ASADA case against Essendon hanging by a thread (The Age, 1 Nov 14)

[BlueWorld]

The spin machine is out in full force.

Cerberus @tretestecane · 3h3 hours ago
Let's remember that above all else the AFL MUST SAVE FACE. It will throw all others under the bus. But its one true fear is players suing.

Cerberus @tretestecane · 4h4 hours ago
Mark my words, come next Tuesday the AFL is going to have you believe that Dank did everything, including shooting JFK.

Cerberus @tretestecane · 12h12 hours ago
It's scary to think what the AFL has riding on this decision. They stand to lose more than anyone. 1/2

Cerberus @tretestecane · 15h15 hours ago
The AFL fears nothing more than a guilty finding by its own Anti-Doping Tribunal.

Not as much as the EFC.

 

[BlueWorld]

He wasn't getting the fedpol job until he got more relevent experience. That's what he was advised and why he ended up at ASADA. ASADA was always just a stepping stone for him. I reckon he will trip up on this stepping stone and lose any chance of the top fedpol job (if he hasn't already) but let's see in the coming months.

On the contrary he wouldn't have taken it as far as he has if he thought it likely to fail. Think about that.

 

[NikkiNoo]

Were they not enough of a driving force to have him removed?

Anyway, Jenny, I don't wish to engage in a tit-for-tat with you. I find you're a reasonable poster and this exchange will add nothing to this thread. Have a very pleasant day.

We have only just gotten two member voted positions on our board this year. Prior to that our licence was held by the SANFL and they decided who was on the Board. We finally own our own licence and have broken the shackles away from the SANFL. Compare that to the powers the members of Essendon have in voting rights for your board positions etc. There was nothing that could be done to remove them except to make noises etc, which did happen.

If you don't want a tit for tat, don't ask a question for us to answer.

 

[jenny61_99]

What would you have the Essendon supporters do? Bang on the gates of Tullamarine in outrage and demand the removal of Little and Hird? It's not realistic. The reality is we have very little information in regards to the case and have no right to say anyone is 'evil'. Obviously mistakes have been made and people will suffer the consequences (some already have).

It's too late now to remove either of them without a guilty verdict. However, the noise SHOULD have been made much earlier - even without the verdict, what happened at Essendon was absolutely despicable. The fact that you were taken out of the finals, fined, loss of draft picks were more than enough impetus to remove all involved at the time. Regardless of the verdict next week, your club allowed injections of substances not approved for human therapeutic use into their players. That's enough right there and this fact has been known for a long while.

 

[King Patty]

It's too late now to remove either of them without a guilty verdict. However, the noise SHOULD have been made much earlier - even without the verdict, what happened at Essendon was absolutely despicable. The fact that you were taken out of the finals, fined, loss of draft picks were more than enough impetus to remove all involved at the time. Regardless of the verdict next week, your club allowed injections of substances not approved for human therapeutic use into their players. That's enough right there and this fact has been known for a long while.

the questions should be being asked about the AFL and their governance. Remember 17 clubs supported them and their actions.
- they thought they could finalise this matter by punishing essendon in 2013. take them out of finals 2 million fine etc end the issue then. Did it work? No!
Good corporate governance AFL would have said they will let the investigation run its course and asada do their job. Once the investigation is finished and we know if Essendon are guilty or not guilty we will look at penalties.

When Demetriou was briefed by ACC and he said a AFL club may be involved. And asked if it was essendon
What AFL/Vlad did - tell Evans force Essendon to self Report. - created Media circus but Vlad believed would give them some"control over situation.
Good corporate governance AFL would have kept confidential information confidential. And Asada could have investigated Essendon and other AFL clubs if they thought were appropriate with the players privacy being protected.

When Essendon announced they would open doors to asada. to check what they did was above board.
AFL decided they would be part of the investigation team so they could keep some control on the investigation.
Good corporate governance AFL would have let asada do their job without interfering.

AFL pressured asada to release information so that they could produce a charge sheet and force Essendon to accept penalties "for the good of the competition". Leave out the bits that we dont need etc.
Good corporate governance afl would have waited until the investigation was over, and would not ahve pressured a regulatory body.

