2015 Non-Crows AFL Discussion - Pt. 1

[alex_is_on_fire]

If the AFL back date the 34 Essendon players suspensions, they are seriously ****ed in the head.

 

[SpeciousArgument]

If the AFL back date the 34 Essendon players suspensions, they are seriously stuffed in the head.

On their (the afls) previous form i dont know why anyone would expect otherwise. The way were going the AFL is heading for vince mcmahon levels of farce

 

[alex_is_on_fire]

On their (the afls) previous form i dont know why anyone would expect otherwise. The way were going the AFL is heading for vince mcmahon levels of farce

Somehow I still expect the AFL to give them their draft picks back.

 

[MRB37]

Did he?

I think he would have taken any deal and it would have been very similar to his Dees deal.

Supposedly got the Mackay special, 4 years and $1.2 million.

 

[GROTTO]

Looks like Ryder will be sitting out the NAB Cup too.

Why is that? and who cares? Not about your comment, but about Ryder.

He has trained all summer with the Power and gained many advantages from that. It may have been different if he wasnt even at training then possibly his suspension could be shorter potentially.

His ban should not be retrospectively applied if he gets one, it should apply from the day he receives it.

 

[SpeciousArgument]

Why is that? and who cares? Not about your comment, but about Ryder.

He has trained all summer with the Power and gained many advantages from that. It may have been different if he wasnt even at training then possibly his suspension could be shorter potentially.

His ban should not be retrospectively applied if he gets one, it should apply from the day he receives it.

Yeah i dont get this whole not playing so they can backdate thing, theyve been training, wtf is their penalty then? 6 month penalty starting from when you last played football 6 months before the start of the season, and no training, but even though youve been training we will ignore it and just pretend and you act all sorry and sad.

Farce. complete farce.

 

[GROTTO]

Farce. complete farce.

Agreed. Bloody joke. Players should be suspended from the R1 date. Otherwise its a mockery of the whole process.

The penalty needs to be a deterrent as well.

 

[SpeciousArgument]

Agreed. Bloody joke. Players should be suspended from the R1 date. Otherwise its a mockery of the whole process.

The penalty needs to be a deterrent as well.

So NikkiNoo correct me if im wrong, but AFAIK the process is supposed to go like this

1. Show cause notice given
2. Athlete stops training and competing
3. Hearing/Athlete is found guilty
4. Penalty handed out and start date of penalty backdated to the date athlete stopped training and competing

I think its reasonable to backdate the penalties in this situation, and even if they didnt miss a game, not training at all between september and march would really **** up their 2015, if not some of their careers. BUT if theyve been training then WTF is the penalty? being called drug cheats? theyll get called drug cheats from now until forever even if completely exonerated anyway

 

[FR0GGY]

Penalty should have to be served during the season, wtf is the point in serving it during the offseason.

 

[AFC3000]

I don't know about the technicalities and whats right according to the law but in my opinion the only way the players should qualify for a backdated penalty is if they were willing to sit out from all training and going to the club etc. during that period.

If you want to fight and keep going on as normal then no penalty has been served and theres nothing that should qualify them for a backdated penalty.

Now all this stuff about the rest of the team boycotting the NAB Cup, yeah sounds like they are cooperating unlike we did.

 

[mattymac]

Penalty should have to be served during the season, wtf is the point in serving it during the offseason.

Anything less is a farce.



Expect a farce.

 

[GROTTO]

Basically if the players are training at the Club with the Club or team mates then simply they cannot realistically expect to have a backdated penalty.

Why not have the penalty to take effect from when they turn 35, Im sure most of them will be happy to cop a years fine or more!

 

[NikkiNoo]

So NikkiNoo correct me if im wrong, but AFAIK the process is supposed to go like this

1. Show cause notice given
2. Athlete stops training and competing
3. Hearing/Athlete is found guilty
4. Penalty handed out and start date of penalty backdated to the date athlete stopped training and competing

I think its reasonable to backdate the penalties in this situation, and even if they didnt miss a game, not training at all between september and march would really **** up their 2015, if not some of their careers. BUT if theyve been training then WTF is the penalty? being called drug cheats? theyll get called drug cheats from now until forever even if completely exonerated anyway

Penalty will start from the date of the Infraction notice. The process is as follows
1. Show Cause Notice from ASADA and athlete is given time to answer that.
2. infraction Notice from the sporting body once advised by ASADA that there is a case to answer.
3. Athlete then is generally required to stop competing/training but this is not set in stone and is slightly different depending on the cause and the sporting body requirements. The AFL allowed the players to continue to train, but they are not allowed to 'compete' unless at the special dispensation of the AFL Commission (hence the Watson/Fletcher participation in the IR games).
4. If they are guilty, then there are some various different options re penalty length, but generally the penalties will start from the timing of the Infraction Notice, which in the case of the 34 players is November last year.

The AFL allowed them to continue to train to help maintain the whole 'oh innocent until proven guilty' idea that the public think you should be allowed. The problem is that in doping cases, the inference immediately is that you are guilty until you can conclusively prove you are innocent (mostly due to positive drug tests). This case hits the curly parts because it is a non-olympic sport (which the WADA code was designed mostly around) and involves a large part of a team, also something very new, and there were no positive tests so it rests on ASADA making a case to the Tribunal that there is a "comfortable satisfaction" that they did it.

 

[GROTTO]

Anything less is a farce.

Expect a farce.

At this point in time, everyone wants to bloody saga to be over. FFS just cop the ban and move on. Im tired and dont like the stain it has placed on the game.

