Play Nice James Hird rushed to hospital - suspected overdose

[Bulldog Joe]

Hey Joe - l think many would disagree that Hird was responsible for the program.

I have read a few posts and understand that you have comprehension issues.

Hird was the coach and therefor in charge of everything designed to maximise the on field performance. He hired people with the intention of maximising the on field performance.

Those hired clearly adopted a program that has resulted in this entire saga and Hird either knew directly, or was negligent in not knowing.

The ultimate responsibility for the program lies with the person, who facilitated its introduction. That person was Hird.

 

[SonofSamsquanch]

Hird was the coach and therefor in charge of everything designed to maximise the on field performance. He hired people with the intention of maximising the on field performance

Was the drugs based program introduced because this coach was not convinced he had the cattle who were capable of mixing it with the best, because he was not certain he and his panel could develop a competative team or because he knew what PEDs could achieve in the short term?

 

[Bulldog Joe]

Was the drugs based program introduced because this coach was not convinced he had the cattle who were capable of mixing it with the best, because he was not certain he and his panel could develop a competative team or because he knew what PEDs could achieve in the short term?

You would need to ask the coach that question, but I would not fancy your chances of an honest answer.

He regularly stated that they would be in a good place when it all came out and then proceeded to go to extraordinary lengths to prevent it coming out.

 

[lethalselbow]

You would need to ask the coach that question, but I would not fancy your chances of an honest answer.

He regularly stated that they would be in a good place when it all came out and then proceeded to go to extraordinary lengths to prevent it coming out.

At least he's in a safe place, not necessarily the good place he was hoping for.

 

[TheBrightSide]

Was the drugs based program introduced because this coach was not convinced he had the cattle who were capable of mixing it with the best, because he was not certain he and his panel could develop a competative team or because he knew what PEDs could achieve in the short term?

In texts between Hird and Dank, there was mention of other clubs using supplements programs, so I guess he wanted to keep up with (and better) the rest.
Who knows how common this stuff is in the AFL? Brisbane was using intravenous recovery back in 2001.

 

[imperial_oz]

In texts between Hird and Dank, there was mention of other clubs using supplements programs, so I guess he wanted to keep up with (and better) the rest.
Who knows how common this stuff is in the AFL? Brisbane was using intravenous recovery back in 2001.

You'd be a fool to think that some players aren't using PEDs but I have my doubts whether there are other club driven programs built around banned substances. I could be wrong, in which case I would expect similar penalties to be handed to to those involved. The example you gave of Brisbane was a case of re-hydrating not performance enhancing and it was banned because it looked bad. I have no issue with the ban as it sets a clearly defined boundary to all teams but I would not consider it to be the same as using banned performance enhancing substances

I'm old fashioned I guess. My view is sport is built solely on human performance, planning and effort. If you use PEDs then you can GTFO as you have no place in sport. The money side of things should be secondary to sporting ethics. If you want to put the dollars first, call it entertainment and take it out of the sporting arena.

 

[Garlic muncher]

Glad its paywalled

Typical HTB mentality

 

[Garlic muncher]

Patrick's article was so spot on. I won't even bother with Alan Hird's. We know what his son's role was and no amount of spin from his old man will change that.

Smiths article was misinformed in the extreme and was typical of the bully attitude that has existed for 5 years regarding Hird.

It was a piling steam of s**t and designed to dump it on a man who had attempted suicide.

 

[Garlic muncher]

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/spo...d/news-story/722b0db398c399c6fc82b7dac1ff7cff

On Wednesday on Melbourne radio, The Australian’s columnist Patrick Smith claimed the purpose of his two articles about my son James Hird was to protect the truth. I find that risible. In my opinion, his “truth” is a distortion of what happened at and to the Essendon Football Club.

The online heading of Smith’s second article was: “Hird backlash angry, uneducated”. We “uneducateds” want to get to the truth through a proper investigation where the key players are questioned under oath.

Through revealing the truth we want justice for the 34 Essendon players, a thorough review of the anti-doping architecture to protect the right of athletes in the future and to restore the primacy of parliament over ASADA.

 

[Lavender Bushranger]

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/spo...d/news-story/722b0db398c399c6fc82b7dac1ff7cff


On Wednesday on Melbourne radio, The Australian’s columnist Patrick Smith claimed the purpose of his two articles about my son James Hird was to protect the truth. I find that risible. In my opinion, his “truth” is a distortion of what happened at and to the Essendon Football Club.