AFL attempted to make a deal with Asada that was in effect (Andruska’s notes) “Deal with AFL — support staff sacked, points off, players off.’’ Essendon coaches would lose their jobs, Essendon would be stripped of premiership points and dumped from the finals series and the players would escape sanction.
Good Corporate Governance AFL would have let Asada do their job, rather than trying to do things, that will manipulate the results. When NRL got wind of the deal Asada called it off, but it was too late for EFC who had already been handed down the penalties.

The fact that AFL made poor decisions. Does not thus mean that the result of those decisions (ie EFC 2013 penalties) means essendon are "Guilty as charged". It purely means that the AFL used the media and punishments to make the average footy fan believe essendon are guilty without looking at all the facts.

We are into the third year of the AFL Drugs Saga if it was a clear cut case the players would have accepted penalty offers and would have served them by now.

I hope more of the average fans look at this investigation what it was. A clear example of the AFL doing everything they can to protect their brand and they do not care who they hurt as long as they protect their brand, their pay packets. The AFL takes you the average fan as a fool, do you want to continue being one.

just think it may be your club next time.

 

[blackshadow]

the questions should be being asked about the AFL and their governance. Remember 17 clubs supported them and their actions.
- they thought they could finalise this matter by punishing essendon in 2013. take them out of finals 2 million fine etc end the issue then. Did it work? No!
Good corporate governance AFL would have said they will let the investigation run its course and asada do their job. Once the investigation is finished and we know if Essendon are guilty or not guilty we will look at penalties.

When Demetriou was briefed by ACC and he said a AFL club may be involved. And asked if it was essendon
What AFL/Vlad did - tell Evans force Essendon to self Report. - created Media circus but Vlad believed would give them some"control over situation.
Good corporate governance AFL would have kept confidential information confidential. And Asada could have investigated Essendon and other AFL clubs if they thought were appropriate with the players privacy being protected.

When Essendon announced they would open doors to asada. to check what they did was above board.
AFL decided they would be part of the investigation team so they could keep some control on the investigation.
Good corporate governance AFL would have let asada do their job without interfering.

AFL pressured asada to release information so that they could produce a charge sheet and force Essendon to accept penalties "for the good of the competition". Leave out the bits that we dont need etc.
Good corporate governance afl would have waited until the investigation was over, and would not ahve pressured a regulatory body.

AFL attempted to make a deal with Asada that was in effect (Andruska’s notes) “Deal with AFL — support staff sacked, points off, players off.’’ Essendon coaches would lose their jobs, Essendon would be stripped of premiership points and dumped from the finals series and the players would escape sanction.
Good Corporate Governance AFL would have let Asada do their job, rather than trying to do things, that will manipulate the results. When NRL got wind of the deal Asada called it off, but it was too late for EFC who had already been handed down the penalties.

The fact that AFL made poor decisions. Does not thus mean that the result of those decisions (ie EFC 2013 penalties) means essendon are "Guilty as charged". It purely means that the AFL used the media and punishments to make the average footy fan believe essendon are guilty without looking at all the facts.

We are into the third year of the AFL Drugs Saga if it was a clear cut case the players would have accepted penalty offers and would have served them by now.

I hope more of the average fans look at this investigation what it was. A clear example of the AFL doing everything they can to protect their brand and they do not care who they hurt as long as they protect their brand, their pay packets. The AFL takes you the average fan as a fool, do you want to continue being one.

just think it may be your club next time.

There's a major flaw to your fallacy above and that is that ASADA wanted the AFL involved in the investigation so they could use the AFL's coercive powers.

 

[onemancyclone]

the questions should be being asked about the AFL and their governance. Remember 17 clubs supported them and their actions.
- they thought they could finalise this matter by punishing essendon in 2013. take them out of finals 2 million fine etc end the issue then. Did it work? No!
Good corporate governance AFL would have said they will let the investigation run its course and asada do their job. Once the investigation is finished and we know if Essendon are guilty or not guilty we will look at penalties.

When Demetriou was briefed by ACC and he said a AFL club may be involved. And asked if it was essendon
What AFL/Vlad did - tell Evans force Essendon to self Report. - created Media circus but Vlad believed would give them some"control over situation.
Good corporate governance AFL would have kept confidential information confidential. And Asada could have investigated Essendon and other AFL clubs if they thought were appropriate with the players privacy being protected.

When Essendon announced they would open doors to asada. to check what they did was above board.
AFL decided they would be part of the investigation team so they could keep some control on the investigation.
Good corporate governance AFL would have let asada do their job without interfering.

