Bruce Francis has replied.

Remove this Banner Ad

Log in to remove this ad.

Muggs said:
He seems to have found his own little cohort of supporters who read and salivate over everything he says if his Facebook page is anything to go by...

If you talking about anyone who matters...like the commonwealth ombudsman....he does get ignored it seems.
Click to expand...
And has he been dumped from TWITlonger ... everything recently has been on Facebook - or maybe it is to quickly target the faithful and get the likes?
 
Muggs said:
Don't forget his mates Allan Jones and Warwick Hadfield!
Click to expand...
I've always thought Warwick Hadfield is The Governor.
 
Well he's done it, the people's poet has broken down Brent Prismall's interview with the ABC and as you can guess it is full of delusional pearls of wisdom. Here are just a few of the better ones:
If you want to see the whole rambling mess - https://www.facebook.com/bruce.francis.547/posts/248156075533569

Item (Prismall) 11: “Certainly there was pressure when you are having meetings with James Hird, Stephen Dank and Dean Robinson They are talking about the program; clearly endorsing the program; talking about what the effects are; how it is going to help us; how it’s not going to produce over the line in terms of being WADA compliant. But certainly the conversations you are having being in that environment it sort of leaves you no choice to do it. There were some guys that hadn’t and they are not serving the bans so.”

My Comment:

1. Prismall was clearly mistaken on a couple of grounds.

i. The players were given some supplements on 19 October 2011, which was the first day of season 2012, pre-season training. Hird wasn’t present when the supplements were distributed and he left the next day for a five-week overseas holiday. Hird had no idea the players were given until about 15 January 2012.

ii. On 8 February 2012, players attended a meeting at the Essendon football club auditorium. The meeting was addressed by Dank and Robinson and related to the supplement protocols. Dank introduced for substances – AOD-9604; Thymosin; Colostrum; and Tribulus - that had reportedly been approved for use in accordance with the new supplement protocols. Hird did not attend this meeting.

2. Ironically, Prismall is Exhibit ‘A’ in proving that no pressure was applied to participate. ASADA nominated 16 specific substances and an ‘all other’ category in the aforementioned table. Prismall admitted to only receiving two of the 16 specifically named substances and admitted to receiving amino acids for which he didn’t know the name. Surely, Prismall’s extremely low participation rate proves that there was no pressure applied to take any substance.

Whateley was clearly having trouble getting Prismall to put the knife in

Item (Whateley) 16: “Where does James Hird sit in that in your mind?”

My Comment:

1. If you keep pushing hard enough and put words into people’s mouths you’ll eventually get what you want. It’s a shame that Whateley didn’t have the courage to ask Prismall where the Essendon board and the AFL Commissioners sat in his mind.

2. If Whateley were half a decent journalist he would have studied the Victorian Occupational Health & Safety Act, the Essendon organisation structure and Hird’s job description, and he would have realised that about 30 people had more responsibility than Hird.
Item (Prismall) 17: “Well the coach in a football club knows everything. Ultimately he would make the decision as to whether the program would or would not run so yeah he certainly has a level of responsibility as well.”

My Comment:

1. Prismall was wrong to claim the coach knows everything. Obviously, the doctors, the sports scientists, the physios, the nutritionists, the psychologists, the conditioners et al know more about their respective fields of expertise than Hird.

2. In May 2011, the Essendon board, through chairman David Evans and chief executive Ian Robson, and Paul Hamilton, Danny Corcoran, Hird and Mark Thompson agreed to adopt a more scientific approach to nutrition, training, conditioning and recovery. The football department – Hamilton, Corcoran, Robinson, the doctors and Dank - was given clear instructions by Hird that the supplements had to be WADA compliant; Dr Reid had to approve their use; the players were free to opt in or opt out; and no substance could be used if there were any chance of it causing harm the player.

3. Hird didn’t need to know any more about the program other than the protocols were being adhered to. It is ridiculous to suggest that Hird, or any coach for that matter, needed to know the chemical breakdown of each substance.

4. Hird was no different from the senior AFL executives and AFL commissioners.

5. The AFL Commissioners trusted the senior AFL executives – Demetriou, Adrian Anderson, Gillon McLachlan and Brett Clothier - to fulfil their duty of care responsibilities to the clubs and players.

