Oppo Camp WADA appealing Essendon decision

[Lana]

Do we really need this conversation here?
I know many of you would be too gutless to take it to the essendon board, as per usual.

But there are other boards specifically for this.

Spew your uneducated s**t elsewhere guys.

I pretty sure having this conversation on the Essendon Board would lead to being carded.
The conversation is happening here so it doesn't dominate the non-geelong football discussion thread and people are interested and want to talk about it.

Nothing forces you to read the thread, it is clearly labeled, if you're not interested, post in the dozens of other threads.

 

[Art Vandelay_]

No, that is actually correct in the cases where there is a positive test.
She was just "confused".
They don't call her Bourbon Bec for nothing.

is she the woman who does a segment with Ox? If so it's no wonder she got that nickname they do do a booze segment.

 

[manboob]

Do we really need this conversation here?
I know many of you would be too gutless to take it to the essendon board, as per usual.

But there are other boards specifically for this.

Spew your uneducated s**t elsewhere guys.

Don't come at us with that. Fred and I amongst others have studied and practiced law here and abroad. We are well within our rights to have a discussion which by its nature is going to be highly speculative given a) the paucity of information released to the general public and b) the complex nature of the CAS sitting owing to the plurality of parties involved in the whole escapade. As regards your other points. There are game day threads on the mainboard so why have them here too then? Why don't we just all head over there to discuss each game? Finally, it's not really a matter of taking it to the "Essendon board" when the threads are tagged "no opposition supporters".

 

[Moggy]

... take it to the essendon board...

...because the Essendon board is the crucible of truth and knowledge?

 

[Art Vandelay_]

Don't come at us with that. Fred and I amongst others have studied and practiced law here and abroad. We are well within our rights to have a discussion which by its nature is going to be highly speculative given a) the paucity of information released to the general public and b) the complex nature of the CAS sitting owing to the plurality of parties involved in the whole escapade. As regards your other points. There are game day threads on the mainboard so why have them here too then? Why don't we just all head over there to discuss each game? Finally, it's not really a matter of taking it to the "Essendon board" when the threads are tagged "no opposition supporters".

This isn't the first board to have a drugs saga thread either. Not exactly like we're breaking new ground here. hawthorn and Carlton (yes I know both hate EFC) have had a thread on this for at least 18 months.

Now I have little to no legal knowledge and have hated the law units associated with my course, don't see why I can't pass an opinion when things come to light for example. Not that I plan to regularly mind you.

 

[Teriyakicat]

A bunch of points again.
- You don't need a positive test. Admission is sufficient. For mine that's Watson admitting he took something. (see cycling)
- Just finding the stuff on premises or in your car is also sufficient. (see cycling)
- So here I think the AFL tribunal erred - IMO the evidence chain or whatever you want to call it was too onerous. It many cases it would be enough that individual X purchased Y and X also worked with Z.
- As regards the whole team thing. They just need one player to get caught and the whole team goes down. (see cycling)
- Attempted use is sufficient too... I think this could be the dark horse here..

From the code itself "Use or Attempted Use may also be established by other reliable means such as admissions by the Athlete, witness statements, documentary evidence, conclusions drawn from longitudinal profiling, including data collected as part of the Athlete Biological Passport, or other analytical information which does not otherwise satisfy all the requirements to establish “Presence” of a Prohibited Substance under Article 2.1."

Well, why have ASADA struggled to pin the suckers down, then? Guilty, then guilty by association. All of them! Crucify them! And their coaches
(Agree on Watson, btw. Thanks for posting all that info, manboob. The message seems to have been lost amid overwhelming cries of "not guilty", unfortunately.)

 

[Teriyakicat]

I must admit I get very pissed off at how the EFC have managed to turn "not comfortably satisfied" into a "not guilty" ruling. "We have done nothing wrong"...

Then why was Hird apologising after the last ruling?

Was ASADA wrong in putting all their eggs in the TB4 basket? Did they have other options available?

And why was Dank found guilty of trafficking in prohibited substances but they couldn't prove any association with what the players were given?

 

[THE CAT WRANGLER]

They will squirm there way out of any further punishment

 

[FredLeDeux]

is she the woman who does a segment with Ox? If so it's no wonder she got that nickname they do do a booze segment.

She got the nickname because of an unfortunate predilection for driving into things when pissed.

 

[Willo_]

Do we really need this conversation here?
I know many of you would be too gutless to take it to the essendon board, as per usual.

But there are other boards specifically for this.

Spew your uneducated s**t elsewhere guys.

I'm sure you are capable of just ignoring the thread if you aren't interested...

The facts are if you tried to discuss anything on the Bombers board they ban you and the HTB is full of extreme opinions to the other side. Here I am more comfortable reading Fred and Boobs (can't believe I'm using that name in a serious point) opinion and legal expertise.

There's already been good discussion and questions asked IMO here.

 

[SJ]

Do we really need this conversation here?
I know many of you would be too gutless to take it to the essendon board, as per usual.

