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

[SunshineBoy]

And right on cue...

Insightfull post

 

[jenny61_99]

I disagree jenny, The inflation rate is a product of the CPI in Australia , The government has in their CPI basket such commodites that are bought every day by consumers like TVs Computers and Cars and shoes (for the ladies) just to name a fewthe drops in those items outwiegh the rises in everyday items thus giving an artificially low CPI hence inflation rate.

Has bread and milk only risen 25 % since 2000? What about other foodstuff? Hell a big mac meal has nearly doubled in price from $4.95

Check with the Australian Bureau of Statistics its actually quite disturbing to read.

The figures I put there were from the USA, but I checked the RBA site and it was almost identical perhaps $20,000 more. It would however only go up to 2012. I can't see it being markedly different in one year.

 

[BigJoeD_]

Insightfull post

If the shoe fits

 

[SunshineBoy]

And how does say, the australian dollar, compare with itself of 2002? Is it more than double? That's the commodity we are talking about...

One Australian Dollar is Still one Australian dollar when you go and spend it. if you bought bread with one Australian dollar in 2000 try and buy the same bread with one Australian dollar in 2013. Given I live overseas and live and die by exchange rate calculations you may have some trouble with this line of thought.

As you only obviously go to the shops and buy mixed lollies tell me how many freckles can you buy for 5 cents today?

 

[SunshineBoy]

The figures I put there were from the USA, but I checked the RBA site and it was almost identical perhaps $20,000 more. It would however only go up to 2012. I can't see it being markedly different in one year.

Hi jenny I don't dispute your figures do you buy shoes every day?, computers? televisions? household furnishing? Why are they part of the CPI when we talk about the cost of living?

This has digressed from the original topic, but it just highlights how inadequate the penalties handed out where.

Adelaide got more severe draft penalties IIRC

 

[jenny61_99]

Hi jenny I don't dispute your figures do you buy shoes every day?, computers? televisions? household furnishing? Why are they part of the CPI when we talk about the cost of living?

This has digressed from the original topic, but it just highlights how inadequate the penalties handed out where.

Adelaide got more severe draft penalties IIRC

We aren't talking goods, we are talking cash. $900,000 in 2002 would be worth $1,180,000 today. 31.5% average of 2.8% per year.

And yes Adelaide did get hit around the head with a 4x2 - apparently we weren't as cooperative as Essendon.

 

[SunshineBoy]

We aren't talking goods, we are talking cash. $900,000 in 2002 would be worth $1,180,000 today. 31.5% average of 2.8% per year.

And yes Adelaide did get hit around the head with a 4x2 - apparently we weren't as cooperative as Essendon.

The question was inflation jenny and my speeding fine in 2001 was $60 today its closer to $130 for the same offence. I can give you plenty more examples especially in regards to fines.

 

[jenny61_99]

The question was inflation jenny and my speeding fine in 2001 was $60 today its closer to $130 for the same offence. I can give you plenty more examples especially in regards to fines.

I used the RBA inflation calculator. You are talking about the cost of "something". All I'm talking about is cash.

 

[Barkly St End]

Well, unsurprisingly, you're wrong.

And in all these discussions on the long term health effects on concussions, who is taking the running on it?

The AFL or the individual clubs?

Who will ultimately meet the cost of any fall out in the future?

Here is a quote from a recent address by an OH&S expert:

The AFL controls the game of Australian Football. It makes the rules; it sets out the specific minimum requirements on everything from off-field player behaviour to the conditions of the playing surface. The AFL has a Rules Committee that runs the game but has an important role in minimising harm to players.

As an example, there have been many head clashes over the last few years which generate the question of whether helmets are required in Australian Football. It is an understandable question as other football codes have helmets as a minimum requirement and, following head clashes in AFL, players frequently wear protective helmets. But, if applying the Hierarchy of Controls to the risk control of players, the personal protective equipment of helmets is far less effective than the control measure devised by the AFL Rules Committee, changing player movements to reduce head contact.

So - does the AFL carry a certain responsibility as far as OH&S goes in the competition?

It would appear the answer is unequivocally: yes.

 

[yodellinhank]

I would have thought the salary cap has gone up over 100% during the same period

It hasn't. In 02 cap appears to have been around $7m, now it's about $9m.