6. Demetriou, Anderson, McLachlan and Clothier trusted each club to comply with clause 7.4 of the AFL’s anti-doping code. Since 2010, Clause 7.4 required every player at every club to table with the club doctor prior to the start of each season a list of every substance and medication that had been administered to the player in the previous 12 months. Demetriou, Anderson, McLachlan and Clothier never checked compliance even once at any club. Presumably, they didn’t check with compliance with clause 7.4 because they trusted each club to comply.

7. The AFL trusting each club to comply is no different from Hird trusting the Essendon football department complying with his verbal and written instructions as to how the supplement program should work.

8. Interestingly, when Hird heard the herd had transgressed he spoke up despite the fact that he had no legal power to interfere with the football department.
 
Boxhead_31 said:
Well he's done it, the people's poet has broken down Brent Prismall's interview with the ABC and as you can guess it is full of delusional pearls of wisdom. Here are just a few of the better ones:
If you want to see the whole rambling mess - https://www.facebook.com/bruce.francis.547/posts/248156075533569

Item (Prismall) 11: “Certainly there was pressure when you are having meetings with James Hird, Stephen Dank and Dean Robinson They are talking about the program; clearly endorsing the program; talking about what the effects are; how it is going to help us; how it’s not going to produce over the line in terms of being WADA compliant. But certainly the conversations you are having being in that environment it sort of leaves you no choice to do it. There were some guys that hadn’t and they are not serving the bans so.”

My Comment:

1. Prismall was clearly mistaken on a couple of grounds.

i. The players were given some supplements on 19 October 2011, which was the first day of season 2012, pre-season training. Hird wasn’t present when the supplements were distributed and he left the next day for a five-week overseas holiday. Hird had no idea the players were given until about 15 January 2012.

ii. On 8 February 2012, players attended a meeting at the Essendon football club auditorium. The meeting was addressed by Dank and Robinson and related to the supplement protocols. Dank introduced for substances – AOD-9604; Thymosin; Colostrum; and Tribulus - that had reportedly been approved for use in accordance with the new supplement protocols. Hird did not attend this meeting.

2. Ironically, Prismall is Exhibit ‘A’ in proving that no pressure was applied to participate. ASADA nominated 16 specific substances and an ‘all other’ category in the aforementioned table. Prismall admitted to only receiving two of the 16 specifically named substances and admitted to receiving amino acids for which he didn’t know the name. Surely, Prismall’s extremely low participation rate proves that there was no pressure applied to take any substance.

Whateley was clearly having trouble getting Prismall to put the knife in

Item (Whateley) 16: “Where does James Hird sit in that in your mind?”

My Comment:

1. If you keep pushing hard enough and put words into people’s mouths you’ll eventually get what you want. It’s a shame that Whateley didn’t have the courage to ask Prismall where the Essendon board and the AFL Commissioners sat in his mind.

2. If Whateley were half a decent journalist he would have studied the Victorian Occupational Health & Safety Act, the Essendon organisation structure and Hird’s job description, and he would have realised that about 30 people had more responsibility than Hird.
Item (Prismall) 17: “Well the coach in a football club knows everything. Ultimately he would make the decision as to whether the program would or would not run so yeah he certainly has a level of responsibility as well.”

My Comment:

1. Prismall was wrong to claim the coach knows everything. Obviously, the doctors, the sports scientists, the physios, the nutritionists, the psychologists, the conditioners et al know more about their respective fields of expertise than Hird.

2. In May 2011, the Essendon board, through chairman David Evans and chief executive Ian Robson, and Paul Hamilton, Danny Corcoran, Hird and Mark Thompson agreed to adopt a more scientific approach to nutrition, training, conditioning and recovery. The football department – Hamilton, Corcoran, Robinson, the doctors and Dank - was given clear instructions by Hird that the supplements had to be WADA compliant; Dr Reid had to approve their use; the players were free to opt in or opt out; and no substance could be used if there were any chance of it causing harm the player.

3. Hird didn’t need to know any more about the program other than the protocols were being adhered to. It is ridiculous to suggest that Hird, or any coach for that matter, needed to know the chemical breakdown of each substance.

4. Hird was no different from the senior AFL executives and AFL commissioners.

5. The AFL Commissioners trusted the senior AFL executives – Demetriou, Adrian Anderson, Gillon McLachlan and Brett Clothier - to fulfil their duty of care responsibilities to the clubs and players.

