News Geelong's position in Essendon investigation and ACC report

[manboob]

You would think that if Deano got shafted everyone one would no? Not an either/or proposition?....

 

[Jon Douglas]

It doesn't work like that Jon, you still have to win to collect 4 points.
If Essendon wins no one gets 4 points.

Although it would still effect the comp to some degree.

That makes sense. But it may effect how Dons select players in games they cannot win. Some teams play them once and some teams twice.

Just a question for those that follow this issue. Are we any closer to knowing if Essendon or any other club or player is looking decidely in trouble ? That something big will come out of this inquiry ?

 

[AM]

Hope Ess got a barrel of lube...cause they are going to get so violated they won't be able to walk for years.

If things turn out very badly the extent of the penalty imposed will depend on how hard ASADA and WADA are prepared to push. My feeling is the AFL will do all in its power to ameliorate the penalty. As they have done so far with the Dees by only imposing a fine.

 

[Grizzly_82]

If things turn out very badly the extent of the penalty imposed will depend on how hard ASADA and WADA are prepared to push. My feeling is the AFL will do all in its power to ameliorate the penalty. As they have done so far with the Dees by only imposing a fine.

Different ball game if WADA and ASADA do not approve of the penalties ...unless they want to lose all the juicy government grants and such.

Good luck if they go against them it would be the death of AD and possibly a few AFL clubs.

 

[manboob]

If things turn out very badly the extent of the penalty imposed will depend on how hard ASADA and WADA are prepared to push. My feeling is the AFL will do all in its power to ameliorate the penalty. As they have done so far with the Dees by only imposing a fine.

I think this is above that to be honest. It's out of AFL house so to speak. The difference between your parents catching you smoking behind the house and a copper catching you for dealing smack. It does really seem to be a legal matter this time around. Not to mention the federal government would likely withdraw all federal funding for the sport if the AFL didn't play ball. Sometimes the issues are bigger than the biggest clubs and this may just be that occasion.

 

[kickazz]

I have heard no practical or ethical reason to ban performance-enhancing drugs if they have been proved safe to use.

In principle, I agree. Vitamins, bananas, ice baths all could be argued to improve performace, and we are fine with them.

Because they are performance-enhancing, that's why. They compromise the integrity of sport in a massive way- footy should be about the best team on the field, not the best team in terms of medicine. The reasons for them being banned go far above and beyond safety.

Do dieticians also count under 'best in terms of medicine'? Your point about the integrity of the sport is spot on though.

FYI, WADA will consider banning a substance if it fits two of three criteria:

(from http://www.usada.org/prohibited-list/)

1) It has the potential to enhance or enhances sport performance
2) It represents an actual or potential health risk to the athlete
3) It violates the spirit of sport

I find point three to be quite alarmingly nebulous. But these are the criteria used.

 

[AM]

I think this is above that to be honest. It's out of AFL house so to speak. The difference between your parents catching you smoking behind the house and a copper catching you for dealing smack. It does really seem to be a legal matter this time around. Not to mention the federal government would likely withdraw all federal funding for the sport if the AFL didn't play ball. Sometimes the issues are bigger than the biggest clubs and this may just be that occasion.

I'm not disagreeing with that just saying don't underestimate the AFLs capacity to mitigate damage. Think of the way they handled the tanking issue.

There's no question that if ASADA, WADA or especially the ACC dig their heels in the AFL will be largely sidelined. Just saying Vlad and Gillon have shown a capacity to "negotiate" their way out of perilous situations before and in so doing mitigate the damage to the AFL brand.

It was interesting that Evans ran off to see the two gents mentioned to brief (read forewarn) them on what's in the Switowski report.

 

[vinum coupe]

I'm very interested in this also... Bloody work getting in the way of my footy following life!!

He said that he has today seen paperwork that proves Essendon used banned substances.

He also clarified a few things.