 

[GROTTO]

Is the Tiser trolling the AFC?



http://www.adelaidenow.com.au/

 

[RodnyDangrfield]

Is the Tiser trolling the AFC?

View attachment 107306

http://www.adelaidenow.com.au/

Always happens mate, I think somehow as it says Adelaide in the name of Port Adelaide, we get roped in with their puff pieces about umpiring decisions or wingards hair.

 

[GROTTO]

Penalty will start from the date of the Infraction notice.

You seem to be quite knowledgeable in this area, what are you thoughts about what may happen to Essendon, penalties? No penalties, big ones, small ones?

 

[RodnyDangrfield]

Penalty will start from the date of the Infraction notice. The process is as follows
1. Show Cause Notice from ASADA and athlete is given time to answer that.
2. infraction Notice from the sporting body once advised by ASADA that there is a case to answer.
3. Athlete then is generally required to stop competing/training but this is not set in stone and is slightly different depending on the cause and the sporting body requirements. The AFL allowed the players to continue to train, but they are not allowed to 'compete' unless at the special dispensation of the AFL Commission (hence the Watson/Fletcher participation in the IR games).
4. If they are guilty, then there are some various different options re penalty length, but generally the penalties will start from the timing of the Infraction Notice, which in the case of the 34 players is November last year.

The AFL allowed them to continue to train to help maintain the whole 'oh innocent until proven guilty' idea that the public think you should be allowed. The problem is that in doping cases, the inference immediately is that you are guilty until you can conclusively prove you are innocent (mostly due to positive drug tests). This case hits the curly parts because it is a non-olympic sport (which the WADA code was designed mostly around) and involves a large part of a team, also something very new, and there were no positive tests so it rests on ASADA making a case to the Tribunal that there is a "comfortable satisfaction" that they did it.

NikkiNoo, what's your opinion regarding whether Watson and Fletcher should've been allowed to play in the IRS? I think it was a poor and weak decision by the AFL again (ie Handing back draft picks) and they've made a rod for their own backs in this case. Im telling you now they wont miss more than 2 games and Hird will keep his job. If this was the crows they would of folded us by now or ran us out of the comp. As Andy D said though, Essendon cooperated while we didn't so fair's fair...

 

[AFC3000]

Is the Tiser trolling the AFC?

View attachment 107306

http://www.adelaidenow.com.au/

There is a good article about petrol prices on there tonight though...

 

[SpeciousArgument]

Penalty will start from the date of the Infraction notice. The process is as follows
1. Show Cause Notice from ASADA and athlete is given time to answer that.
2. infraction Notice from the sporting body once advised by ASADA that there is a case to answer.
3. Athlete then is generally required to stop competing/training but this is not set in stone and is slightly different depending on the cause and the sporting body requirements. The AFL allowed the players to continue to train, but they are not allowed to 'compete' unless at the special dispensation of the AFL Commission (hence the Watson/Fletcher participation in the IR games).
4. If they are guilty, then there are some various different options re penalty length, but generally the penalties will start from the timing of the Infraction Notice, which in the case of the 34 players is November last year.

The AFL allowed them to continue to train to help maintain the whole 'oh innocent until proven guilty' idea that the public think you should be allowed. The problem is that in doping cases, the inference immediately is that you are guilty until you can conclusively prove you are innocent (mostly due to positive drug tests). This case hits the curly parts because it is a non-olympic sport (which the WADA code was designed mostly around) and involves a large part of a team, also something very new, and there were no positive tests so it rests on ASADA making a case to the Tribunal that there is a "comfortable satisfaction" that they did it.

So its reasonable to assume penalties may be 6 months backdated to November, which will effectively result in no penalty?

 

[GROTTO]

So its reasonable to assume penalties may be 6 months backdated to November, which will effectively result in no penalty?

Disgraceful, unprofessional and an embarrassment.

That penalty suits the situation which has been farcical since Day 1.

 

[NikkiNoo]

So its reasonable to assume penalties may be 6 months backdated to November, which will effectively result in no penalty?

Considering how pissed WADA was about the 1 year penalties backdated for Cronulla players, I don't think 6 months is on the cards for the majority of players if they are found guilty. A 6 month reduction is normally only allowed for someone who has offered "substantial assistance" and everyone knows that is something Essendon hasn't done at all during this saga. Even if that was offered, WADA can appeal any decision from the Tribunal and take it to CAS, the Court of Arbitration in Sport. So while people might want things to be over as soon as the AFL Tribunal makes a decision, it might still take longer. The players have the right to go to CAS as well if they don't like the decision.

Playing the game of if it is only 6 months... it would still take them into May, so would miss a bit of the season and if banned then they have to stop training at any club etc and no contact is another requirement. It would then take them a bit to get back to fitness required, so effectively it is a longer penalty in respect to being able to play at the level required.

Those people wanting this to be over asap as they have had enough need to understand that this is the first case of its kind in relation to systematic team doping on such a large scale. The rest of the world are watching this case very closely. The new WADA code we operate under was changed to be able to better deal with non-olympic sports doping like this and to really be able to go after support people better than they had in the past. I suspect it is far from over.

 

[Mike Smyth]

If, as expected, Essendon players get zero games will it impact on the game or will there be 5 minutes of outrage and then business as usual?

 

[FR0GGY]

I can't believe this is the first of its kind in the world nikkinoo? Given the drug history of other countries in the olympics, are other teams in other countries just not tested as much as we are in Australia?

 

[Red mist]

If, as expected, Essendon players get zero games will it impact on the game or will there be 5 minutes of outrage and then business as usual?

Pretty much constantly this from me.