6. Demetriou, Anderson, McLachlan and Clothier trusted each club to comply with clause 7.4 of the AFL’s anti-doping code. Since 2010, Clause 7.4 required every player at every club to table with the club doctor prior to the start of each season a list of every substance and medication that had been administered to the player in the previous 12 months. Demetriou, Anderson, McLachlan and Clothier never checked compliance even once at any club. Presumably, they didn’t check with compliance with clause 7.4 because they trusted each club to comply.

7. The AFL trusting each club to comply is no different from Hird trusting the Essendon football department complying with his verbal and written instructions as to how the supplement program should work.

8. Interestingly, when Hird heard the herd had transgressed he spoke up despite the fact that he had no legal power to interfere with the football department.
Click to expand...
Love it. Keep the EFC propaganda of fighting things on technicality, not logic, going. If Primal says "The coach knows OF everything" then suddenly Bruce's entire argument falls down.

I think the point also gets missed that Hird was not only a coach but an ex-player. If there was even wind of unknown substances being injected or records not being kept, wouldn't you think he'd look into it more given he'd understand the implications from years of the anti-doping responsibilities being drilled into him. Instead, he actively sought to keep the program going when Reid put a stop to it.
 
i. The players were given some supplements on 19 October 2011, which was the first day of season 2012, pre-season training. Hird wasn’t present when the supplements were distributed and he left the next day for a five-week overseas holiday. Hird had no idea the players were given until about 15 January 2012.

LOL

So despite meeting Dank, Charter on the Gold Coast in December he was unaware of what was happening until January.

Also what was Hird doing taking Holidays in November? Or was that when he was in New York sourcing Worlds Best Practice for Pharmacists
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

Messenger said:
Are you ******* serious?


Post a screenie for us non-Facebook types.
Click to expand...

It's Bruce Francis... He is verbose and it's a book chapter....so I quoted it... It's rather long.. He does not seem to care about copyright so here you go...well as much as big footy enables me to post it exceeds the character limit per post.

I got to the second paragraph... Read his arguements on dotted lines before and disagree with him...

