ASADA relied on 'vague' accounts - The Australian 27/12/13

[Leather Poisoning]

I note that our new recruit, Stewart Crameri, in a presser described it all as a storm in a teacup - he thought the whole thing had been exaggerated to buggery.

Now if you have been the recipient of a calf thymus derivative, useful in couteracting the immunosuppressive effects of prolonged periods of intensive training, you'd definitely be thinking to yourself: what are all these people on about?

Thousands/millions of people smoke cigarettes every day, full of chemicals and a drug that is proven beyond all doubt to have severe negative medical outcomes.

The threat of a drug MAYBE having UNKNOWN negative consequences ONE DAY probably doesn't alarm the players too much. I would say that dean Robinson's training that caused half the squad to pull up with soft tissue injuries would cause more animosity in the group than a PED program in terms of health.

If the players become angsty over this supplement program it will probably be about the risk to their career and cash flow (which they keep getting told by the club is quite unlikely, there won't be any AOD sanctions etc). They may well be a very tightly knit group until sanctions are handed down. If that happens I suspect it'll be every man for himself.

 

[Argy]

The AFL is not conducting any further investigations.

Proof please.

Sorry, but I don't believe a word you write.

 

[Laphroaig]

Agreed.

However, in my opinion the 'spirit' of S0 was to give a catch all clause to prosecute those that could escape prosecution because they were so close to the cutting edge of doping that specific clauses had not yet been implemented to counter them.

I really don't think it was meant to counter substances that are likely to be approved sooner rather than later.

Note though, this doesn't mean I condone the use of AOD-9604; far from it. I think the administration of a substance that has not yet completed it's proper approval process is bloody stupid bordering on criminally negligent.

An interesting thought; let's say ASADA successfully bans a number of Essendon players for two years, only to have AOD-9604 passed as safe and approved soon after; how does that sit with them? Or the AFL? Needs some thought.

1. There is nothing to suggest that AOD is likely to be approved soon, or ever.

2. The intent of S0 is to get around the fact that no authority, no matter how well resourced or efficient could ever dream of keeping a meaningful complete list of banned substances. THe spirit of S0 is "if it aint clinically approved, don't try to tell us later it's not a big deal. DONT **** ing USE IT.

3. If somebody is banned for using a substance not approved for human use they are guilty. Anything which happens later is irrelevant. How would you look caught doing 80 in a clearly marked 60 zone. Even if next year it is changed to an 80 zone. You knew, you got caught, you're guilty.

 

[theflea]

I would think the AFL would again have reason to look long and hard at it's association with WADA/ASADA.

Much as I believe the AFL have acted utterly despicable during this process, I think just about everyone acknowledges that successful bans in high numbers of AFL players would be an unmitigated disaster.

If those bans are the result of the administration of a harmless and non-performance enhancing, LEGAL supplement it would be a tough pill to swallow.

Not a chance that the AFL would leave the WADA code. Not only would the government drop them of support and funding, it would be seen as trying to cover up a doping crime.

 

[blackcat]

1. There is nothing to suggest that AOD is likely to be approved soon, or ever.

2. The intent of S0 is to get around the fact that no authority, no matter how well resourced or efficient could ever dream of keeping a meaningful complete list of banned substances. THe spirit of S0 is "if it aint clinically approved, don't try to tell us later it's not a big deal. DONT **** ing USE IT.

3. If somebody is banned for using a substance not approved for human use they are guilty. Anything which happens later is irrelevant. How would you look caught doing 80 in a clearly marked 60 zone. Even if next year it is changed to an 80 zone. You knew, you got caught, you're guilty.

think there is also a regulation outlawing your body as a pin cushion for 50 different ampoules of legal hypodermics.

can just take everything that is legal under the sun, that needs to be injected. I think there is a clause outlawing this.

now, it seemed from some of the reading material, every potential peptide that may have some clinical benefit outside sport, was considered fair game for off-label, and to pursue it no matter the cost, no matter the immaterial benefit.

this was confusing the trees for the forest. If they focused on the forest and the key performance inputs, with all the intensity they diverted, they could have got another few wins out of the season.

 

[sosos]

No shark jumping here.

With all due respect Jenny, the fonz and only the fonz will be the final arbiter of whether you did or didn't.

 

[tigerdan]

Don't think that's fair players should only be punished if they were using a PED.

Do you understand why S0 is there?

To protect players from injecting themselves with exotic shit that has not been tested. Also to prevent teams from trying to keep ahead of testers.

And by the way justin charles took steroids to get over an injury. And he still got banned, "performance" enhancing or not. He also put his hand up and took it like a man once he got caught.

 

[Big Sim]

Not Chip's finest hour, even by News Ltd's lofty standards. More or less says that the Essendon players responded to questions in their interviews exactly as they were coached to do by some high-priced spin merchant: vaguely, without incriminating anyone.

But Chip somehow beats that into ASADA (and thus Fairfax) getting it wrong.

The silliness never ceases.

 

[Jade]

Not Chip's finest hour, even by News Ltd's lofty standards. More or less says that the Essendon players responded to questions in their interviews exactly as they were coached to do by some high-priced spin merchant: vaguely, without incriminating anyone.

But Chip somehow beats that into ASADA (and thus Fairfax) getting it wrong.

The silliness never ceases.

Yeah because Fairfax have been completely fair in their coverage.

 

[tigerdan]

Yeah because Fairfax have been completely fair in their coverage.

Mate I hate to break it to you. Fairfax have been fair. Hanging you guys out to dry might seem harsh because it's your club but it was deserved. And any club would have copped it. You are getting hammered for being cheats not for being essendon.