The online heading of Smith’s second article was: “Hird backlash angry, uneducated”. We “uneducateds” want to get to the truth through a proper investigation where the key players are questioned under oath.

Through revealing the truth we want justice for the 34 Essendon players, a thorough review of the anti-doping architecture to protect the right of athletes in the future and to restore the primacy of parliament over ASADA.

So that's it?

Where's the 'truth' that is going to have everyone in a very good place?

 

[Bulldog Joe]

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/spo...d/news-story/722b0db398c399c6fc82b7dac1ff7cff


On Wednesday on Melbourne radio, The Australian’s columnist Patrick Smith claimed the purpose of his two articles about my son James Hird was to protect the truth. I find that risible. In my opinion, his “truth” is a distortion of what happened at and to the Essendon Football Club.

The online heading of Smith’s second article was: “Hird backlash angry, uneducated”. We “uneducateds” want to get to the truth through a proper investigation where the key players are questioned under oath.

Through revealing the truth we want justice for the 34 Essendon players, a thorough review of the anti-doping architecture to protect the right of athletes in the future and to restore the primacy of parliament over ASADA.

We believe the proper way to achieve that is through a Senate inquiry, which is something the crossbenchers sought in the previous parliament only to be thwarted by the ALP and government senators.

The case to achieve those aims is contained in the truth Patrick Smith ignored in his articles. It can all be found in Chip Le Grand’s excellent book The Straight Dope, which he hasn’t read because it’s on the AFL banned list.

Let me go through some of the bits he left out of his “truth” telling because they are important matters for the Senate to examine.

It has been discussed in the media that in 2013 the then AFL chief executive Andrew Demetriou tipped off David Evans, the then Essendon chairman that the Australian Crime Commission had Essendon in its sights.

It has also been widely aired that Evans asked James Hird not to disclose the tip-off in his sworn testimony to ASADA.

Surely that is something a person concerned with the truth would discuss because it indicates machinations between two men deeply involved in trying to manipulate an outcome rather than letting ASADA investigate as an independent statutory authority should.

The media in 2013 revealed that Brett Clothier, the AFL integrity officer, had produced a file note for ASADA two years after he claimed it was written to implicate James Hird. It related to a meeting with three Essendon officials, Danny Corcoran, James Hird and Paul Hamilton. Clothier claimed he had warned James Hird at that meeting that all peptides were banned (in fact, not all are banned).

So two years after the event, Clothier “remembers” something and as we know ASADA relied on his “evidence” and incorporated it in the interim report it provided to the AFL. In doing so, ASADA ignored the evidence of the three officials at the meeting that Clothier gave no such warning. Surely that would be something someone seeking the truth would report on, at least for context.

Patrick Smith in his search for the truth ignored the evidence revealed in the transcripts of the Federal Court case James Hird v ASADA 2014 that Kate Lundy, the then federal sports minister and Richard Eccles, the senior sports bureaucrat, interfered in ASADA’s investigation despite the ASADA legislation specifically forbidding government interference.

The transcript also reveals Eccles, at the request of the AFL’s Gillon McLachlan, leant on the ASADA chief executive to get the interim report it needed to stitch up Essendon and James Hird. The evidence is there for any journalist to find. Yet Patrick “truth seeker” Smith finds it irrelevant.

The decision of the Federal Court had profound implications for athletes and for the primacy of parliament.

Parliament had inserted two protections for athletes in the ASADA Act: confidentiality while being investigated; and the right not to self-incriminate. ASADA got around those provisions by teaming up with the AFL to use the coercive powers in the player contracts.

The Federal Court decision effectively rubber-stamped ASADA’s actions, which has two significant consequences. First the protections the parliament wanted athletes to have are gone. Second, ASADA has set the precedent for other statutory authorities, established by parliament, to go round the back door to undermine the wishes of elected legislators. That is not healthy for our democracy.

Patrick “truth seeker” sees that as not important probably because it doesn’t fit the AFL’s directive which as we know is: “make it all James Hird’s fault”.

Patrick Smith ignores all the facts and disquiet that surrounds the CAS verdict. Instead he relies on the decision to ban the players to justify his position.

The important things to remember are that the players should never have been before CAS and the CAS decision could not have been made under Australian law.

The anti-doping architecture provides for ASADA to prosecute athletes before an independent tribunal established by the parent sporting body. Thus the AFL established a tribunal comprising two Australian judges and an eminent QC. That tribunal found ASADA failed in all its claims, in fact it had no evidence and, therefore, the players were innocent.