AFL pressured asada to release information so that they could produce a charge sheet and force Essendon to accept penalties "for the good of the competition". Leave out the bits that we dont need etc.
Good corporate governance afl would have waited until the investigation was over, and would not ahve pressured a regulatory body.

AFL attempted to make a deal with Asada that was in effect (Andruska’s notes) “Deal with AFL — support staff sacked, points off, players off.’’ Essendon coaches would lose their jobs, Essendon would be stripped of premiership points and dumped from the finals series and the players would escape sanction.
Good Corporate Governance AFL would have let Asada do their job, rather than trying to do things, that will manipulate the results. When NRL got wind of the deal Asada called it off, but it was too late for EFC who had already been handed down the penalties.

The fact that AFL made poor decisions. Does not thus mean that the result of those decisions (ie EFC 2013 penalties) means essendon are "Guilty as charged". It purely means that the AFL used the media and punishments to make the average footy fan believe essendon are guilty without looking at all the facts.

We are into the third year of the AFL Drugs Saga if it was a clear cut case the players would have accepted penalty offers and would have served them by now.

I hope more of the average fans look at this investigation what it was. A clear example of the AFL doing everything they can to protect their brand and they do not care who they hurt as long as they protect their brand, their pay packets. The AFL takes you the average fan as a fool, do you want to continue being one.

just think it may be your club next time.

Look what the AFL made my club do.

 

[jenny61_99]

the questions should be being asked about the AFL and their governance. Remember 17 clubs supported them and their actions.
- they thought they could finalise this matter by punishing essendon in 2013. take them out of finals 2 million fine etc end the issue then. Did it work? No!
Good corporate governance AFL would have said they will let the investigation run its course and asada do their job. Once the investigation is finished and we know if Essendon are guilty or not guilty we will look at penalties.

When Demetriou was briefed by ACC and he said a AFL club may be involved. And asked if it was essendon
What AFL/Vlad did - tell Evans force Essendon to self Report. - created Media circus but Vlad believed would give them some"control over situation.
Good corporate governance AFL would have kept confidential information confidential. And Asada could have investigated Essendon and other AFL clubs if they thought were appropriate with the players privacy being protected.

When Essendon announced they would open doors to asada. to check what they did was above board.
AFL decided they would be part of the investigation team so they could keep some control on the investigation.
Good corporate governance AFL would have let asada do their job without interfering.

AFL pressured asada to release information so that they could produce a charge sheet and force Essendon to accept penalties "for the good of the competition". Leave out the bits that we dont need etc.
Good corporate governance afl would have waited until the investigation was over, and would not ahve pressured a regulatory body.

AFL attempted to make a deal with Asada that was in effect (Andruska’s notes) “Deal with AFL — support staff sacked, points off, players off.’’ Essendon coaches would lose their jobs, Essendon would be stripped of premiership points and dumped from the finals series and the players would escape sanction.
Good Corporate Governance AFL would have let Asada do their job, rather than trying to do things, that will manipulate the results. When NRL got wind of the deal Asada called it off, but it was too late for EFC who had already been handed down the penalties.

The fact that AFL made poor decisions. Does not thus mean that the result of those decisions (ie EFC 2013 penalties) means essendon are "Guilty as charged". It purely means that the AFL used the media and punishments to make the average footy fan believe essendon are guilty without looking at all the facts.

We are into the third year of the AFL Drugs Saga if it was a clear cut case the players would have accepted penalty offers and would have served them by now.

I hope more of the average fans look at this investigation what it was. A clear example of the AFL doing everything they can to protect their brand and they do not care who they hurt as long as they protect their brand, their pay packets. The AFL takes you the average fan as a fool, do you want to continue being one.

just think it may be your club next time.

Let's strip back to the bare bones here of what you are trying to say: Blame the AFL, it's all their fault we are in this mess.

And apart from the obvious fact that your club is in this mess because of poor choices your coach and staff made in the the 2011 pre-season/2012 season proper - I think you will be hard pressed to find someone that believes the AFL have handled this well. Until you are prepared to apply the same blowtorch to your Club as you have done to the AFL, you won't be able to move forward.