Displaying the logic shown on this board and equating how much bread that buys you, some are arguing the salary cap is actually lower now than it was in 02.

 

[Barkly St End]

Would think that the AFL's liability resides with providing grounds and facilities are in a safe condition to play the game, what happens during the week to the players is exclusively the responsibility of the individual clubs

Are you saying the AFL has zero authority and/or responsibility to formulate rules outside of what happens inside the boundary line?

I would argue that that is an incorrect view.

 

[jenny61_99]

And in all these discussions on the long term health effects on concussions, who is taking the running on it?

The AFL or the individual clubs?

Who will ultimately meet the cost of any fall out in the future?

Here is a quote from a recent address by an OH&S expert:




So - does the AFL carry a certain responsibility as far as OH&S goes in the competition?

It would appear the answer is unequivocally: yes.

Whilst I agree with you that the AFL must carry some responsibility - they have set ground rules clearly down for all clubs to adhere to in the form of an anti-doping code. They educate the players regularly on the code. I assume they also do the same to the coaches when they meet. They can claim they have taken all reasonable precautions to ensure players/personnel are aware of the code and their responsibilities within it.

(As an aside re concussions, helmets don't help. The only thing a helmet does is limit damage to the skull. The brain however is free floating within the skull and the impact of a head clash on the brain (either with someone else or the ground) isn't changed by the existence of a helmet. Helmets are for mothers.)

 

[Barkly St End]

You speak so much rot. What two card trick?
If the Bombers didnt do this in the first place - there is no issue.
Forget the AFL and your convoluted theories.
If Essendon didn't take the gear on S0 and S2 - no issue in the first place.
The AFL came in POST event. It is the EVENT that matters here - not the post event wheelings and dealings.

Is the gear S0 or S2?
Don't forget - it cannot be both.

 

[Barkly St End]

Whilst I agree with you that the AFL must carry some responsibility - they have set ground rules clearly down for all clubs to adhere to in the form of an anti-doping code. They educate the players regularly on the code. I assume they also do the same to the coaches when they meet. They can claim they have taken all reasonable precautions to ensure players/personnel are aware of the code and their responsibilities within it.

(As an aside re concussions, helmets don't help. The only thing a helmet does is limit damage to the skull. The brain however is free floating within the skull and the impact of a head clash on the brain (either with someone else or the ground) isn't changed by the existence of a helmet. Helmets are for mothers.)

As far as the AFL taking some responsibility - your highly esteemed colleagues are arguing otherwise.

Your highly esteemed colleagues are wrong.

 

[Barkly St End]

Hmmm, you think
Or is the AFL players competition, considered to be a "workplace". Don't they work under an CBA?

Even a CBA can tip its hat to a higher authority.

 

[jenny61_99]

As far as the AFL taking some responsibility - your highly esteemed colleagues are arguing otherwise.

Your highly esteemed colleagues are wrong.

Since when do fellow posters on an internet forum become esteemed colleagues?

You also seemed to miss the part where I said the AFL could justifiably argue that they have taken all precautions by introducing a code, and educating everyone within the system about that code. If people go outside that code they must take personal responsibility for doing so.

 

[Barkly St End]

Since when do fellow posters on an internet forum become esteemed colleagues?

You also seemed to miss the part where I said the AFL could justifiably argue that they have taken all precautions by introducing a code, and educating everyone within the system about that code. If people go outside that code they must take personal responsibility for doing so.

You remind me that under the AFL Code the AFL accepts the responsibility of educating all within the AFL industry about the code.

The question becomes: how far does that responsibility to educate go?

For instance, when an AFL staffer was present at a meeting where the topic of peptides arose - would it not be incumbent on the AFL to advise clubs as to the legality of peptides or otherwise?

Did this ever happen?

If it did not happen - is that a failure on the part of the AFL to adhere to its own code? To fulfil its responsibility under the code?

 

[SunshineBoy]

Since when do fellow posters on an internet forum become esteemed colleagues?

You also seemed to miss the part where I said the AFL could justifiably argue that they have taken all precautions by introducing a code, and educating everyone within the system about that code. If people go outside that code they must take personal responsibility for doing so.

Jenny I take that as a compliment esteemed clleague

 

[SunshineBoy]

You remind me that under the AFL Code the AFL accepts the responsibility of educating all within the AFL industry about the code.