1/ It will be up to the Essendon board to sack administrators, not the AFL
2/ Wada have set guidelines / precedents for how they punish clubs. There wont be leniency because its the AFL.
3/ he expects there will be court case after court case.

 

[Pure_Ownage]

If Essendon are badly busted I would imagine the AFL will do what happened to Storm. Let them play out 2013, but for no points. Keeps the structure in place and the money rolling in.

Completely agree that's what would happen.

The Bombers would play for no points but their points to date would not be awarded to any of the other clubs.

As per the penalties, while I tend to agree with VC in respect that I don't think the players deserve suspensions if they have been deceived, I can't see how they won't be. WADA's rules are very black and white, and if you have taken non approved susbstances, you will be suspended. While no doubt the afl will try and avoid that happening, how can it? If the afl threatens to walk away from or not accept WADA's bans, you can bet the Feds will withdraw all funding from the afl faster than they can blink. So the afl has very little leverage, and I can't see WADA being nice and letting the players off out of the goodness of their heart. The only thing I can see happening is that they want the players to roll over on those who are really responsible for it all, and that those that do will get reduced suspensions in exchange for testimony. But even in that case, I still think the players will get a suspension, just a lesser one.

 

[Willo_]

He said that he has today seen paperwork that proves Essendon used banned substances.

He also clarified a few things.

1/ It will be up to the Essendon board to sack administrators, not the AFL
2/ Wada have set guidelines / precedents for how they punish clubs. There wont be leniency because its the AFL.
3/ he expects there will be court case after court case.

Cheers mate, interesting that Essendon have now released a statement saying they have never confirmed or stated any players took any banned substances...

I expect court case after court case as well... Means the punishment will still be served you'd imagine while its going on, Tour de France riders that try take it to court still can't compete while its all going on can they?

 

[vinum coupe]

Cheers mate, interesting that Essendon have now released a statement saying they have never confirmed or stated any players took any banned substances...

I expect court case after court case as well... Means the punishment will still be served you'd imagine while its going on, Tour de France riders that try take it to court still can't compete while its all going on can they?

Correct, but the big thing is they dont deny it.

Robinson obviously knows what they took. And Essendon are going to play the "we didnt know it was banned" card.

 

[manboob]

Essendon are going to play the "we didnt know it was banned" card.

Lol no excuse - why would they even try that play.

 

[Senatorguesty]

Cheers mate, interesting that Essendon have now released a statement saying they have never confirmed or stated any players took any banned substances...

I expect court case after court case as well... Means the punishment will still be served you'd imagine while its going on, Tour de France riders that try take it to court still can't compete while its all going on can they?

My expectation is ASADA will hand down suspensions etc after proof that they took banned substances (provided there is any) and the court cases may be more against the AFL/Dank.
I dont know though, but I couldnt stand knowing the bombers cheated (other than now where its still speculation) and allowing them to play and potentially win finals while they are in court.
I dont know of many who that would sit well with.

 

[vealesy]

Correct, but the big thing is they dont deny it.

Robinson obviously knows what they took. And Essendon are going to play the "we didnt know it was banned" card.

Then theyre gone.

The onus is on them to find out if its banned or not, surely.

Unless the letter can be produced and Dank is charged with fraud?

Even then, still banned.

 

[vealesy]

My expectation is ASADA will hand down suspensions etc after proof that they took banned substances (provided there is any) and the court cases may be more against the AFL/Dank.
I dont know though, but I couldnt stand knowing the bombers cheated (other than now where its still speculation) and allowing them to play and potentially win finals while they are in court.
I dont know of many who that would sit well with.

Whatever happened to innocent until proven guilty?

 

[Senatorguesty]

Whatever happened to innocent until proven guilty?

Think its kinda past that point dont you?

 

[manboob]

The onus is on them to find out if its banned or not, surely.

Pretty sure it's a positive list too. I.e. you can only take it if it's on this list.

 

[FredLeDeux]

Completely agree that's what would happen.