 

[jatz14]

the questions should be being asked about the AFL and their governance. Remember 17 clubs supported them and their actions.
- they thought they could finalise this matter by punishing essendon in 2013. take them out of finals 2 million fine etc end the issue then. Did it work? No!
Good corporate governance AFL would have said they will let the investigation run its course and asada do their job. Once the investigation is finished and we know if Essendon are guilty or not guilty we will look at penalties.

As has been said many times. Essendon were punished for governance, and had already been found guilty of that by the AFL. The current investigation relates to what that poor governance allowed to happen. Saying Essendon can only be guilty of bad governance if the players are found guilty is like saying I can only be found guilty of bad driving if I crash and kill someone.

 

[Tiger Toffee]

the questions should be being asked about the AFL and their governance. Remember 17 clubs supported them and their actions.
- they thought they could finalise this matter by punishing essendon in 2013. take them out of finals 2 million fine etc end the issue then. Did it work? No!
Good corporate governance AFL would have said they will let the investigation run its course and asada do their job. Once the investigation is finished and we know if Essendon are guilty or not guilty we will look at penalties.

When Demetriou was briefed by ACC and he said a AFL club may be involved. And asked if it was essendon
What AFL/Vlad did - tell Evans force Essendon to self Report. - created Media circus but Vlad believed would give them some"control over situation.
Good corporate governance AFL would have kept confidential information confidential. And Asada could have investigated Essendon and other AFL clubs if they thought were appropriate with the players privacy being protected.

When Essendon announced they would open doors to asada. to check what they did was above board.
AFL decided they would be part of the investigation team so they could keep some control on the investigation.
Good corporate governance AFL would have let asada do their job without interfering.

AFL pressured asada to release information so that they could produce a charge sheet and force Essendon to accept penalties "for the good of the competition". Leave out the bits that we dont need etc.
Good corporate governance afl would have waited until the investigation was over, and would not ahve pressured a regulatory body.

AFL attempted to make a deal with Asada that was in effect (Andruska’s notes) “Deal with AFL — support staff sacked, points off, players off.’’ Essendon coaches would lose their jobs, Essendon would be stripped of premiership points and dumped from the finals series and the players would escape sanction.
Good Corporate Governance AFL would have let Asada do their job, rather than trying to do things, that will manipulate the results. When NRL got wind of the deal Asada called it off, but it was too late for EFC who had already been handed down the penalties.

The fact that AFL made poor decisions. Does not thus mean that the result of those decisions (ie EFC 2013 penalties) means essendon are "Guilty as charged". It purely means that the AFL used the media and punishments to make the average footy fan believe essendon are guilty without looking at all the facts.

We are into the third year of the AFL Drugs Saga if it was a clear cut case the players would have accepted penalty offers and would have served them by now.

I hope more of the average fans look at this investigation what it was. A clear example of the AFL doing everything they can to protect their brand and they do not care who they hurt as long as they protect their brand, their pay packets. The AFL takes you the average fan as a fool, do you want to continue being one.

just think it may be your club next time.

Boo hoo, and if Essendon didn't use drugs you wouldn't be in this situation but someone got desperate in your club didn't they and wanted success quick smart and wasn't prepared to build up a list, a list by the way that advanced no further than when that legend Knighta was in charge.

 

[PoppedCorn]

 

[Albert Ross]

the questions should be being asked about the AFL and their governance. Remember 17 clubs supported them and their actions.
- they thought they could finalise this matter by punishing essendon in 2013. take them out of finals 2 million fine etc end the issue then. Did it work? No!
Good corporate governance AFL would have said they will let the investigation run its course and asada do their job. Once the investigation is finished and we know if Essendon are guilty or not guilty we will look at penalties.

Letting the investigation run it's course would have seen Essendon competing in the 2013 finals series. This could not be allowed. So in that context, yes, the AFL's actions very clearly worked.

When Demetriou was briefed by ACC and he said a AFL club may be involved. And asked if it was essendon
What AFL/Vlad did - tell Evans force Essendon to self Report. - created Media circus but Vlad believed would give them some"control over situation.
Good corporate governance AFL would have kept confidential information confidential. And Asada could have investigated Essendon and other AFL clubs if they thought were appropriate with the players privacy being protected.

The journos already had the story, the ACC report contained enough detail to make it clear that 1 AFL club was under investigation, and Vlad was attending a press conference in Canberra that everything was going to be announced a couple of days later. There was zero chance the story was not coming out and that Essendon would have privacy.