But there are other boards specifically for this.

Spew your uneducated s**t elsewhere guys.

If you don't want to read it, don't click on the thread!

 

[Tysio]

Whaddya mean, Tysio?

Like on Footy shows and footy news we watch each day matey. Once drugs and politics get involved, that's pretty much the main headline for discussion and it's boring and meaningless. Rather they talk about actual footy than the law/politics

 

[Teriyakicat]

Like on Footy shows and footy news we watch each day matey. Once drugs and politics get involved, that's pretty much the main headline for discussion and it's boring and meaningless. Rather they talk about actual footy than the law/politics

Yeah, my rolled eyes signified that I agreed with you but pretended I didn't know what you were talking about.
There's nothing better than a bit of negative press to derail discussions on actual football. Most people get caught up in the sensationalism of the moment.

 

[CatTricks]

I haven't read all the posts in this thread, so apologies if this has been already mentioned.

ASADA/WADA will be laughing that they have managed to have the case heard in the CAS.
ASADA/WADA were never going to get anywhere with any hearing involving an AFL tribunal.

Hopefully we will see some justice now and Hird can GTFO of the AFL all together.

 

[Cataholic]

I haven't read all the posts in this thread, so apologies if this has been already mentioned.

ASADA/WADA will be laughing that they have managed to have the case heard in the CAS.
ASADA/WADA were never going to get anywhere with any hearing involving an AFL tribunal.

Hopefully we will see some justice now and Hird can GTFO of the AFL all together.

and charge him with bringing the game into disrepute on his way out the door.

 

[Willo_]

People saying WADA wouldn't appeal unless they were certain, they've appealed twice in Australia apparently and are 0 from 2...

 

[Cataholic]

People saying WADA wouldn't appeal unless they were certain, they've appealed twice in Australia apparently and are 0 from 2...

3rd time lucky?

 

[CatTricks]

People saying WADA wouldn't appeal unless they were certain, they've appealed twice in Australia apparently and are 0 from 2...

Yes, but do you honestly think ASADA/WADA would have got a fair case with the AFL Tribunal involved?
The AFL and any tribunal they assembled were always going to rule in favor of Essendon (and the AFL - Which is doing it's best FIFA impersonation).

At least now we may see something resembling a fair hearing.

 

[Willo_]

Yes, but do you honestly think ASADA/WADA would have got a fair case with the AFL Tribunal involved?
The AFL and any tribunal they assembled were always going to rule in favor of Essendon (and the AFL - Which is doing it's best FIFA impersonation).

At least now we may see something resembling a fair hearing.

I agree, was just pointing out that it's not like WADA are running at 100% and it's a foregone conclusion

 

[Teriyakicat]

I haven't read all the posts in this thread, so apologies if this has been already mentioned.

ASADA/WADA will be laughing that they have managed to have the case heard in the CAS.
ASADA/WADA were never going to get anywhere with any hearing involving an AFL tribunal.

Hopefully we will see some justice now and Hird can GTFO of the AFL all together.

Oh, but Hird tells us that the players support him... surely this means that he will keep his job? And Timbo Watson loves him to shreds.. also Mr Little. He's got all the EFC people on his side now. (Yeah, piss him off now before he does any more damage! The only thing that's saving him is that the EFC and the AFL don't dare go to court over it- and he is very very keen to drag them through years of pain, while draining the coffers of both institutions.)

 

[Mahlepi]

If you don't want to read it, don't click on the thread!

but then he would have nothing to whinge about

 

[Mahlepi]

Don't come at us with that. Fred and I amongst others have studied and practiced law here and abroad. We are well within our rights to have a discussion which by its nature is going to be highly speculative given a) the paucity of information released to the general public and b) the complex nature of the CAS sitting owing to the plurality of parties involved in the whole escapade. As regards your other points. There are game day threads on the mainboard so why have them here too then? Why don't we just all head over there to discuss each game? Finally, it's not really a matter of taking it to the "Essendon board" when the threads are tagged "no opposition supporters".

Dear Intellectual, don't come at us with i'm a liar so I can have my say. Everyone is entitled to voice their opinion, and you can simply ignore him.

 

[Moggy]

I agree, was just pointing out that it's not like WADA are running at 100% and it's a foregone conclusion

From what I read, those two were both cases of challenging a "too light" penalty. This seems to be a different beast altogether.
I also read that they win the vast majority of these appeals in general.

Could be wrong... but they must have something decent to bother with a local competition in a one-country sport.

 

[CatTricks]

This is a legit hearing... not some AFL kangaroo court.
The fight is now on WADA's terms..

 

[FredLeDeux]

People saying WADA wouldn't appeal unless they were certain, they've appealed twice in Australia apparently and are 0 from 2...

Someone put up a chart he compiled on the main board showing a much higher overall success rate of, I think, somewhere over 80%. I doubt that it matters where the cases come from.