Mega Thread AFL to investigate Essendon for controversial fitness program - PART3

[TerryWallet]

oh yeh, nah can't see that ever happening, 6 month ban would be penalty enough I would have thought, I mean it's not just the team which would then struggle to win but sponsors may jump off in the short-term so financially, the club would be massively impacted.

Still, I haven't read anything new or anything relevant to Essendon since this story broke a few months ago, but the latest NRL controversy seems to have people linking that to the Essendon football club.

No. 2 years is the appropriate penalty.

IF they actively help the investigation with evidence that leads to prosecution , then 6 months will be penalty enough.

 

[Ant_]

16 week suspension = de-registering. If a player is suspended for 16 weeks or more why wouldn't they be de-registered?

What rule are you quoting?

 

[Bluesince62]

that still makes absolutely no sense. Essendon will need players, therefore you're going to deregister them and give them to other clubs....

If they are not deregistered you cannot replace them. You can only have 40 players on the list.
It is not a matter of where they end up it is about create spots on your list

 

[Sector 7G]

I've said it before, but ASADA have advised that they have 8 ways of linking the use of PED's drugs to an athlete, and enforcing a suspension. A positive drug test is just one of them.

Its the paper trail that is the modern day killer. Invoices and cash movements are what is bringing athletes down today. And before you go "oh yeah, like they are going to invoice for illegal drugs", if they want cash from a club/athlete, they need an invoice, so they falsify an invoice. How much scrutiny will a falsified invoice stand up to though, and once its proven false, how long will the signatory of the invoice stand behind it before they fess up?

It could be hard to argue you injected 500 vival of PEDs into assistant coaches or you are Dr Ageliss's only client that he provided Vitamin C to.

 

[mufassa]

huh?

Any player that misses 16 weeks through suspension is de-registed.

 

[PieBeast]

Gonna be a lot of very upset and disappointed people.

Already are, Essendon supporters are fully entitled to be angry and disappointed with their administration for allowing this mess to happen.

 

[Ned_Flanders]

According to you.

According to common sense.

ASADA have said this investigation will go for 6-12 months, this is a slow burn, and patience is required. Just because we haven't heard everything in the first 4 weeks doesn't mean nothing has happened, it just means we have to hold onto our hats a little longer.

The shit hitting Cronulla only occurred yesterday. Danks declared his innocence in an interview weeks ago. Its naive to think IF the Sharks go down, he won't be going with them, and he won't be trying to minimize the damage to himself. Human nature means his first reaction is to fight, but when the chances of winning any fight are done, it will be deal time.

Now let me underline one thing. Danks being a dog doesn't mean he has a story to tell about EFC. He will about who he buys from, and his stupid clinics, but we don't know yet about EFC. Problem is the weak compliance program at EFC makes them vulnerable, and Danks rep makes him suspicious. Given the EFC program is sounding very similar to the Cronulla one, only an idiot would think ASADA will not go hard on Danks to reveal what happened at the EFC. If he was clean there, lucky for EFC. If not, I personally have no doubt he will roll over - most dogs have no integrity.

And to preempt, I am not an anti-bomber troll. I've defended your mob more than I like on this thread, but while I think the players are innocent victims, the EFC management a mixture of naive and stupid, I don't trust Danks as far as I could spit him. I hope he did nothing at your club, and the only sanctions against EFC are AFL ones for piss poor management. No one wants this shit to be true, because the price that will be paid is too high.

 

[Achilles Heel]

If they are not deregistered you cannot replace them. You can only have 40 players on the list.
It is not a matter of where they end up it is about create spots on your list

AFL rule 187694.99 Essendon under PED circumstances will be allowed 80 players on their list

hot of the computer.

 

[Lance Uppercut]

If they are not deregistered you cannot replace them. You can only have 40 players on the list.
It is not a matter of where they end up it is about create spots on your list

how many players are we losing now?

 

[boncer34]

Already are, Essendon supporters are fully entitled to be angry and disappointed with their administration for allowing this mess to happen.

Actually rather pleased with the way they've carried themselves through this.

 

[mufassa]

What rule are you quoting?

Players shall be automatically deregistered and not allowed further registration with the same or another League if the Player has accumulated a combined total of sixteen (16) weeks Suspension (or greater) in a football career (including AFL career)

 

[whiteoak]

Gonna be a lot of very upset and disappointed people.

See, this is where you cross the line between it being simply your opinion and fact.

 

[Bluesince62]

Players shall be automatically deregistered and not allowed further registration with the same or another League if the Player has accumulated a combined total of sixteen (16) weeks Suspension (or greater) in a football career (including AFL career)

I thought that was only the AFLNT rule that rubbed out Darryl White ? Didn't know it extended elsewhere

 

[boncer34]

See, this is where you cross the line between it being simply your opinion and fact.

Yes. My lets wait and see and wait for evidence approach is the one that crosses that line.

The Essendon is guilty, loaded up on drugs and players will be banned despite zero evidence coming from anyone in that aspect is the approach that doesn't cross the line.

Makes sense to me.

