No Opposition Supporters CAS hands down guilty verdict - Players appealing - Dank shot - no opposition - (cont in pt.2)

Status
Not open for further replies.

yaco55

Hall of Famer
Joined
Jul 25, 2007
Posts
35,436
Likes
11,848
Location
hong kong
AFL Club
Essendon
I have the same suspicions as Rines about the trading going on - Giles I understand but Gwilt and Cooney have my concerns.

I posted months ago that ASADA should drop the whole case - Nothing has transpired in the last few months has changed my mind.

One thing I am sure of is that the 2015 will be affected one way or another.
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

yaco55

Hall of Famer
Joined
Jul 25, 2007
Posts
35,436
Likes
11,848
Location
hong kong
AFL Club
Essendon
This is why EFC should have also appealed.

ASADA have stated multiple times that the outcome of the federal court action is inconsequential as they would "simply reissue sc the next day".

They are thunder campaigners that will not find any player guilty and are parading around hoping to just get a deal.

We know Jobe and Timmy Watson didn't want Hird to appeal, but was this because they didn't want the distraction to continue or because they didn't want Hird to get himself sacked. It seems like other players did want him to appeal and didn't want him sacked.

I have no idea whatsoever but I can also speculate that your clause in Hird's 2 year extension does not exist. That Hird simply backed down from his Supreme Court action for a 2 year extension at the same terms.
I am still convinced ( and there has been online chatter from legal types ) that ASADA needs to hold off until the Federal Court appeal is resolved.
 

rines

Norm Smith Medallist
Suspended
Joined
Sep 28, 2007
Posts
8,340
Likes
9,310
AFL Club
Essendon
I have read the opinions of some of the lawyers in the media who think it will take considerably longer. Can't remember who it was, if it was Kane or someone else. But it makes sense. Every single player is entitled to an independent, separate defence. There's just no way that can happen for 30 odd players within a fortnight. Maybe within 30 fortnights.
In which case you can't have players provisionally suspended for that period.

I doubt that there will be 34 that end up at tribunal anyway.. there is already 'rumours' that they won't issue 34 new notices.. it might be less. So depending on what evidence they have against which players.. maybe there will be less.

How long do you think they would 'hear' each case for? I can't see it going longer than 4 hours of presentation. Deliberation could take a week or more depending on whether there was a 'predetermined' outcome (I know there shouldn't be.. but this is the AFL). Also think most of the leg work will be already done via written submissions.

I agree thought.. it is going to take at least a month for the hearings to be completed.. at least.

I was talking about the fact that the AFL has less than 14 days to announce a hearing DATE after the ROF.. so not the actually hearing date.. but to 'start' proceedings. The actual hearing date maybe a month down the track.. but the IN and Hearing date will be set fairly quickly after the official ROF.
 

jmoo wan

Premium Platinum
Joined
Oct 12, 2007
Posts
5,069
Likes
14,896
Location
Ringwood
AFL Club
Essendon
In which case you can't have players provisionally suspended for that period.

I doubt that there will be 34 that end up at tribunal anyway.. there is already 'rumours' that they won't issue 34 new notices.. it might be less. So depending on what evidence they have against which players.. maybe there will be less.

How long do you think they would 'hear' each case for? I can't see it going longer than 4 hours of presentation. Deliberation could take a week or more depending on whether there was a 'predetermined' outcome (I know there shouldn't be.. but this is the AFL). Also think most of the leg work will be already done via written submissions.

I agree thought.. it is going to take at least a month for the hearings to be completed.. at least.

I was talking about the fact that the AFL has less than 14 days to announce a hearing DATE after the ROF.. so not the actually hearing date.. but to 'start' proceedings. The actual hearing date maybe a month down the track.. but the IN and Hearing date will be set fairly quickly after the official ROF.
it would be absolutely staggering if they issued less than 34 SCNs. This would surely mean their fishing expedition was unsuccessful and the only 'evidence" they have is some players' vague testimony around something that might be familiar sounding.
 

rines

Norm Smith Medallist
Suspended
Joined
Sep 28, 2007
Posts
8,340
Likes
9,310
AFL Club
Essendon
it would be absolutely staggering if they issued less than 34 SCN. This would surely mean their fishing expedition was unsuccessful and the only 'evidence" they have is some players' vague testimony around something that might be familiar sounding.
Look when I first heard it.. I was shocked too.. but it makes sense.. if they are now doing 'individual' SCN's.. then they will actually have to put times and dates for EACH player on there.. good luck.

What I find staggering is no one seems to be noticing that ASADA have admitted that the SCN's issued in June were 'generic'... I mean is that even legal or fair? Makes no sense.. surely each SCN should have been individual from the start.. to take into account evidence against the specific player and their specific responses to questioning etc etc...

Probably clears up how you get 26 vials = 34 notices though.
 

efcboy

Brownlow Medallist
Joined
Oct 2, 2007
Posts
10,178
Likes
7,767
Location
Essendon
AFL Club
Essendon
Other Teams
Arsenal
Arguments in the opposite direction can be the players have been suspended from between 1 and 4 games already for missing the finals last year.
I'd argue 22 matches. They risked injury for nothing. Every player ( minus jack watts) aims to play finals and this was taken away from them
 

cymarak

Go Gators !
Joined
Aug 7, 2009
Posts
2,977
Likes
4,007
Location
Over it. All of it.
AFL Club
Essendon
Other Teams
49ers, Gators
Arguments in the opposite direction can be the players have been suspended from between 1 and 4 games already for missing the finals last year.
The counter argument to that is that the 'suspension' the players copped in 2013 was not for taking PEDs, but for playing at a club where governance ... blah, blah, blah ...