ASADA had the right to appeal that decision to a different Australian tribunal. It chose not to and instead provided $US100,000 to WADA, plus access to ASADA lawyers to enable WADA to dissect the ASADA case and the tribunal decision.

ASADA connived with WADA to prosecute players in a purely domestic competition before CAS, a foreign body applying Swiss law because it knew it had no case under Australian law.

I use the word “prosecute” deliberately. The CAS hearing was not an appeal. It was a fresh trial. The players were tried twice, which is generally not allowed in Australian law. They suffered double jeopardy and both prosecutions were funded out of taxpayer money provided to ASADA by the parliament.

The CAS hearing was not subject to Australian legal principles and the legal advice available to me suggests if CAS had applied Australian legal principles the players would have had no case to answer. For example, CAS accepted the WADA proposition to try the players as a job lot, like cattle at the sales yard.

WADA relied on supposition, the infamous “strands in the cable” approach to get its scalps. So here we have ASADA not exercising its appeal rights and instead funding WADA to try the players a second time in a foreign court.

To me, that is a gross miscarriage of justice and something all Australian athletes should be concerned about. But does Patrick “truth seeker” even mention it? No, probably because it doesn’t fit the AFL’s directive: “make it all James Hird’s fault”.

Hopefully with a straight- shooting new federal Sports Minister, Greg Hunt, the government will finally allow a Senate inquiry so we can have the facts investigated to get justice for the Essendon players, get the anti-doping architecture back in order and for the parliament to provide some decent oversight of ASADA.

If you need help with depression, you can reach Lifeline on 13 11 14 or BeyondBlue on 1300 22 4636.

Hear hear Alan

Alan ignores many of the facts.

The players were never found innocent not even by the AFL tribunal.

The tribunal was not comfortably satisfied that any player violated clause 11.2 of the AFL anti-doping code.

That is well removed from being found innocent.

Alan also ignores the fact that the AFL and Australian Sport are signatories to the WADA code and WADA would still have had the right to appeal even if a first appeal by ASADA had been unsuccessful.

He also seems to think that avoiding evidence somehow equals a better truth.

 

[imperial_oz]

So that's it?

Where's the 'truth' that is going to have everyone in a very good place?

It's really hard to believe that anybody could try to peddle the nonsense in that article and expect to have any credibility left afterwards. I'm struggling to find anything factually correct in what he has written. Looks like pure BF gibberish to me. Beyond stupid.

 

[TheBrightSide]

The money side of things should be secondary to sporting ethics. If you want to put the dollars first, call it entertainment and take it out of the sporting arena.

That boat sailed away decades ago.

 

[TheBrightSide]

The tribunal was not comfortably satisfied that any player violated clause 11.2 of the AFL anti-doping code.

That is well removed from being found innocent.

Well, they were cleared of the charges, what would you call it?

 

[imperial_oz]

That boat sailed away decades ago.

It did in the AFL, I agree and look where we ended up.

I'd have to say it's the case for many professional sports as well but It isn't a situation that can't be addressed over time. Some return to integrity can be made if enough are willing to push for it.

 

[imperial_oz]

Well, they were cleared of the charges, what would you call it?

Factually speaking, Australian Courts (and the AFL Tribunal) do not make findings of innocence. There is a legal presumption of innocence where a court finds insufficient evidence to prove a case to the required level.

This was the case with the AFL Tribunal. Insufficient evidence and therefore a legal presumption of innocence but NOT a finding of innocence. They are not the same thing.

 

[LoungeLizard]

Maybe we could also investigate what the players were given, or if they were given what they thought they were.
Maybe we could find out if they were indeed duped by Dank, or if Dank was doing what he was told.
Maybe we could learn why the players declined to put what drugs they were given on the ASADA form.
Then we could look into what drugs Charter was delivering, and who knew.
We could look into who was in the know with this program, if Dank was indeed hiding it.
We could look into the "black ops" why there was no records.
Etc.
Etc.
Bring on the investigations.
But Mr. Hird.
I think your son is sick, maybe we should put it off for a while, give him a chance to recover.

 

[jenny61_99]

Maybe we could also investigate what the players were given, or if they were given what they thought they were.
Maybe we could find out if they were indeed duped by Dank, or if Dank was doing what he was told.
Maybe we could learn why the players declined to put what drugs they were given on the ASADA form.
Then we could look into what drugs Charter was delivering, and who knew.
We could look into who was in the know with this program, if Dank was indeed hiding it.
We could look into the "black ops" why there was no records.
Etc.
Etc.
Bring on the investigations.
But Mr. Hird.
I think your son is sick, maybe we should put it off for a while, give him a chance to recover.