The Bombers would play for no points but their points to date would not be awarded to any of the other clubs.

As per the penalties, while I tend to agree with VC in respect that I don't think the players deserve suspensions if they have been deceived, I can't see how they won't be. WADA's rules are very black and white, and if you have taken non approved susbstances, you will be suspended. While no doubt the afl will try and avoid that happening, how can it? If the afl threatens to walk away from or not accept WADA's bans, you can bet the Feds will withdraw all funding from the afl faster than they can blink. So the afl has very little leverage, and I can't see WADA being nice and letting the players off out of the goodness of their heart. The only thing I can see happening is that they want the players to roll over on those who are really responsible for it all, and that those that do will get reduced suspensions in exchange for testimony. But even in that case, I still think the players will get a suspension, just a lesser one.

Under the AFL's drugs code, ASADA (not) WADA) decides conclusively whether an offence has been committed by the players, and recommends penalties, which the AFL and the players, through the CBA, have bound themselves to follow, subject to the right of the players, if they don't like the penalties, to take it to the AFL Tribunal. The Tribunal has power to decide whether to apply the special exemptions reducing penalties from 2 years to 6 months or zero. If WADA thinks the Tribunal has been too soft, it can appeal to the CAS. Any players who are suspended will almost certainly take legal action against suppliers, club, officials.
The AFL has not signed on to the WADA or ASADA rules and guidelines in relation to clubs or officials, and is not bound by them. However, if ASADA recommends penalties on the club or officials, the AFL will be politically/economically bound to apply them, using its general powers and rules, and maybe add some of their own, eg draft penalties and fines. I suspect that if any backdoor dealing has gone on between the parties (which I also suspect it has), it will have been on this aspect - agreement on punishments which ASADA can live with politically, and which the AFL can live with in terms of running the competition. But if Essendon is not on board, it will legally appeal any punishments it can't live with.

 

[catempire]

This is going to get very, very messy if Essendon is in the top four and half a dozen of their players get hauled before a tribunal for banned substance use.

 

[Willo_]

My expectation is ASADA will hand down suspensions etc after proof that they took banned substances (provided there is any) and the court cases may be more against the AFL/Dank.
I dont know though, but I couldnt stand knowing the bombers cheated (other than now where its still speculation) and allowing them to play and potentially win finals while they are in court.
I dont know of many who that would sit well with.

It doesn't sit well with me at all, if question marks sit over the bombers linger all year, say the roll us in the finals. Then after its all done are found guilty and had players banned..
I would be furious

 

[Chief]

scintilla

People don't use this word enough

 

[vealesy]

Think its kinda past that point dont you?

Trial by media is above the courts now?

 

[FredLeDeux]

People don't use this word enough

I spent too much time listening to barristers and other similar riffraff in my misspent youth.

 

[Senatorguesty]

Trial by media is above the courts now?

The courts are yet to be involved and the investigation is on-going, all we can go by is what we are hearing.
At this point in time we have reports of Essendon admitting to injecting their players (unknowingly) with banned substances among other things.
You can call it trial by media if you like but where there's smoke, there's fire.

 

[Cataholic]

If things turn out very badly the extent of the penalty imposed will depend on how hard ASADA and WADA are prepared to push. My feeling is the AFL will do all in its power to ameliorate the penalty. As they have done so far with the Dees by only imposing a fine.

For mine, Demetriou has already started down that path going by his statements today.

I agree that you are innocent until proven guilty, in a court of law, but even blind freddy can see the circumstantial evidence is becoming increasingly irrefutable by the day.

Robinson's adamant statement tonight on AFL 360 that the HS have seen documents showing a drug regime at the Dons, and his criticism of their honesty in this affair, suggests that there is a definite fire amongst this smoke.

I've always believed that if the AFL were fair dinkum about drugs they wouldn't be so determined to shield the players with the 3 strike rule, and it seems they still don't want to face facts, much like Captain Smith.