Remove this Banner Ad

Bruce Francis (Part3)

🥰 Love BigFooty? Join now for free.

Status
Not open for further replies.
I'm old enough to have seen 5 premierships. That always helps!:D
I've also experienced them but 72 was a day of dread I still dream about and can't seem to get over. Still couldn't bear watching highlights. 82 similarly (I saw Bourke re damage malthouses' shoulder at training). The rest is farce and dark history entwined.
 
I've also experienced them but 72 was a day of dread I still dream about and can't seem to get over. Still couldn't bear watching highlights. 82 similarly (I saw Bourke re damage malthouses' shoulder at training). The rest is farce and dark history entwined.
It's hard to give up on them though. I just hope the hard times will just make success all the more sweet. Richmond supporters are obviously masochists!
 

Log in to remove this Banner Ad

Correct.
Players don't have to prove anything.
Onus is 100% on ASADA to prove that each and every one of the 34 players used TB4.

This comment is far removed from the five minutes you stated it would take before the ASADA case was to be thrown out.
Nonetheless, I suggest Essendon players and officials would be very worried.
 
This comment is far removed from the five minutes you stated it would take before the ASADA case was to be thrown out.
Nonetheless, I suggest Essendon players and officials would be very worried.

A lot of people have said that.

No one has ever been able to pull up a direct quote.

I find that interesting.
 
It's pretty straight forward AT, nothing has changed. ... As you progress down that series of statements, the certainty of the statement decreases.

But you don't progress down that series of statements. A circumstantial case is not necessarily built on a sequence of events, but a network of evidence. It's only when you stand back and look at the big picture that is formed from these individual elements that you see whether you have a case - or not.

(... this without going into your list, which is both subjective in its opinions and selective in its omissions ... not to mention either, we don't need certainty here, we only need comfortable satisfaction)
 
All discussion, including bruce's most recent, seems to be that you cannot prove what was in each syringe even if you can prove TB4 was provided to the club with the intention of giving it to the playing group. This is the last bastion my friends.
Does he realize it's only comfortable satisfaction
 
You seem balanced and unaffected by the travails of our club. Most tiger supporters I know are clearly marked by failure.
Hang on some of us are marked by the Tigers success how many supporters have had their club win 5 flags in there lives, dont worry the wheel turns and like those long suffering Cats supporters that waited 44 years between flags our time will come again.
 

Remove this Banner Ad

They maybe masochists but I admire their commitment
There's something to respect supporters who have not bragged about a clubs numerous premierships, I respect those more who have had a lot more lean times and stuck like a rock! There's more dignity in that than mindless boasting.
 
All discussion, including bruce's most recent, seems to be that you cannot prove what was in each syringe even if you can prove TB4 was provided to the club with the intention of giving it to the playing group. This is the last bastion my friends.
Does he realize it's only comfortable satisfaction

I don't believe so. The definition of those words would have been debated (both at Tribunal and in written submissions) to no end. Im no legal eagle, but in my view the tribunal needs to be comfortably satisfied the players were administered TB4. They can be comfortably satisfied even if they also hold a reasonable doubt. It is up to the players and their legal representation to ensure the panel has more then, in number or weight, a reasonable doubt.
 
It's pretty straight forward AT, nothing has changed.

There is evidence that TB4 was ordered by Charter.
There is some evidence that it was prepared by Alavi.
There is some evidence that it was provided to Dank.
There is some evidence that it made it to the club.
There is some evidence that it may have been used on players.

As you progress down that series of statements, the certainty of the statement decreases.

If you're willing to end careers because players unwittingly may have taken a substance that might be performance enhancing then you're not as intelligent nor as reasonable as you've portrayed yourself.
So you now admit Asada have evidence of tb4 being used at the club. Don't be so melodramatic. Careers ended? How long are they missing? Go read the Wada code. If players have taken a substance that is banned by Wada (forget unwittingly or might be performance enhancing) then there are no provisions for them to be let off.
 

🥰 Love BigFooty? Join now for free.

A lot of people have said that.

No one has ever been able to pull up a direct quote.

I find that interesting.

Oh C'mon Giggity, as respected former poster GG you were often saying that ASADA were a bunch of Shiny....... merchants who had nowhere near enough evidence, and the case will be thrown out in 5 minutes.

This was during the time when it was revealed that Charter and Alavi would not give evidence.

You remember you wily old fox.
 
$2m fine
Removed from the 2013 finals?

Yep that would set a great precedent and provide a big deterrent to other clubs that may want to go down the route that Essendon did :rolleyes:

The conversation may go something like "Let's implement a programme that will give our players benefits that will last for years. We will miss one year of finals but are likely to win at least four. There may also be a fine imposed but our President will sort all that out ..."
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Remove this Banner Ad

🥰 Love BigFooty? Join now for free.

Back
Top