JAMES HIRD'S LEGAL RESPONSIBILITIES
PREAMBLE:
The first page of this chapter contains the Essendon organisation structure, which Facebook doesn’t allow me to include. Hopefully, my description of matrix organisations will suffice. The following is my creation from having designed many matrix organisations for clients. I have not referred to a textbook for the definition.
It is impossible to determine James Hird’s legal responsibilities without understanding matrix organisations and the Essendon organisation structure.. Unfortunately, despite numerous pleas to the media, no journalist was prepared to mention matrix organisation or publish the Essendon organisation structure that I sent them. They weren’t interested because they couldn’t hold Hird responsible if they had published it.
Matrix Organisations
Matrix organisation structures have been embraced by organisations since the late twentieth century to leverage and recognise the professional credentials and expertise of an increasingly specialised workforce. This ensures that elite subject matter experts have the authority and responsibility commensurate with their professional credentials and are not politically buried deep within archaic ‘command and control’ structures.
In addition, professional experts are held to account to the standards and ethics of their own profession that can NOT be eroded or ignored by the commercial or other organisational hierarchy. Doctors, lawyers, accountants and human resource specialists etcetera are all sworn to codes of conduct that is core and conditional to their accreditation. Thus, no one could legally override Dr Reid on medical matters at Essendon, and no one, including McLachlan, could override Andrew Dillon on legal matters at the AFL.
The Essendon board and executive were at least implicitly aware of this when they created an organisation that accorded solid line reporting by specialists to their accountable manager whilst with persons and departments which they ‘served and advised’ having dotted line reporting relationships
Solid line accountability and reporting represents authority and responsibility with rights to:
• Set policies and procedures to ensure proper compliance with standards their professions demand
• Provide the formal Quality Assurance for the provision of their professional expertise
• Hire and fire, performance manage and therefore promote and remunerate staff within their department
This meant that Hird only had authority over, and responsibility for, Mark Thompson, Brendan McCartney, Simon Goodwin and Sean Wellman.
Dotted line accountability denotes consultation, advice and provision of expert services. This meant that Hird could consult with, and seek advice from Dean Robinson and Danny Corcoran. He had no power to admonish, let alone discipline Robinson or Corcoran or anyone in any department other than his own coaching department.
Every organisation is subject to legal and regulatory framework that is general to all organisations. In addition, there are legal and regulatory requirements and enforcement agencies particular to specific industries such as professional sport. The board is obliged to ensure the chief executive establishes an organisation, policies and procedures that comply with all legal and regulatory requirements. The appropriate professional is delegated responsibility and authority for designing and enforcing rules and processes to ensure compliance. At Essendon, the line of authority for the supplementation program was Robson, Hamilton and Robinson, with the proviso that Dr Reid could not be overruled.
No executive in a line role, as is the football and coaching departments, is expected, or indeed allowed, to establish policies, introduce procedures or intervene or ignore the application of any such rules and regulations. In large corporations there are Board Risk Sub-Committees that are established to ensure a direct line to the board if any staff considers there are breaches of proper practices. For example, this occurred in the David Jones-Mark McInnes matter. In any public company, the chief executive himself could not act in direct contradiction to a formal opinion by a lawyer or accountant that spoke of non-compliance.
To illustrate the increasing obligations of major organisations, in the last few years, significantly upgraded OH&S compliance obligations have been imposed on company directors, which include criminal and civil penalties for offences. The board and chief executive are obliged to ensure all laws and regulations are enforced and the onus is on them to prove that they were in place and that ALL relevant and affected staff, those impacted as well as those with authority and responsibility is apprised of their respective rights, duties and obligations.
8.4 Hird Background
James Hird was appointed senior coach of Essendon Football Club in September 2010.
Hird was on his own branch of the Essendon organisation structure and reported directly to Chief Executive Officer, Ian Robson. Hird had four assistant coaches reporting to him - Mark Thompson, Brendan McCartney, Simon Goodwin and Sean Wellman.
The Football Department was on a different branch of the organisation structure from Hird’s coaching branch, and the football department was run by Paul Hamilton, whose title was General Manager – Football Operations.
Hird’s Coaching Department, and Hamilton’s Football Department, only had a broken line link. Hird had no link to Hamilton.
Hamilton, like Hird, reported directly to CEO, Ian Robson.
The Executive Team at Essendon comprised;
• Essendon FC Board; (Level1);
• Managing Director & CEO, Ian Robson; (Level 2)
• Chief Financial Officer; Chief Commercial Officer; General Manager - Football Operations, Paul Hamilton; Chief Operating Officer; and Communications Manager. (Level 3).
Although Hird reported directly to the chief executive, Ian Robson, he, unlike those named above, was not a member of the executive. The High Performance Unit was run by Stuart Cormack until June 2011, and then by his replacement, Dean Robinson, from August 2011 until February 2013.
The High Performance Unit formed part of the football department and Cormack, and then Robinson, reportedly directly to Hamilton.