The question becomes: how far does that responsibility to educate go?

For instance, when an AFL staffer was present at a meeting where the topic of peptides arose - would it not be incumbent on the AFL to advise clubs as to the legality of peptides or otherwise?

Did this ever happen?

If it did not happen - is that a failure on the part of the AFL to adhere to its own code? To fulfil its responsibility under the code?

 

[Argy]

I used the RBA inflation calculator. You are talking about the cost of "something". All I'm talking about is cash.

For those who don't understand what Jenny is saying, here is a link to the inflation calculation page...
http://www.rba.gov.au/calculator/annualDecimal.html

 

[Aerial Ping Pong]

Since when do fellow posters on an internet forum become esteemed colleagues?

You also seemed to miss the part where I said the AFL could justifiably argue that they have taken all precautions by introducing a code, and educating everyone within the system about that code. If people go outside that code they must take personal responsibility for doing so.

If it ever got to a court or tribunal I think the AFL would be in trouble when asked "How many times did AFL players contact the ASADA advice line in 2011?" The answer will be very interesting. I suspect the answer may be "Dunno."

You can introduce a code and educate everyone but if you don't follow up and confirm that players are following the code you are failing your OH&S responsibilities.

There are approx. 800 players on AFL lists. It would be reasonable to expect that each player would be in a situation requiring they check at least once with ASADA. There should be at least 800 advice tickets for AFL players in the ASADA system. Did the AFL ever check that the players were contacting ASADA and receiving advice tickets as per the code?

If the practice is that the club doctors or players doctors are getting the ASADA advice on behalf of the players there should be a similar number of advice tickets in the system.

 

[jenny61_99]

If it ever got to a court or tribunal I think the AFL would be in trouble when asked "How many times did AFL players contact the ASADA advice line in 2011?" The answer will be very interesting. I suspect the answer may be "Dunno."

You can introduce a code and educate everyone but if you don't follow up and confirm that players are following the code you are failing your OH&S responsibilities.

There are approx. 800 players on AFL lists. It would be reasonable to expect that each player would be in a situation requiring they check at least once with ASADA. There should be at least 800 advice tickets for AFL players in the ASADA system. Did the AFL ever check that the players were contacting ASADA and receiving advice tickets as per the code?

It the practice is that the club doctors or players doctors are getting the ASADA advice on behalf of the players there should be a similar number of advice tickets in the system.

Very good point.

 

[Barkly St End]

If it ever got to a court or tribunal I think the AFL would be in trouble when asked "How many times did AFL players contact the ASADA advice line in 2011?" The answer will be very interesting. I suspect the answer may be "Dunno."

You can introduce a code and educate everyone but if you don't follow up and confirm that players are following the code you are failing your OH&S responsibilities.

There are approx. 800 players on AFL lists. It would be reasonable to expect that each player would be in a situation requiring they check at least once with ASADA. There should be at least 800 advice tickets for AFL players in the ASADA system. Did the AFL ever check that the players were contacting ASADA and receiving advice tickets as per the code?

If the practice is that the club doctors or players doctors are getting the ASADA advice on behalf of the players there should be a similar number of advice tickets in the system.

Aerial Ping Pong
Geelong supporter from Chadstone
where have you been all this time?

 

[Argy]

You remind me that under the AFL Code the AFL accepts the responsibility of educating all within the AFL industry about the code.

The question becomes: how far does that responsibility to educate go?

For instance, when an AFL staffer was present at a meeting where the topic of peptides arose - would it not be incumbent on the AFL to advise clubs as to the legality of peptides or otherwise?

Did this ever happen?

If it did not happen - is that a failure on the part of the AFL to adhere to its own code? To fulfil its responsibility under the code?

The AFL is not an employer. It sets the rules and issues penalties when they are broken. It introduced rules about doping and made sure the clubs and players knew about those rules. It then became the responsibility of the clubs and players to adhere to the rules and the responsibility of the AFL to punish those who did not stick to the rules. Think of it like a holding the ball decision.

 

[Aerial Ping Pong]

Aerial Ping Pong
Geelong supporter from Chadstone
where have you been all this time?

It got to hot and personal in here for my liking. I have many Essendon supporting friends and the stuff about foamers and cult of Hird etc. is not to my taste.