Mega Thread All AOD-9604 Discussion - Still Illegal but ASADA will not press charges on AOD9604 - McDevitt

[FyfesBoot]

Peole have to start getting their heads round this.

When the AFL say that there will be no infraction notices against players unless new info comes to light - they need to understand that as things currently stand - there is nothing else.

There is no info lurking in the ASADA corner waiting to emerge.

The only uncertainty is Dank - that's it.

Apart from that - it's over - done and dusted.

Yeah, the only uncertainty is Dank. The one who has all the detailed records of who was given what when. The one Essendon sacked and then tried to lay the blame solely on by labelling him as a rogue element.

It's not over.

Real Madrid.

 

[Barkly St End]

in·ter·im

[in-ter-uhm]
noun
1.
an intervening time; interval; meantime: in the interim.
2.
a temporary or provisional arrangement; stopgap; makeshift.
— adj
1. ( prenominal ) temporary, provisional, or intervening: interim measures to deal with the emergency

ha ha - yes

and

realpolitik: the AFL has done it again

 

[Lance Uppercut]

Why would ASADA provide the AFL and thereby Essendon the information regarding specific players when it's an ongoing investigation and the charges last night were AFL violations largely irrelevant to their case?

How do you not get this?

The charges last night were largely IRRELEVANT to ASADA.

They were AFL code violations. ASADA provided them evidence to support their case, that's it.

No way in hell are they going to compromise their ongoing investigation for the sake of another organisation wanting to enforce their own rules.

I would respond but:

Wrong - to quote GW -

'The announcement yesterday brings in everybody, that wasnt a rouge announcement by the AFL pending what ASADA's going to say. There are going to be no infraction notices on the evidence that is currently before the AFL & thats the evidence gathered by ASADA, so unless something else comes to light the players are in the clear."

Whats all she wrote folks as far as the players are concerned.

I don't need to now

 

[TheLastCall]

Peole have to start getting their heads round this.

When the AFL say that there will be no infraction notices against players unless new info comes to light - they need to understand that as things currently stand - there is nothing else.

There is no info lurking in the ASADA corner waiting to emerge.

The only uncertainty is Dank - that's it.

Apart from that - it's over - done and dusted.

Your 100% wrong on this. The AFL are talking about the interim report which does not contain names. When the final report comes out it will contain names (new information) and then infringement notices will be handed out. AFL are not doing the investigating ASADA are, so AFL can only base findings on what they have and that is the interim report.

 

[Cronos]

I know it has now been said many times - but it's worth reiterating - as things currenty stand - the AFL know everything that needs to be known about this case - it was a joint investigation.

And yet did NOTHING until ASADA provided their Interim report.

And somehow your logic says they are completely done, even when ASADA provide their FINAL report.

 

[Colonial]

Just no - the AFL have been sitting next to ASADA at every point for the last 6 months - there ius nothing ASADA know that the AFL do not.

http://www.heraldsun.com.au/sport/a...e-doping-charges/story-fni5f6kv-1226696644875

But ASADA has told the Herald Sun the investigation continues; and the possibility of future charges remains.

“Given this investigation is ongoing, ASADA is not providing any further comment on its interim report. As we have previously noted, it is a complex investigation and ASADA has a duty of care to be both thorough and accurate in every step of the process,” an ASADA spokesman said.

“Should ASADA form the view at the conclusion of its investigation that a person may have committed an anti-doping rule violation ASADA will follow its established process”.

It is not up to the AFL to initiate doping charges against players

 

[Cronos]

ha ha - yes

and

realpolitik: the AFL has done it again

The only evidence you have for this assertion is your flawed belief that this is all finished, despite evidence to the contrary.

 

[Barkly St End]

Yeah, the only uncertainty is Dank. The one who has all the detailed records of who was given what when. The one Essendon sacked and then tried to lay the blame solely on by labelling him as a rogue element.

It's not over.

Real Madrid.

Ok - I can agree that something might eventuate from Dank yet - as remote as that probably is.

As long as everyone understands that's where it's at.

But where I sit - that's as good as saying it's over bar the shouting.

 

[Cronos]

Ok - I can agree that something might eventuate from Dank yet - as remote as that probably is.

As long as everyone understands that's where it's at.

But where I sit - that's as good as saying it's over bar the shouting.

BSE's argument:
It's all over!
(unless it's not)

 

[Barkly St End]

The only evidence you have for this assertion is your flawed belief that this is all finished, despite evidence to the contrary.

You know what - a lot of people have been flinging so-called "evidence" at me over the past 48 hours, and you know what else?

That so-called "evidence" has been worth diddly squat.

Unless Dank drops the mother of all bombshells - it's over.

No evidence - just reading the tealeaves and appreciating the realpolitik of the situation - call it a gut feel - call it je ne sais quoi.

 

[FyfesBoot]

that's true, but sitting in on interviews isn't all the AFL have been doing, one would presume. Once again, it's been a "joint investigation".

I can't see how the AFL could possibly have all the information that ASADA has. ASADA as an organisation is mainly interested in drug investigations, the AFL is mainly concerned with running (or ruining, depending on your pov) football. The level of resources dedicated to this matter by each organisation would have to be completely different. I'm guessing that ASADA, as a government entity, would also find it easier to access information from government sources e.g. customs.