In May 2011, President, David Evans; CEO, Ian Robson; General Manager – Football Operations, Paul Hamilton; Football Manager, Danny Corcoran; Senior Coach, James Hird; and Assistant Coach, Mark Thompson, agreed that Essendon had to adopt a more scientific approach to conditioning, nutrition and recovery - a strategy, no doubt, embraced by every club in the league.
Unsurprisingly, the AFL also shared the view that there were some positives to be derived from sports science and the search for the extra edge. On 24 April 2012, the AFL’s General Manager – Football Operations, Adrian Anderson, sent an email to the clubs titled ‘Leading Approach to Sports Medicine and Sports Science in AFL’. The discussion paper that was attached to the email, identified a range of ‘issues’ and possible consequences that had arisen under the existing medical arrangements within AFL clubs. Inter alia, Anderson said: ‘The influence of sport science and search for the extra “edge” has grown in recent years which has some positive and potential negative implications.’
Ian Robson (page 59 of the Interim Report): “It was clear we all felt – all of us felt, coming out of 2011, that the – the players were undersized in terms of their strength.”
Paul Hamilton (page 59): “The coaches had identified – I don’t think they were happy with the weights program that had been previously done by the previous regime. Certainly – and Mark Thompson was a big one on this – he wanted – he wanted the players to lift heavier weights… In combination with this focus, Essendon, decided to invest more in the high performance sports science team’.”
The bottom line was the coaches and senior executives, including the president and chief executive (who spoke for the board), had identified a problem. It was the football department’s, led by Paul Hamilton, responsibility, to fix the problem.
Identifying the problem and insisting that the football department complied with the WADA Code; that Dr Reid had the final say; that the players were free to decide the extent of their involvement, if any; and that no supplement could be harmful to a player, was the beginning and end of Hird and Thompson’s official input – although Hamilton invited Hird and Thompson to Robinson’s and Dank’s interview meetings. Hird and Thompson had no responsibilities whatsoever for the high performance unit or the supplementation program, and had no authority to intervene.
The Victorian Occupational, Health & Safety Act, the Commonwealth Corporations Act, various agreements signed by the AFL and Essendon, the Essendon matrix organisation structure, and job responsibilities, determined responsibility for providing a safe workplace. ASADA, and the media had no say, although the media’s vicious, unrelenting attacks claiming Hird was responsible, created an opportunity for AFL general counsel, Andrew Dillon, to lodge a series of vexatious allegations against Hird and Thompson.
In early June 2011, a member of Hird’s cycling ‘group’ asked Hird whether AFL clubs used peptypes [sic] [peptides] as part of their conditioning program. Hird had never heard the word before and approached the club’s performance dietician and recovery co-ordinator, Benita Lalor, and asked her what she thought of ‘peptypes’. Lalor immediately advised Essendon’s High Performance Manager, Stuart Cormack that she had been approached by Hird and asked about peptides.
On 16 June 2011, Stuart Cormack resigned as Essendon’s High Performance Coach, which created an opportunity for Essendon to change focus within the high performance unit by employing someone with better sports scientist credentials to run the high performance unit under Hamilton’s control.
On 26 July 2011, Hird approached an ASADA Doping Control Officer (DCO) during a routine drug testing session at Essendon and asked whether any AFL clubs were using ‘peptites’[sic] as he had received information that they were. Hird’s approach was reported by the DCO to his superiors at ASADA.
Within a couple of days of Hird’s conversation with the ASADA doping control officer, AFL integrity manager, Brett Clothier, phoned Essendon’s General Manager – Football Operations, Paul Hamilton and requested that he bring Hird to a meeting at the AFL. The phone call was significant in that it clearly demonstrated that the AFL knew Hamilton was more senior to Hird.
On 5 August 2011 (page 56), Hird was interviewed by ASADA and AFL Integrity Officers in relation to his enquiry with the DCO. Essendon’s two most senior football department members, Hamilton and Danny Corcoran, also attended the meeting. Hird explained that he had been approached by some colleagues from his cycling group who had asked him about ‘peptites’ [sic] and whether they were permitted to be used.
ASADA’s Interim Report inexcusably stated that “At the conclusion of the ASADA interview, The AFL’s Manager Integrity Services ‘re-iterated’ to Hird that peptides were a serious risk to the integrity of the AFL, in the same category as steroids and HGH.’ Mr Clothier told Mr Hird that ‘peptides already appeared to be infiltrating other elite sports in Australia and that [the AFL] we could be next.’ Mr Clothier also ‘implored [Mr] Hird to report to [the AFL] if he came across any information relating to peptides.”
This account is substantially different from the accounts of Hird and the ASADA official who attended the meeting. ASADA’s inexplicable decision to accept them as fact, not only proved ASADA’s bias, but corrupted the entire investigation to the point that the investigation should have been aborted. Throughout the interim report, testimony by witnesses is preceded by terms such as “says” or “claims”. On this occasion a witnesses’ comment was accepted as fact. The above Clothier comments were used against Hird by AFL general counsel, Andrew Dillon, and given Hird had no responsibilities within the football department, undoubtedly contributed more to the AFL demanding he be suspended for twelve months than any other factor. This issue is so important, the Minister for Sport, Peter Dutton, should immediately order an investigation to ascertain why ASADA accepted Clothier’s comments as fact when Hird, Hamilton and Corcoran believed the comments were pure fabrication:
• The AFL’s Manager Integrity Services ‘re-iterated’ to Hird, implies Hird was told before. That is a lie;