 

[liam_13]

Players shall be automatically deregistered and not allowed further registration with the same or another League if the Player has accumulated a combined total of sixteen (16) weeks Suspension (or greater) in a football career (including AFL career)

That's not re: AFL though, I don't think so anyway?

I think it was Darryl White who that rule affected, but that was for NT football?

 

[Achilles Heel]

According to common sense.

ASADA have said this investigation will go for 6-12 months, this is a slow burn, and patience is required. Just because we haven't heard everything in the first 4 weeks doesn't mean nothing has happened, it just means we have to hold onto our hats a little longer.

The shit hitting Cronulla only occurred yesterday. Danks declared his innocence in an interview weeks ago. Its naive to think IF the Sharks go down, he won't be going with them, and he won't be trying to minimize the damage to himself. Human nature means his first reaction is to fight, but when the chances of winning any fight are done, it will be deal time.

Now let me underline one thing. Danks being a dog doesn't mean he has a story to tell about EFC. He will about who he buys from, and his stupid clinics, but we don't know yet about EFC. Problem is the weak compliance program at EFC makes them vulnerable, and Danks rep makes him suspicious. Given the EFC program is sounding very similar to the Cronulla one, only an idiot would think ASADA will not go hard on Danks to reveal what happened at the EFC. If he was clean there, lucky for EFC. If not, I personally have no doubt he will roll over - most dogs have no integrity.

And to preempt, I am not an anti-bomber troll. I've defended your mob more than I like on this thread, but while I think the players are innocent victims, the EFC management a mixture of naive and stupid, I don't trust Danks as far as I could spit him. I hope he did nothing at your club, and the only sanctions against EFC are AFL ones for piss poor management. No one wants this shit to be true, because the price that will be paid is too high.

The cronulla shit happened in 2011, they have been investigating for some time, do you think that this all happened in the last four weeks?

The press conference may have been a catalyst, but if they have been doing their jbs , they would have got them anyway, the bombers issues are less than 12 months old.

But i have no doubt in my mid that they were tipped off and held a prss conference, which forced the ACC/ASADA to hold theirs.

The bombers need friends in high places, but when it comes to drug cheating in sport not too many stand up for you.

 

[mufassa]

Actually rather pleased with the way they've carried themselves through this.

He did not ask how happy you have been with them since this broke. He asked how happy you are they let this happen? Big difference.

 

[Lance Uppercut]

Any player that misses 16 weeks through suspension is de-registed.

not automatically

Should a Player receive sixteen (16) weeks or more Suspension as a “first offence” it shall be at the Leagues discretion as to whether or not that player will be deregistered, following his/her Suspension

Can you see Demetriou killing off a golden goose? Me neither

 

[mufassa]

That's not re: AFL though, I don't think so anyway?

I think it was Darryl White who that rule affected, but that was for NT football?

Here is the policy

http://www.vcfl.com.au/fileadmin/user_upload/Resources/DeRegistration_Policy_May_2011.pdf

 

[Ant_]

Players shall be automatically deregistered and not allowed further registration with the same or another League if the Player has accumulated a combined total of sixteen (16) weeks Suspension (or greater) in a football career (including AFL career)

Found it, seems they half it.

Also if it's the first offence, it can be at the AFL's discretion.

i)Any Suspension period served by a Player during his AFL career shall carry over, however such Suspension period shall be halved for the purposes of this Deregistration policy. For example, if a Player receives a total of six (6) weeks Suspension whilst playing in the AFL, only three (3) weeks shall carry over for the purposes of this Deregistration policy.

First Offence

ii)Should a Player receive sixteen (16) weeks or more Suspension as a “first offence” it shall be at the Leagues discretion as to whether or not that Player will be deregistered, following his/her Suspension.

 

[mufassa]

not automatically


Can you see Demetriou killing off a golden goose? Me neither

What if a player gets 44 weeks?

 

[boncer34]

Players shall be automatically deregistered and not allowed further registration with the same or another League if the Player has accumulated a combined total of sixteen (16) weeks Suspension (or greater) in a football career (including AFL career)

First Offence
iv) Should a Player receive sixteen (16) weeks or more Suspension as a "first offence" it shall be at the Leagues discretion as to whether or not that Player will be deregistered, following his/her Suspension.

 

[Lance Uppercut]

What if a player gets 44 weeks?

what about it? Still a "first offence" innit

 

[PieBeast]

Actually rather pleased with the way they've carried themselves through this.

Sure, how could you not be proud of your club employing a bloke with criminal connections, a dodgy offside business and who's been given the arse from his two previous employers, that presser that made all Bomber supporters die a little inside, Hird chucking a hissy fit during the on air interview and you president admitting to "irregular practices" "things that might not be good for Football" and "making mistakes".

 

[whiteoak]

Yes. My lets wait and see and wait for evidence approach is the one that crosses that line.

The Essendon is guilty, loaded up on drugs and players will be banned despite zero evidence coming from anyone in that aspect is the approach that doesn't cross the line.

Makes sense to me.

You'd be the only one.

On one hand you are saying "let's wait and see". Which I agree with.

But on the other hand you are ADAMANT that you are innocent and people will be disappointed.

See how this works?