As for the self-report nonsense. Essendon already knew. When Vlad rings Evans, Evans is hosting a meeting of Hird etc and Tania is on the extension taking notes. They are already in a crisis meeting waiting for Vlad's call.

When Essendon announced they would open doors to asada. to check what they did was above board.
AFL decided they would be part of the investigation team so they could keep some control on the investigation.
Good corporate governance AFL would have let asada do their job without interfering.

ASADA wanted to use AFL's powers to compel witnesses to answer questions, surrender phones, documents, laptops etc.

AFL pressured asada to release information so that they could produce a charge sheet and force Essendon to accept penalties "for the good of the competition". Leave out the bits that we dont need etc.
Good corporate governance afl would have waited until the investigation was over, and would not ahve pressured a regulatory body.

Waiting would have seen Essendon competing in the 2013 finals series which the AFL could not allow.

AFL attempted to make a deal with Asada that was in effect (Andruska’s notes) “Deal with AFL — support staff sacked, points off, players off.’’ Essendon coaches would lose their jobs, Essendon would be stripped of premiership points and dumped from the finals series and the players would escape sanction.
Good Corporate Governance AFL would have let Asada do their job, rather than trying to do things, that will manipulate the results. When NRL got wind of the deal Asada called it off, but it was too late for EFC who had already been handed down the penalties.

There was no deal. This was tested in the Middleton case. ASADA had detailed the penalties and discounts and journos like Roy Masters ignorant of the process decided there was a deal.

The fact that AFL made poor decisions. Does not thus mean that the result of those decisions (ie EFC 2013 penalties) means essendon are "Guilty as charged". It purely means that the AFL used the media and punishments to make the average footy fan believe essendon are guilty without looking at all the facts.

It is clear that Essendon's slipshod and amateurish approach to running their medical department brought the game into disrepute. It is not yet clear whether they also breached the anti-doping codes.

We are into the third year of the AFL Drugs Saga if it was a clear cut case the players would have accepted penalty offers and would have served them by now.

I hope more of the average fans look at this investigation what it was. A clear example of the AFL doing everything they can to protect their brand and they do not care who they hurt as long as they protect their brand, their pay packets. The AFL takes you the average fan as a fool, do you want to continue being one.

just think it may be your club next time.

As an average fan I applaud the AFL's decisive action to protect the 2013 final series and premiership from taint, and if they cut a corner or two to get there I don't really mind.

 

[Art Corvelay]

I hope more of the average fans look at this investigation what it was. A clear example of the AFL doing everything they can to protect their brand and they do not care who they hurt as long as they protect their brand, their pay packets. The AFL takes you the average fan as a fool, do you want to continue being one.

Protecting their pay packet would mean not punishing Essendon at all. Why would the AFL want to knife one of the biggest clubs? Any conspiracy theory will do when you don't want to face up to the simple fact - your club ****ed up, badly.

 

[Akka76]

When Demetriou was briefed by ACC and he said a AFL club may be involved. And asked if it was essendon
What AFL/Vlad did - tell Evans force Essendon to self Report. - created Media circus but Vlad believed would give them some"control over situation.
Good corporate governance AFL would have kept confidential information confidential. And Asada could have investigated Essendon and other AFL clubs if they thought were appropriate with the players privacy being protected.

When Essendon announced they would open doors to asada. to check what they did was above board.

Demetriou tipped off EFC to allow them 2-3 days to shred the documents, before ASADA Officers actually got to Napier Street, Essendon.

 

[jenny61_99]

Were they not enough of a driving force to have him removed?

Anyway, Jenny, I don't wish to engage in a tit-for-tat with you. I find you're a reasonable poster and this exchange will add nothing to this thread. Have a very pleasant day.

He's not there now.

 

[Strapping Young Lad]

the questions should be being asked about the AFL and their governance. Remember 17 clubs supported them and their actions.
- they thought they could finalise this matter by punishing essendon in 2013. take them out of finals 2 million fine etc end the issue then. Did it work? No!
Good corporate governance AFL would have said they will let the investigation run its course and asada do their job. Once the investigation is finished and we know if Essendon are guilty or not guilty we will look at penalties.

When Demetriou was briefed by ACC and he said a AFL club may be involved. And asked if it was essendon
What AFL/Vlad did - tell Evans force Essendon to self Report. - created Media circus but Vlad believed would give them some"control over situation.
Good corporate governance AFL would have kept confidential information confidential. And Asada could have investigated Essendon and other AFL clubs if they thought were appropriate with the players privacy being protected.