• Clothier was an investigator. He had access to all witnesses’ testimonies. As such, ASADA corrupted the investigation by allowing him to testify;
• Hird testified on 16 April 2013, and inter alia, discussed what was said at the 5 August 2011 meeting. Hird’s version of the what was said is totally different from what ASADA investigators negligently accepted as fact in their interim report;
• Clothier, ‘coincidentally’, testified the very next day, 17 April 2013. As nothing was included in the Interim Report about Clothier’s comments on 17 April 2013, about the meeting on 5 August 2011, it is reasonable to assume he wasn’t asked about it by ASADA or that he couldn’t recall what was said at the 5 August 2011 meeting;
• At 12:33pm on 17 July 2013, Clothier sent an email to ASADA investigators. Although, ASADA has not published the full contents of the email and file notes, it claims the above comments by Clothier were part of it. Given the damage the email caused Hird, and given the flood of irrelevant SMSs and email’s between Dank and non-Essendon people included in the report, it is inexplicable that this email was not included in full, in the report;
• It is impossible to comprehend how ASADA accepted the email as evidence;
• Although a number of lawyers believe Clothier, the investigator, should not have been allowed to act as a witness, once he was, it is impossible to comprehend that ASADA did not re-interview him (Clothier) about the email – particular as his version was different from the ASADA staff member, who attended the 5 August 2011 meeting.
• Given, many witnesses were recalled to qualify things, or refute things, it is mind-blowing that Hird wasn’t recalled to be re-questioned about the issue. Given Hird believes Clothier fabricated his evidence, Hird should have been given an opportunity to refute Clothier’s claim.
• Danny Corcoran and Paul Hamilton, whose contemporaneous notes taken at the meeting disagreed with Clothier’s claim, should have been recalled by ASADA to be questioned about the matter.
• An ASADA employee attended the meeting with Clothier, Hamilton, Hird and Corcoran and his recollection is different from Clothier’s, which ASADA accepted as fact. On page 56 of the Interim Report it states: “According to the ASADA file note ‘Mr Hird stated that he had never heard of the substance before and the opportunity arose to ask ASADA testing staff on the day of the mission on his club on 26.7.11. Mr Hird reiterated that he had no knowledge of the substance whatsoever and was simply making inquiries to satisfy the original question put to him. A general discussion then followed covering off on ASADA’s belief that various forms of peptides were increasingly being detected by Customs and other agencies and that the products were banned in sport.’ (ASADA file note – xxxxxxxxxxxx).
• Clothier did not record the above comments in his diary. Those comments were never mentioned to anybody until he trotted them out 711 days later. The comments were deemed to be so damaging to Hird that one of the investigators kindly shared them with Caroline Wilson from the Age which enabled her to include them in her on-line column six hours before ASADA received the email. The leak was obviously in breach of the ASADA Act and was done to damage Hird.
• If ASADA had genuinely been interested in the truth instead of focussing on compiling a case against Hird, it would have asked Clothier a series of questions:
Why did Clothier falsely claim ‘peptides were in the same category as steroids and HGH.’ All steroids and HGH are banned. Many peptides are not banned. Clothier’s alleged comment for Essendon not to use peptides put Essendon at a severe disadvantage because other clubs were using permitted peptides.
As Hamilton was General Manager – Football Operations, and as he was a member of the Essendon executive, and as he was responsible for the high performance unit, why did Clothier warn Hird instead of Hamilton?
If you really gave Hird the above warning, why didn’t you inform AFL’s General Manager - Football Operations, Adrian Anderson, in writing about the warning, as you were required to do?
If you really gave Hird the above warning, why didn’t you inform Essendon chief executive, Ian Robson, in writing about the warning as you were required to do?
As you were responsible for the integrity of the competition, and as the warning contains serious concerns by you, why didn’t you conduct a series of audits at Essendon to ensure it was complying with your demands?
If you gave the above warning to Hird, is there any difference between you trusting him to comply, and Hamilton / Hird warning Robinson and Dank not to breach the WADA code, and then trusting them to comply?
If Hird is penalised for trusting Hamilton’s Essendon staff, should you receive the same penalty as Hird, for trusting Hird to comply with your request?
Robinson started work as Essendon’s High Performance Coach on 25 August 2011. Robinson was in charge of the high performance unit and reported to General Manager – Football Operations, Paul Hamilton. The doctors; sports scientist (Stephen Dank); physiotherapists; physical prep manager; rehab coach; physical prep coach; performance dietician and recovery co-ordinator; trainers; pilates instructor; and the masseurs all reported to Robinson.
In his interview with ASADA on 15 February 2013, chief executive, Ian Robson, stated (page 99) that “Mr Robinson had supervisory responsibility of the Sports Science Team, which included Mr Dank and the club doctors. In turn, Mr Robinson reported to Mr Hamilton who was accountable to both Mr Robson and the club’s executive. Mr Dank was part of the Sports Science Team and therefore reported to Mr Robinson.”
Inexplicably, ASADA, of its own volition stated on page 62 that “Robinson in turn reported to Hird and Hamilton”. In making this claim ASADA was guilty of serious misconduct. This claim was factually incorrect. ASADA knew it was incorrect. ASADA had no evidence to support the claim. This was further grounds to have the investigation aborted. This statement was the major contributor to Hird being suspended for 12 months.
Hird (page 62) rejected any suggestion that he had instructed or encouraged Robinson to ‘push the edge’.