Has he visited him yet?

 

[imperial_oz]

Maybe we could also investigate what the players were given, or if they were given what they thought they were.
Maybe we could find out if they were indeed duped by Dank, or if Dank was doing what he was told.
Maybe we could learn why the players declined to put what drugs they were given on the ASADA form.
Then we could look into what drugs Charter was delivering, and who knew.
We could look into who was in the know with this program, if Dank was indeed hiding it.
We could look into the "black ops" why there was no records.
Etc.
Etc.
Bring on the investigations.
But Mr. Hird.
I think your son is sick, maybe we should put it off for a while, give him a chance to recover.

I think maybe we should just leave it at letting the guy recover....and frankly that applies to all including those who are using Hird's current illness as a weapon against those who didn't follow the party line. Hird's family had it right the first time. I'm pretty sure that the medical professionals won't be letting Hird read the current round of publicity and those who 'really' care won't do their caring in the headlines. Right now, time away from all of this is what's best for his state of mind.

 

[LoungeLizard]

I think maybe we should just leave it at letting the guy recover....and frankly that applies to all including those who are using Hird's current illness as a weapon against those who didn't follow the party line. Hird's family had it right the first time. I'm pretty sure that the medical professionals won't be letting Hird read the current round of publicity and those who 'really' care won't do their caring in the headlines. Right now, time away from all of this is what's best for his state of mind.

Yes i think Mr. Hird doesn't really know or care what this could do to his son.

 

[imperial_oz]

Yes i think Mr. Hird doesn't really know or care what this could do to his son.

I don't want to speak to his motives as I don't know him or his relationship with his son but I do think that running the whole scenario through the media isn't what is best for his son's health. Maybe reputation is more important than health, I don't know but it's not something I would do.

 

[Slartibartfast]

I have no doubt he is, far more single minded and uncompromising than me as well, without doubt.

Also, i was a an all rounder, who wants to face the new ball, but without doubt i was a much better footballer, i don't think he played.

But he sure has rustled your jimmies ?, if of course you have any ?.

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/spo...d/news-story/722b0db398c399c6fc82b7dac1ff7cff


On Wednesday on Melbourne radio, The Australian’s columnist Patrick Smith claimed the purpose of his two articles about my son James Hird was to protect the truth. I find that risible. In my opinion, his “truth” is a distortion of what happened at and to the Essendon Football Club.

The online heading of Smith’s second article was: “Hird backlash angry, uneducated”. We “uneducateds” want to get to the truth through a proper investigation where the key players are questioned under oath.

Through revealing the truth we want justice for the 34 Essendon players, a thorough review of the anti-doping architecture to protect the right of athletes in the future and to restore the primacy of parliament over ASADA.

We believe the proper way to achieve that is through a Senate inquiry, which is something the crossbenchers sought in the previous parliament only to be thwarted by the ALP and government senators.

The case to achieve those aims is contained in the truth Patrick Smith ignored in his articles. It can all be found in Chip Le Grand’s excellent book The Straight Dope, which he hasn’t read because it’s on the AFL banned list.

Let me go through some of the bits he left out of his “truth” telling because they are important matters for the Senate to examine.

It has been discussed in the media that in 2013 the then AFL chief executive Andrew Demetriou tipped off David Evans, the then Essendon chairman that the Australian Crime Commission had Essendon in its sights.

It has also been widely aired that Evans asked James Hird not to disclose the tip-off in his sworn testimony to ASADA.

Surely that is something a person concerned with the truth would discuss because it indicates machinations between two men deeply involved in trying to manipulate an outcome rather than letting ASADA investigate as an independent statutory authority should.

The media in 2013 revealed that Brett Clothier, the AFL integrity officer, had produced a file note for ASADA two years after he claimed it was written to implicate James Hird. It related to a meeting with three Essendon officials, Danny Corcoran, James Hird and Paul Hamilton. Clothier claimed he had warned James Hird at that meeting that all peptides were banned (in fact, not all are banned).

So two years after the event, Clothier “remembers” something and as we know ASADA relied on his “evidence” and incorporated it in the interim report it provided to the AFL. In doing so, ASADA ignored the evidence of the three officials at the meeting that Clothier gave no such warning. Surely that would be something someone seeking the truth would report on, at least for context.