When Essendon announced they would open doors to asada. to check what they did was above board.
AFL decided they would be part of the investigation team so they could keep some control on the investigation.
Good corporate governance AFL would have let asada do their job without interfering.

AFL pressured asada to release information so that they could produce a charge sheet and force Essendon to accept penalties "for the good of the competition". Leave out the bits that we dont need etc.
Good corporate governance afl would have waited until the investigation was over, and would not ahve pressured a regulatory body.

AFL attempted to make a deal with Asada that was in effect (Andruska’s notes) “Deal with AFL — support staff sacked, points off, players off.’’ Essendon coaches would lose their jobs, Essendon would be stripped of premiership points and dumped from the finals series and the players would escape sanction.
Good Corporate Governance AFL would have let Asada do their job, rather than trying to do things, that will manipulate the results. When NRL got wind of the deal Asada called it off, but it was too late for EFC who had already been handed down the penalties.

The fact that AFL made poor decisions. Does not thus mean that the result of those decisions (ie EFC 2013 penalties) means essendon are "Guilty as charged". It purely means that the AFL used the media and punishments to make the average footy fan believe essendon are guilty without looking at all the facts.

We are into the third year of the AFL Drugs Saga if it was a clear cut case the players would have accepted penalty offers and would have served them by now.

I hope more of the average fans look at this investigation what it was. A clear example of the AFL doing everything they can to protect their brand and they do not care who they hurt as long as they protect their brand, their pay packets. The AFL takes you the average fan as a fool, do you want to continue being one.

just think it may be your club next time.

Geez bud, you'd already made a guff in regards to the Mexico drug today, and then you follow up with this.

It's not great.

 

[southwest bomber]

We have only just gotten two member voted positions on our board this year. Prior to that our licence was held by the SANFL and they decided who was on the Board. We finally own our own licence and have broken the shackles away from the SANFL. Compare that to the powers the members of Essendon have in voting rights for your board positions etc. There was nothing that could be done to remove them except to make noises etc, which did happen.

If you don't want a tit for tat, don't ask a question for us to answer.

So members couldn't hand back their memberships in a sign to the SANFL that they were not pleased with the current board?

I'm sure they'd listen if they lost all membership revenue.

 

[Higgins2Waite]

the questions should be being asked about the AFL and their governance. Remember 17 clubs supported them and their actions.
- they thought they could finalise this matter by punishing essendon in 2013. take them out of finals 2 million fine etc end the issue then. Did it work? No!
Good corporate governance AFL would have said they will let the investigation run its course and asada do their job. Once the investigation is finished and we know if Essendon are guilty or not guilty we will look at penalties.

When Demetriou was briefed by ACC and he said a AFL club may be involved. And asked if it was essendon
What AFL/Vlad did - tell Evans force Essendon to self Report. - created Media circus but Vlad believed would give them some"control over situation.
Good corporate governance AFL would have kept confidential information confidential. And Asada could have investigated Essendon and other AFL clubs if they thought were appropriate with the players privacy being protected.

When Essendon announced they would open doors to asada. to check what they did was above board.
AFL decided they would be part of the investigation team so they could keep some control on the investigation.
Good corporate governance AFL would have let asada do their job without interfering.

AFL pressured asada to release information so that they could produce a charge sheet and force Essendon to accept penalties "for the good of the competition". Leave out the bits that we dont need etc.
Good corporate governance afl would have waited until the investigation was over, and would not ahve pressured a regulatory body.

AFL attempted to make a deal with Asada that was in effect (Andruska’s notes) “Deal with AFL — support staff sacked, points off, players off.’’ Essendon coaches would lose their jobs, Essendon would be stripped of premiership points and dumped from the finals series and the players would escape sanction.
Good Corporate Governance AFL would have let Asada do their job, rather than trying to do things, that will manipulate the results. When NRL got wind of the deal Asada called it off, but it was too late for EFC who had already been handed down the penalties.

The fact that AFL made poor decisions. Does not thus mean that the result of those decisions (ie EFC 2013 penalties) means essendon are "Guilty as charged". It purely means that the AFL used the media and punishments to make the average footy fan believe essendon are guilty without looking at all the facts.