Hird: “I have an issue with people who give people illegal products and things that would harm them. My philosophy is as stated there, that any product that goes to a player must not harm them, must be approved by the AFL and WADA and the player has to consent to it, and the doctors [have] the ultimate say, but – that was expressed to Dean all the time.”
Robinson (page 62) claims to have understood the responsibilities of his role to include the management of the High Performance Department and the oversight of medical staff (doctors and physiotherapists), but not ever take away from their professional medical decision making.
On 28 September 2011, at Dean Robinson’s request, Stephen Dank was interviewed for the role of sports scientist at Essendon Football Club. The interview panel comprised General Manager - Football Operations, Paul Hamilton; Football Manager, Danny Corcoran; High Performance Coach, Dean Robinson; Senior Coach, James Hird; and Assistant Coach, Mark Thompson. During his interview Dank informed the interviewers that he had other business interests in the anti-aging industry. This created a huge dilemma for ASADA in its investigation of Essendon. It was one thing for ASADA to establish that Dank had ordered WADA prohibited substances but it was impossible to ascertain whether they were ordered for Essendon players or his other clients. As ASADA made no allegations that Essendon took any WADA alleged prohibited substances other than Thymosin Beta-4, it implies that it accepts that all the other WADA prohibited substances were for other clients.
Robinson and Hamilton (page 68) recalled that during Dank’s interview, he became a bit upset or aggressive following a question from Danny Corcoran about whether Essendon should have ‘any concerns with [Dank] for not following WADA codes’.
As it transpires, the AFL owned Gold Coast Suns and Essendon breached the WADA Code when they hired Dank. The code states words to the effect that if a person uses a substance banned for athletes on a member of the public, he cannot work with an athlete who falls under the WADA umbrella. In simple terms it was illegal for the Gold Coast Suns and Essendon to hire Dank. The AFL was equally at fault for registering Dank.
ASADA devoted over 6000 words to the recruitment process of Robinson and Dank. ASADA was concerned that “no background checks were [sic] conducted with Dank’s past employers”. Notwithstanding this was a lie, what Essendon’s recruitment policy had to do with ASADA’s charter of investigating possible anti-doping violations is beyond comprehension. ASADA investigating Essendon’s recruitment procedures is bordering on a criminal abuse of taxpayers’ money. It is no different from Craig Thomson MP, spending union funds on prostitutes. This is just one of many unacceptable examples of ASADA acting outside its charter to build a case for the AFL to charge Essendon, Hird and Thompson for “governance failures”.
As Dank had worked for Manly Rugby League Club for seven years, and as Robinson had worked for Thompson at Geelong for three years, and as both had worked together for the AFL at the Gold Coast Suns, Hamilton believed they had credible credentials. Hamilton believed that if it were good enough for the AFL to employ Dank and Robinson, it was good enough for Essendon to do likewise. Surprisingly, ASADA did not table the AFL’s background checks into Dank and Robinson when it employed both of them.
ASADA (page 73) disagreed with Hamilton, and in the most self-humiliating statement of the year, believed Essendon should have ‘Googled’ Dank. The fact that ASADA dismissed Robinson’s evidence that he checked Dank’s credentials with Manly coach, Des Hasler, indicates how poorly it regarded Robinson’s evidence. Inexplicably, ASADA tried to build a case against Thompson and Hird over the recruitment of Dank and Robinson. To his lasting shame, AFL general counsel, Andrew Dillon, even charged Hird and Thompson for allegedly not checking Dank’s and Robinson’s references. Such action by Dillon was unconscionable considering neither Hird nor Thompson was a member of the football department – the department responsible for employing Robinson and Dank.
In late September, or early October 2011, Robinson supplied Hird with two WADA permitted substances, one of which was a prescription only substance. During his football career Hird suffered multiple fractures to his face and had battled headaches ever since, which created severe sleeping problems. Robinson believed Melatonin would help Hird’s sleeping problem. This information was leaked to the media. It should be noted that WADA had no jurisdiction over what substances Hird took.
Pre-season training commenced on 19 October 2011. Hird took overseas holidays between 20 October 2011 and 7 November 2011. As part of the pre-season training, players were administered supplementation that had not been approved by club doctors Bruce Reid and Brendan De Morton. None of the three substances taken, Tribulus, Creatine and Glutamine was on the WADA prohibited list. Dr Reid recalled on ‘day one of the [2012] pre-season [that] he blew his stack’ after discovering Robinson had approved Tribulus (taken in tablet form) to be handed to some players at training.
Dr Reid told ASADA that he contacted AFL Medical Director, Dr Peter Harcourt that same afternoon to ensure the supplement wasn’t a WADA prohibited substance. Reid’s phone call to Harcourt should have triggered an immediate response from the AFL because a doctor being marginalised posed a potential threat to the integrity of the competition and the health of the players. Dr Harcourt should have informed the AFL’s integrity officer, Brett Clothier, of the possible breach. Clothier should have investigated Essendon immediately. Furthermore, Clothier should have reported the matter to ASADA. Clause 4.6 of the AFL’s anti-doping code says: “Where reasonable and as soon as the AFL becomes aware that a possible Anti-Doping Rule Violation may have occurred, the AFL will immediately advise ASADA of the possible violation. The AFL will provide ASADA with all information pertaining to the possible Anti-Doping Rule Violation.” If the AFL had taken action at this point, (19 October 2011), as it should have, this whole sorry saga would not have occurred.
In addition to speaking to Dr Harcourt, Dr Reid also approached Robinson to reinforce the protocol that ‘nothing without [his] knowl.
Click to expand...
 