 

[Jock]

Mate I hate to break it to you. Fairfax have been fair. Hanging you guys out to dry might seem harsh because it's your club but it was deserved. And any club would have copped it. You are getting hammered for being cheats not for being essendon.

Too true. It's just that the HUN get their articles edited at AFL house by Robbo who works out of there. Fairfax have had to pretty much go it alone in doing what we the public expect.

 

[BigJoeD_]

Too true. It's just that the HUN get their articles edited at AFL house by Robbo who works out of there. Fairfax have had to pretty much go it alone in doing what we the public expect.

You may have it arse about there ol Jock..

 

[coryne]

Too true. It's just that the HUN get their articles edited at AFL house by Robbo who works out of there. Fairfax have had to pretty much go it alone in doing what we the public expect.

Not to mention that the HS are "Official Partners" of the EFC, so there may be a little bit of bias there too (Why would they trash the brand which they sponsor ???). It kinda explains all the EFC puff pieces they publish ..................

 

[Jade]

Mate I hate to break it to you. Fairfax have been fair. Hanging you guys out to dry might seem harsh because it's your club but it was deserved. And any club would have copped it. You are getting hammered for being cheats not for being essendon.

If you could be so kind as to point me in the direction of the guilty verdicts for doping I'd be much obliged...

 

[Jade]

Too true. It's just that the HUN get their articles edited at AFL house by Robbo who works out of there. Fairfax have had to pretty much go it alone in doing what we the public expect.

No no no, I think you're mistaken.

Fairfax have been doing what generates clicks from the slovenly masses.

Laughable you say they've gone it alone when they've blatantly acted as the unofficial mouthpiece of the AFL through leaked information.

 

[coryne]

No no no, I think you're mistaken.

Fairfax have been doing what generates clicks from the slovenly masses.

Laughable you say they've gone it alone when they've blatantly acted as the unofficial mouthpiece of the AFL through leaked information.

And the HS are "official partners" of the EFC, so which do you think would be LESS biased Fairfax or the HS ???

 

[tigerdan]

No no no, I think you're mistaken.

Fairfax have been doing what generates clicks from the slovenly masses.

Laughable you say they've gone it alone when they've blatantly acted as the unofficial mouthpiece of the AFL through leaked information.

Slovenly masses? Do you even live in Victoria??? Without wanting to get into a flame war about demographics, The hs is the paper of the dimwits.

I know it must gall to be picked on for cheating but that's just the way it is. If anything what's surprising is that the hs chose essendon's side. Whether it was partisan to be on the other side of fairfax or simply because of essendon connections I don't know.

I say it again. The age would pick on any club cheating.

For what it's worth the afl was in essendons side until Hird tried to take Demetriou with him.

 

[tigerdan]

If you could be so kind as to point me in the direction of the guilty verdicts for doping I'd be much obliged...

Read the charge sheet. Put two and two together. If you don't like the answer well I guess you can contact mxett for the alternative scenario with all its coincidences.

Just because you barrack for essendon doesn't mean you need to ignore common sense.

 

[Jock]

Slovenly masses? Do you even live in Victoria??? Without wanting to get into a flame war about demographics, The hs is the paper of the dimwits.

I know it must gall to be picked on for cheating but that's just the way it is. If anything what's surprising is that the hs chose essendon's side. Whether it was partisan to be on the other side of fairfax or simply because of essendon connections I don't know.

I say it again. The age would pick on any club cheating.

For what it's worth the afl was in essendons side until Hird tried to take Demetriou with him.

The AFL is still begrudgingly in EFC's corner as they just want to limit the damage to the AFL brand, hence them giving Robbo the heads up to go easy on any negativity or lose the right of his key pass to AFL house and their flash coffee lounge. The two boys and Caro aren't welcome anyway so are free to keep having an honest crack at getting the truth out there. They have sfa to lose anyway and for that we all benefit.

 

[Whatsonswhat]

“One of the few certainties in life is that persons of certainty should certainly be avoided.”

 

[BOMBERS 4 LIFE!!!!]

Do you understand why S0 is there?

To protect players from injecting themselves with exotic shit that has not been tested. Also to prevent teams from trying to keep ahead of testers.

And by the way justin charles took steroids to get over an injury. And he still got banned, "performance" enhancing or not. He also put his hand up and took it like a man once he got caught.

i bet half the drugs that fall under the S0 category don't even had ped substances in them i call it the "I don't know" pile.

 

[yaco55]

In other words you have no links.

I am discussing a post in the Essendon forum that detailed the proposed sanctions at least a month before August 27. It's in the ASADA thread part 1.

I am not here because you are too lazy to read - And you have posted in the Essendon thread on ASADA.

 

[jenny61_99]

I am discussing a post in the Essendon forum that detailed the proposed sanctions at least a month before August 27. It's in the ASADA thread part 1.

I am not here because you are too lazy to read - And you have posted in the Essendon thread on ASADA.

Yacco, you make a claim it is normal for you to back it up with links. If you can't do that, then the claim is either ignored or treated with disdain. It's up to you if you want the claim taken seriously or not I guess.

 

[yaco55]

Stuart Cormack made those comments, not the Weapon.

You are confusing posts.

Your initial post clearly pointed to Cormack - It's correct that he considered the proposed training program for 2011/2012 to be unrealistic.

But I am certain that Lap's post was referring to Robinson.

 

[yaco55]

Most sensible people found that interview quite funny. Black ops? Say that again? Ffs, there's a reason why it was done by Darcy and not even a Barrett type journalist. It was low brow.

You have to pick what you believe - and what I believe in this case was that Robinson was turfed when he wasn't expecting it. If he is in the middle of this mess and is a desperate guy and has a willingness to lie then you've got a firecracker of a problem for the efc.

The interview was done by Darcy because there is a loose family connection with Robinson.