We are into the third year of the AFL Drugs Saga if it was a clear cut case the players would have accepted penalty offers and would have served them by now.

I hope more of the average fans look at this investigation what it was. A clear example of the AFL doing everything they can to protect their brand and they do not care who they hurt as long as they protect their brand, their pay packets. The AFL takes you the average fan as a fool, do you want to continue being one.

just think it may be your club next time.

Thanks James

 

[Proper Gander]

Someone should write a 'Crucible' style novel about it one day

Won't need to go that sophisticated. Underbelly franchise will no doubt be onto it. You won't be able to get into your own family day for all the psychos and nymphomaniacs that flock to meet the characters. Solid.

 

[Proper Gander]

Do you really like the stadia the AFL currently has? Ever want to see them upgraded? Be difficult to do without Federal funds would you think?

Nothing to add or see here.

Loving that you said 'stadia'.

 

[Albert Ross]

Do you really like the stadia the AFL currently has? Ever want to see them upgraded? Be difficult to do without Federal funds would you think?

Essendon's 2014 annual report lists $1.2m in grants in both 2013 and 2014 from the Australian Sports Foundation, plus another $700k over the two years from Government Grants. $3.2m over two years at one club. I don't think the AFL is walking away from WADA anytime soon.

 

[jerry springer]

essendon fans are too pissweak to ask the hard questions of their club. Hird mentality

 

[thegerman]

the questions should be being asked about the AFL and their governance. Remember 17 clubs supported them and their actions.
- they thought they could finalise this matter by punishing essendon in 2013. take them out of finals 2 million fine etc end the issue then. Did it work? No!
Good corporate governance AFL would have said they will let the investigation run its course and asada do their job. Once the investigation is finished and we know if Essendon are guilty or not guilty we will look at penalties.

When Demetriou was briefed by ACC and he said a AFL club may be involved. And asked if it was essendon
What AFL/Vlad did - tell Evans force Essendon to self Report. - created Media circus but Vlad believed would give them some"control over situation.
Good corporate governance AFL would have kept confidential information confidential. And Asada could have investigated Essendon and other AFL clubs if they thought were appropriate with the players privacy being protected.

When Essendon announced they would open doors to asada. to check what they did was above board.
AFL decided they would be part of the investigation team so they could keep some control on the investigation.
Good corporate governance AFL would have let asada do their job without interfering.

AFL pressured asada to release information so that they could produce a charge sheet and force Essendon to accept penalties "for the good of the competition". Leave out the bits that we dont need etc.
Good corporate governance afl would have waited until the investigation was over, and would not ahve pressured a regulatory body.

AFL attempted to make a deal with Asada that was in effect (Andruska’s notes) “Deal with AFL — support staff sacked, points off, players off.’’ Essendon coaches would lose their jobs, Essendon would be stripped of premiership points and dumped from the finals series and the players would escape sanction.
Good Corporate Governance AFL would have let Asada do their job, rather than trying to do things, that will manipulate the results. When NRL got wind of the deal Asada called it off, but it was too late for EFC who had already been handed down the penalties.

The fact that AFL made poor decisions. Does not thus mean that the result of those decisions (ie EFC 2013 penalties) means essendon are "Guilty as charged". It purely means that the AFL used the media and punishments to make the average footy fan believe essendon are guilty without looking at all the facts.

We are into the third year of the AFL Drugs Saga if it was a clear cut case the players would have accepted penalty offers and would have served them by now.

I hope more of the average fans look at this investigation what it was. A clear example of the AFL doing everything they can to protect their brand and they do not care who they hurt as long as they protect their brand, their pay packets. The AFL takes you the average fan as a fool, do you want to continue being one.

just think it may be your club next time.

Nice fairytale.

 

[DapperJong]

essendon fans are too pissweak to ask the hard questions of their club. Hird mentality

lol

 

[tigerdan]

just think it may be your club next time.

It already was my club in 1996. Justin Charles cheated. Your club could take a leaf out of his book on how to face the punishment like a man. Your club could take a leaf out of Richmond's book on how to condemn the cheating but welcome the guy back into the fold once he did his time.

It's bad enough to cheat, but trying to weasel out of it has turned the club into a pariah. You can get Sheedy to spin all the 'we are Essendon / backs to the wall' guff you want but it wont remove the stain on your club for decades.