Patrick Smith in his search for the truth ignored the evidence revealed in the transcripts of the Federal Court case James Hird v ASADA 2014 that Kate Lundy, the then federal sports minister and Richard Eccles, the senior sports bureaucrat, interfered in ASADA’s investigation despite the ASADA legislation specifically forbidding government interference.

The transcript also reveals Eccles, at the request of the AFL’s Gillon McLachlan, leant on the ASADA chief executive to get the interim report it needed to stitch up Essendon and James Hird. The evidence is there for any journalist to find. Yet Patrick “truth seeker” Smith finds it irrelevant.

The decision of the Federal Court had profound implications for athletes and for the primacy of parliament.

Parliament had inserted two protections for athletes in the ASADA Act: confidentiality while being investigated; and the right not to self-incriminate. ASADA got around those provisions by teaming up with the AFL to use the coercive powers in the player contracts.

The Federal Court decision effectively rubber-stamped ASADA’s actions, which has two significant consequences. First the protections the parliament wanted athletes to have are gone. Second, ASADA has set the precedent for other statutory authorities, established by parliament, to go round the back door to undermine the wishes of elected legislators. That is not healthy for our democracy.

Patrick “truth seeker” sees that as not important probably because it doesn’t fit the AFL’s directive which as we know is: “make it all James Hird’s fault”.

Patrick Smith ignores all the facts and disquiet that surrounds the CAS verdict. Instead he relies on the decision to ban the players to justify his position.

The important things to remember are that the players should never have been before CAS and the CAS decision could not have been made under Australian law.

The anti-doping architecture provides for ASADA to prosecute athletes before an independent tribunal established by the parent sporting body. Thus the AFL established a tribunal comprising two Australian judges and an eminent QC. That tribunal found ASADA failed in all its claims, in fact it had no evidence and, therefore, the players were innocent.

ASADA had the right to appeal that decision to a different Australian tribunal. It chose not to and instead provided $US100,000 to WADA, plus access to ASADA lawyers to enable WADA to dissect the ASADA case and the tribunal decision.

ASADA connived with WADA to prosecute players in a purely domestic competition before CAS, a foreign body applying Swiss law because it knew it had no case under Australian law.

I use the word “prosecute” deliberately. The CAS hearing was not an appeal. It was a fresh trial. The players were tried twice, which is generally not allowed in Australian law. They suffered double jeopardy and both prosecutions were funded out of taxpayer money provided to ASADA by the parliament.

The CAS hearing was not subject to Australian legal principles and the legal advice available to me suggests if CAS had applied Australian legal principles the players would have had no case to answer. For example, CAS accepted the WADA proposition to try the players as a job lot, like cattle at the sales yard.

WADA relied on supposition, the infamous “strands in the cable” approach to get its scalps. So here we have ASADA not exercising its appeal rights and instead funding WADA to try the players a second time in a foreign court.

To me, that is a gross miscarriage of justice and something all Australian athletes should be concerned about. But does Patrick “truth seeker” even mention it? No, probably because it doesn’t fit the AFL’s directive: “make it all James Hird’s fault”.

Hopefully with a straight- shooting new federal Sports Minister, Greg Hunt, the government will finally allow a Senate inquiry so we can have the facts investigated to get justice for the Essendon players, get the anti-doping architecture back in order and for the parliament to provide some decent oversight of ASADA.

If you need help with depression, you can reach Lifeline on 13 11 14 or BeyondBlue on 1300 22 4636.

Hear hear Alan

Hird Snr neglected to mention what drugs were taken, why the records have miraculously disappeared, why Thr Dr was deliberately kept out of the loop, why all the subterfuge and PR bull. if it was such a big deal about fat controller tipping of EFC probably means they did had something to hide. Yes it shows AFL was dodgy but does not clear EFC. Why avoid the main points, the drug taking and look for reasons to divert blame and responisbilty.
Anyway Alan, how is your son? Give him my best next time you see him.

 

[The_Wookie]

Cleared various amounts of debris from the thread. Lets knock this personal stuff out or Ill lock it permanently next time. Garlic muncher, imperial_oz

 

[jenny61_99]

Cleared various amounts of debris from the thread. Lets knock this personal stuff out or Ill lock it permanently next time. Garlic muncher, imperial_oz

Can't you just thread ban people that do this?

 

[The_Wookie]

Can't you just thread ban people that do this?

I can do many things.