A Swiss perspective

[Slartibartfast]

How wonderful of the bombers to spread the word to the world that Australians are drug cheats.
Great PR

 

[sameolds33]

and?

and the appeal, being heard in Switzerland in German, is not about any of the information contained in the article. And, what it is about, an appeal on a point of law of a CAS decision involving different facts and a different banned substance is not mentioned.

Talk about not letting the facts get in the way of a good story.

 

[QuietB]

Actually, I think a Swiss person knowing nothing about the case would most likely draw the following conclusions:

1. There were "1000s and 1000s of injections" (cue Ben McDevitt's hysterical screeching after the ALF Tribunal decision - as if an injection program is, in itself, prima facie evidence of taking banned substances);
2. Some of these injections were found to be AOD;
3. The players were found guilty of taking AOD.

It's not unreasonable to expect a newspaper - whether Swiss or Australian - reporting on a doping violation to at least mention - at least once - the drug to which the charge/offence relates. Especially when the case was entirely based on circumstantial and expert evidence relating to that substance.

This article reads to me like WADA PR, operating in much the same way as the AFL leaks in 2013, "calf's blood! Satan's spawn!" Sensationalist reporting prejudicial to the players' appeal.

What is the Swiss term for "so brave" or because they are always neutral in conflicts they don't bother with such a term?

 

[Lavender Bushranger]

That's exactly my point. On the basis of this article, the most logical conclusion to be drawn is that the team cheated because they took thousands of injections of AOD. And we all know that AOD was just a red herring.

It wasn't a red herring.

It was banned.

 

[Satan]

What is the Swiss term for "so brave" or because they are always neutral in conflicts they don't bother with such a term?

Vatican guards so brave

 

[Lavender Bushranger]

and the appeal, being heard in Switzerland in German, is not about any of the information contained in the article. And, what it is about, an appeal on a point of law of a CAS decision involving different facts and a different banned substance is not mentioned.

Talk about not letting the facts get in the way of a good story.

I reckon that article is far less damning and emarrassing than if they were to actually write the facts!

 

[sameolds33]

Not really. Not at all actually.

The Swiss court isn't deciding anything to do with the specifics of the case, so I wouldn't expect an article in a Swiss paper would be highly focused on details.
I mean if our own media can be so wrong on the topic - why on earth would you expect the Swiss to get it right FFS?

so you think that the actual banned substance the players were found guilty of taking is a "detail" and that it's OK to rabbit on about another substance that wasn't even connected with the case?
I don't expect the Swiss to get it right. I think this paper reported the appeal as an AOD, frogs spawn (is that better Satan?), eye of newt cocktail of injectables because that narrative is more colourful than the truth. and I think anyone reading about the case from this article would conclude that they're guilty - as did the Australian public who were fed the same stories in 2013. You'll recall that they served only to convince the public of guilt but wre not mentioned in either of the hearings.

 

[TheArchivist]

I reckon that article is far less damning and emarrassing than if they were to actually write the facts!

and the appeal, being heard in Switzerland in German, is not about any of the information contained in the article. And, what it is about, an appeal on a point of law of a CAS decision involving different facts and a different banned substance is not mentioned.

Talk about not letting the facts get in the way of a good story.

So go ahead and outline the factual details of the case in the comments section - all the drugs that they've been convicted of using. Or maybe someone else can.

 

[sameolds33]

I reckon that article is far less damning and emarrassing than if they were to actually write the facts!

Well they had the choice and they chose to run with this narrative.

 

[sameolds33]

So go ahead and outline the factual details of the case in the comments section - all the drugs that they've been convicted of using. Or maybe someone else can.

The CAS tribunal was comfortably satisfied that the players had used tb4 and, on this basis, banned them for 2 years, backdated by a year.

 

[Unfazed]

I hope the transcripts of the case are translated better than this article.

 

[Lavender Bushranger]

so you think that the actual banned substance the players were found guilty of taking is a "detail" and that it's OK to rabbit on about another substance that wasn't even connected with the case?
I don't expect the Swiss to get it right. I think this paper reported the appeal as an AOD, frogs spawn (is that better Satan?), eye of newt cocktail of injectables because that narrative is more colourful than the truth. and I think anyone reading about the case from this article would conclude that they're guilty - as did the Australian public who were fed the same stories in 2013. You'll recall that they served only to convince the public of guilt but wre not mentioned in either of the hearings.

I'm not sure what your point, or concern is?

The players took a banned drug, tried to conceal it from the club doctor and ASADA, and as a result came out and won 11 straight games.
Once off the drugs, they couldn't get out of their own daylight.

They were charged, found guilty and banned for 2 years.

That's the facts.



How is that better than the article?


What is your concern? Are you shocked that a journo got it wrong?

Robbo, Chip, Holmes, Jones, Connolly and about 50 others say hi!

 

[TheArchivist]

Well they had the choice and they chose to run with this narrative.

Read the article again. The journalist is outlining the original charges laid against the team, as outlined in the formal charges sheet issued to the players.

 

[Lavender Bushranger]

Well they had the choice and they chose to run with this narrative.

Have you read the Herald-Sun or listened to SEN over the last 4 years??

 

[TheArchivist]

I hope the transcripts of the case are translated better than this article.

Somehow I think the multilingual judiciary in Switzerland have a pretty good grasp of the English language, and given the appeal will be conducted in French, they won't have to rely on Google Translate to get the gist of it.

 

[sameolds33]

I'm not sure what your point, or concern is?

The players took a banned drug, tried to conceal it from the club doctor and ASADA, and as a result came out and won 11 straight games.
Once off the drugs, they couldn't get out of their own daylight.

They were charged, found guilty and banned for 2 years.

That's the facts.



How is that better than the article?


What is your concern? Are you shocked that a journo got it wrong?

Robbo, Chip, Holmes, Jones, Connolly and about 50 others say hi!

My point is that the article is sensationalist, covering irrelevant ground as if it was somehow connected with the appeal, when there is absolutely no connection between AOD and the appeal. And, as I said before, I think that its purpose is to lay the groundwork so that the public are convinced of the players guilt in this open and shut case on AOD.

 

[TheArchivist]

The CAS tribunal was comfortably satisfied that the players had used tb4 and, on this basis, banned them for 2 years, backdated by a year.

So, here you go - disabuse the journalist of his ill-conceived Swiss notions:

 

[Lavender Bushranger]

My point is that the article is sensationalist, covering irrelevant ground as if it was somehow connected with the appeal, when there is absolutely no connection between AOD and the appeal. And, as I said before, I think that its purpose is to lay the groundwork so that the public are convinced of the players guilt in this open and shut case on AOD.

This case has nothing to do with their guilt though.

 

[sameolds33]

Read the article again. The journalist is outlining the original charges laid against the team, as outlined in the formal charges sheet issued to the players.

I don't understand your point.

 

[sameolds33]

This case has nothing to do with their guilt though.

The article has nothing to do with their case.

 

[sameolds33]

So, here you go - disabuse the journalist of his ill-conceived Swiss notions:

View attachment 217378

I don't understand what you want me to say - or what your point is.

 

[Lavender Bushranger]

The article has nothing to do with their case.

Obviously.

 

[sameolds33]

Somehow I think the multilingual judiciary in Switzerland have a pretty good grasp of the English language, and given the appeal will be conducted in French, they won't have to rely on Google Translate to get the gist of it.

I believe the appeal will be heard in German.

 

[sameolds33]

Have you read the Herald-Sun or listened to SEN over the last 4 years??

And your point is?

 

[Randomizor]

Could you imagine if Essendon didn't dope their players? Nobody would even need to have written this article!! Oh what a world