One of the things I love about BruceTheGoose (TM JD-Roo 2015) is his marvellous method of intricately picking over someone's comment or article in minute detail, then accusing all and sundry of not seeing the bigger picutre. He also likes to throw in a number of jibes in his holier-than-thou attempts to show he is smarter than everyone else, usually at Rugby League's expense, showing the inherent snobbery Rugby Union types seem to carry with them from birth.

As an example:
The sky is blue
Click to expand...


Bruce's most likely reply:

"The"
My comment:
Even a complete moron or a rugby league player would know that when describing something as big as 'sky' you cannot use something as specific as a definite artcile description such as 'the'. I think we all know from this that it is safe to assume that he obviously does not know what he is looking at.

"sky"
My comment:
At no stage do we know which part of "the" sky is being referred to here. The stratosphere, the ionosphere? To try to manipulate this comment to include the complete 'sky' is merely a case of weasel-words by the ill-educated and unqualified author. Obviously in being unable to be specific he has shown he is ill-equipped to be passing comment on this matter and should be ignored by all authorities in every sense.

'is'
My comment:
Is the author qualified in philosophy and it has just never been made public? No. Not that I can find in any of my investigations. With no explanation of what is 'is', the AFL, ASADA, WADA and the Australian Governemnt continue their acts of BASTARDRY in not publicly denying the accuracy of the authors words.

'blue'
My comment:
And here we come to the crux of the matter. What shade of 'blue'? As with the lack of 'sky' definition, the author has blanket accused all shades of being 'blue' when this is clearly not the case. Having had the only BOM report for that day in my possesion, the facts show that the sky itself was 'Powder Blue' on that day. Regardless of what other blue may have been found in the investigations since, the Interim Report, which I cannot quote or reproduce as I have re-typed it with one finger and burnt the original for legal reasons, says 'POWDER BLUE'. It doesn't actually matter what the author says he saw, or thinks he saw, because I know what it was and has always been since.

Finally, the maps in the report show that the Powder Blue in no way was linked to any other blue and is therefore totally absolved of any association or responsibility for those blues. The AFL, ASADA, WADA, CAS, the Australian Government and especially the BOM should all step down or at least admit publicly their illegal conflicts of interest and behind the scenes dealings and have the guts to face the music.


Wash, rinse, repeat............ oh AND absolve James Hird of any responsibility.......
 
The 747 said:
Bruce always delivers at least one lolworthy thought per ramble. This time I really like the idea that the coaching department is not part of the football department, and therefore has no authority over the football department. Ha!
Click to expand...
this was my personal favourite: "and he would have realised that about 30 people had more responsibility than Hird."

The head coach is under 30 people. That's quite a football club they're running out at East Keilor.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top