavours around the world.

The AFL exists to attempt to promote the game of Australian Rules Football as broadly and effectively as it can. Its interest in removing the scourge of drugs from the game only exists to the degree where this assists its messaging around the virtuous nature of the game.

Where there is conflict between the ongoing existence (and success) of a key stakeholder like the Dons and the overall integrity of the code, the AFL is entirely unable to do anything more than collude with a key contributing partner in trying to manufacture an outcome that primarily serves the purpose of advancing the game and its 'image'. This is an implicit priority for the organisation and will always outweigh the significance of maintaining integrity regarding matters such as the verifiable existence of an experimental and uncontrolled injection regime operating unchecked at one of its member clubs.

And the alleged call from AD to Evans before Essendon 'self-reported' (pretty much the only thing the golden boy has said through the entire saga that I believe to be entirely credible) is the clearest indication you could ever have that the AFL is far more interested in its continued reign as a financial powerhouse than any focus on making certain that performance-enhancing drugs were not rattling around in a certain fridge at Windy Hill.

And, by the way, I wouldn't buy a used car salesman (or even a used car, for that matter) from Andrew.

The post of the thread! Good writing, clear thinking, and amiableness by someone who 'gets
it'

We shouldn't underestimate the dimensions of the worldwide task of WADA. Dealing with pathological liars, thugs, rogues and extortionists and having many protected by corrupt governments is no easy task.

 

[Nickoo]

The only way to truly punish these Essendon players is to appoint Gary Ayers as their coach for their year off.

That's magic!! Gary Ayes, god what a Cronk of a coach.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

 

[Art Vandelay_]

Hmmm. Suggestions from Bomber fans that they're simply required to pay 100% of the cap and whatever is over that for these top up players is paid by the AFL.

 

[manboob]

Hmmm. Suggestions from Bomber fans that they're simply required to pay 100% of the cap and whatever is over that for these top up players is paid by the AFL.

No ******* way. Though it wouldn't surprise me if the Don's signed Kelly and Stokes on 500k then demanded the AFL pick up the bill.

 

[manboob]

Oh and now they are pissed cause Port/Dogs etc expect them to pay the salaries of the players that Essendon's actions caused to get suspended.

(uff terrible grammar but you know what I mean).

 

[thejester]

Oh and now they are pissed cause Port/Dogs etc expect them to pay the salaries of the players that Essendon's actions caused to get suspended.

(uff terrible grammar but you know what I mean).

I think that's a fair enough reaction. Buyer beware etc.

 

[manboob]

I think that's a fair enough reaction. Buyer beware etc.

Not at all. Say we traded Daniel Menzel and he went down with a knee, that is a case of buyer beware. When you trade for a player and are told by Essendon that they've done nothing wrong then you have a case to be aggrieved. They gave assurances that subsequently proved false. Therefore they need to pay up.

 

[thejester]

Not at all. Say we traded Daniel Menzel and he went down with a knee, that is a case of buyer beware. When you trade for a player and are told by Essendon that they've done nothing wrong then you have a case to be aggrieved. They gave assurances that subsequently proved false. Therefore they need to pay up.

Lol, c'mon boobie. When Crameri was traded for there was enough information in the public domain ('we didn't do anything wrong, but we can't tell you what we did', Dank's 'I can't believe TB4 is illegal!' admission in Fairfax, and the Ziggy and interim reports) to strongly suggest that even if Essendon did genuinely believe they'd done nothing wrong, the overall set up was so lax that they could have been (and probably were) given banned substances. When Ryder was traded for he had an SCN to his name! Hiding behind 'assurances' from a club that routinely admitted it didn't know what it had administered to its players is absurd. Reality is the Dogs and Port used the crisis at Essendon to recruit players they otherwise wouldn't have had a shot at, knowing full well that the reason they were on the market in the first place meant they carried a significant degree of risk. Subsequently complaining that they didn't know there was risk in the first place, and so should have no responsibilities, is ridiculous.

 

[manboob]

But but it was all hearsay

I see your point that leverage was gained to extract the players on the back of information about their doping programme (and that the Dogs and Port knew to some extent what was going on. They danced with Ron Jeremy and ended up pregnant). But to be perfectly honest, I still think Essendon have gotten off extremely lightly, not just for what they've done but how they behaved and continue to behave. And to that end, I believe they should have to compensate every single party impacted by their actions.

 

[manboob]

Dees are a different kettle of fish. They deserve to punished. I mean pick 25 for Milkshake FFS.

 

[David the Cat]

Lol, c'mon boobie. When Crameri was traded for there was enough information in the public domain ('we didn't do anything wrong, but we can't tell you what we did', Dank's 'I can't believe TB4 is illegal!' admission in Fairfax, and the Ziggy and interim reports) to strongly suggest that even if Essendon did genuinely believe they'd done nothing wrong, the overall set up was so lax that they could have been (and probably were) given banned substances. When Ryder was traded for he had an SCN to his name! Hiding behind 'assurances' from a club that routinely admitted it didn't know what it had administered to its players is absurd. Reality is the Dogs and Port used the crisis at Essendon to recruit players they otherwise wouldn't have had a shot at, knowing full well that the reason they were on the market in the first place meant they carried a significant degree of risk. Subsequently complaining that they didn't know there was risk in the first place, and so should have no responsibilities, is ridiculous.

Absolutely right.....and I think they are seeking compensation for Monfries which is totally over the top IMO. I'm a world away, but I was hoping like hell that Geelong wouldn't go near any Essendon player ( some were pumping for Bellchambers at one stage ) because of the threat of suspension......Port, Dees and Dogs took the chance...and lost. ...

Stiff cheddar....