 

[Barkly St End]

BSE's argument:
It's all over!
(unless it's not)

Ha ha - if you want to rely on Dank - be my guest!!

 

[Underdog]

You know what - a lot of people have been flinging so-called "evidence" at me over the past 48 hours, and you know what else?

That so-called "evidence" has been worth diddly squat.

Unless Dank drops the mother of all bombshells - it's over.

No evidence - just reading the tealeaves and appreciating the realpolitik of the situation - call it a gut feel - call it je ne sais quoi.

So given your endless arguement that AOD-9604 was legal, why were the 4 lads last night charged?

 

[Mixed Results]

I saw that bit.

It means: it's over baby, unless something completely unforeseen happens.

If you were a lawyer for the AFL, how would you advise them to word that part if the AFL expected that player infraction notices were the likely outcome once the final report is released

 

[Barkly St End]

If the 400 page report did not contain a single players name, I can't see how the AFL could lay any charges ESPECIALLY as the investigstion is ongoing.w
Don't forget, they were waiting for this interim before coming out with any decision.
If the AFL had all the information all this time, why did they wait for the report at all?

The AFL know everything there is to be known - they have sat on all the interviews - it has been a joint investigation - they are in each others' back pockets.

Your last question is a good one, but one can surmise a good answer.

In acting as if they wanted all the i's dotted and t's crossed, the AFL have contrived a situation where a hard decision can be made at the very end of the home and away season.

Once again - realpolitik.

 

[rumply]

But ASADA has told the Herald Sun the investigation continues; and the possibility of future charges remains.

& the possibility still remains I will hook up with Scarlett Johansson one of these days....

 

[FyfesBoot]

... call it je ne sais quoi.

Finally admitting that you don't know.

Bon pour vous.

 

[Barkly St End]

So given your endless arguement that AOD-9604 was legal, why were the 4 lads last night charged?

1. I didn't actually make the case that AOD was legal - I made the case that a charge under S0 was easily challenged.

2. I think the 4 lads have been roped into this whole bringing the game into disrepute business - and in that space - the AFL is almost free to argue anything it wants - as long as the club in question accepts the clip over the ear.

 

[Barkly St End]

Finally admitting that you don't know.

Bon pour vous.

That is terrible French.

 

[FyfesBoot]

That is terrible French.

Which matches up perfectly with your terrible arguments.

 

[Cronos]

You know what - a lot of people have been flinging so-called "evidence" at me over the past 48 hours, and you know what else?

That so-called "evidence" has been worth diddly squat.

Unless Dank drops the mother of all bombshells - it's over.

No evidence - just reading the tealeaves and appreciating the realpolitik of the situation - call it a gut feel - call it je ne sais quoi.

Which part in particular tells you it's all over? The part where the ASADA investigation is ongoing? The part where the AFL felt the need to assert that yes, AOD is prohibited under WADA rules? The very specific part where they said "on the information before the AFL", the part where "at the present time, no infraction notices will be issued", the part where "The AFL notes that the investigation into Essendon's 2011/2012 supplement program by ASADA and the AFL remains open", "Infraction notices under the AFL Anti-Doping Code against individual Essendon FC players or other persons could also result if further information comes to hand".

Just how many times in one statement do they need to say that it's not over before you catch the fact that it's not over?

 

[Colonial]

& the possibility still remains I will hook up with Scarlett Johansson one of these days....

The odds would be higher for that to happen than charges laid at players.

Did you read the whole thing or just cherry pick the bit you thought you could twist?

ASADA has come out and said the AFL's interim decision is not the be all and end all and carries no wait into what they will decide to do when their report is finished

 

[Barkly St End]

If you were a lawyer for the AFL, how would you advise them to word that part if the AFL expected that player infraction notices were the likely outcome once the final report is released

That's the point.

The AFL's action from the very start has been to minimise the chances of such an eventuality.

It would appear that they have succeeded.

You have to give it to them.

 

[Barkly St End]

Which part in particular tells you it's all over? The part where the ASADA investigation is ongoing? The part where the AFL felt the need to assert that yes, AOD is prohibited under WADA rules? The very specific part where they said "on the information before the AFL", the part where "at the present time, no infraction notices will be issued", the part where "The AFL notes that the investigation into Essendon's 2011/2012 supplement program by ASADA and the AFL remains open", "Infraction notices under the AFL Anti-Doping Code against individual Essendon FC players or other persons could also result if further information comes to hand".

Just how many times in one statement do they need to say that it's not over before you catch the fact that it's not over?

The part where the AFL, the joint investigator, who is privy to all the info, says there are no infraction notices unless new info comes to light (wink, wink).

 

[Colonial]

The part where the AFL, the joint investigator, who is privy to all the info, says there are no infraction notices unless new info comes to light (wink, wink).

Should ASADA form the view at the conclusion of its investigation that a person may have committed an anti-doping rule violation ASADA will follow its established process”.

It is not up to the AFL to initiate doping charges against players