In other words, that suspension was for a different 'crime' to the one the players are facing charges for now.
 

efcboy

Brownlow Medallist
Joined
Oct 2, 2007
Posts
10,178
Likes
7,767
Location
Essendon
AFL Club
Essendon
Other Teams
Arsenal
The counter argument to that is that the 'suspension' the players copped in 2013 was not for taking PEDs, but for playing at a club where governance ... blah, blah, blah ...

In other words, that suspension was for a different 'crime' to the one the players are facing charges for now.
The counter argument to that would be that given that rationale the players were also unfairly punished given they are not in a position to control governance (unless you're Ryan Griffen). Given players are drafted majority also didn't choose club as per AFL rules.
 

JayDon

Club Legend
Joined
Oct 17, 2013
Posts
1,302
Likes
591
Location
Home
AFL Club
Essendon
no. not that we know of.

In fact charters is the only one who claims it was even TB4.. and he says Dank 'asked about TB4 dosages, and asked him to source the materials... but Charters does not believe it was given to the players...

it is odd stuff really
It's and Charter is crinimal!
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

The Prosecutor

Norm Smith Medallist
Joined
Sep 13, 2011
Posts
9,379
Likes
11,409
AFL Club
Essendon
no. not that we know of.

In fact charters is the only one who claims it was even TB4.. and he says Dank 'asked about TB4 dosages, and asked him to source the materials... but Charters does not believe it was given to the players...

it is odd stuff really

I've seen you suggest that a lot, the only thing I can contribute to Charters is this quote... ''It is a legal product but clearly a banned substance for professional athletes,'' he said. ''I would assume that Dank would have known that.''
 

rines

Norm Smith Medallist
Suspended
Joined
Sep 28, 2007
Posts
8,340
Likes
9,310
AFL Club
Essendon
I've seen you suggest that a lot, the only thing I can contribute to Charters is this quote... ''It is a legal product but clearly a banned substance for professional athletes,'' he said. ''I would assume that Dank would have known that.''
Why do you have a sick fascination with all our players receiving bans?

TBH I trust Charters less than I trust Dank.. and at no point was Charters ever officially part of the EFC program.. at no point did he bill us directly.. he didn't have contact with the club and so we have no idea what side deals he and Dank were doing for the legal, or otherwise, businesses.

Charters said very early on that he didn't believe EFC players were given banned substances.
 

Doss

Super Moderator
Joined
Aug 1, 2011
Posts
70,947
Likes
96,300
AFL Club
Essendon
Thread starter Admin #36,392
Anyhow, in relation to Charters- that article suggesting he is still unsure whether he'll even be testifying left me...puzzled.

He has been spoken about for quite some time now as ASADA's 'star witness'. It has almost become a soundbite in its own right. Yet a star witness is still apparently uncertain to even be testifying?
 

carnthedons

Norm Smith Medallist
Joined
Sep 12, 2006
Posts
8,183
Likes
12,278
Location
Melbourne
AFL Club
Essendon
Anyhow, in relation to Charters- that article suggesting he is still unsure whether he'll even be testifying left me...puzzled.

He has been spoken about for quite some time now as ASADA's 'star witness'. It has almost become a soundbite in its own right. Yet a star witness is still apparently uncertain to even be testifying?
It's times like this i just want to be a nihilist like Uli

Ve vant ze money Lebovski
 

rines

Norm Smith Medallist
Suspended
Joined
Sep 28, 2007
Posts
8,340
Likes
9,310
AFL Club
Essendon
rines, there is no sick fascination there, it is a fair question.
All he does is try and prove our players are drug cheats.. like all the time.

Charters has been on record stating he doesn't believe the EFC players were given banned substances.. what more does he want?

The guy has a fair dinkum crush on EFC burning and you think it is a fair question??
 

Doss

Super Moderator
Joined
Aug 1, 2011
Posts
70,947
Likes
96,300
AFL Club
Essendon
Thread starter Admin #36,395
All he does is try and prove our players are drug cheats.. like all the time.

Charters has been on record stating he doesn't believe the EFC players were given banned substances.. what more does he want?

The guy has a fair dinkum crush on EFC burning and you think it is a fair question??
No. He said he'd never seen anything more than the statement he attributed to Charters on the previous page. Asking for clarification is a fair question.

As for crush on EFC burning- don't be ridiculous.
 

fishardansin

Brownlow Medallist
Joined
Apr 6, 2008
Posts
15,127
Likes
10,051
Location
coburg
AFL Club
Essendon
Other Teams
Australian cricket team
All he does is try and prove our players are drug cheats.. like all the time.

Charters has been on record stating he doesn't believe the EFC players were given banned substances.. what more does he want?

The guy has a fair dinkum crush on EFC burning and you think it is a fair question??
No he never said that. I know that he says that he did work with Hird back in the day and he thinks Hird is a man of the highest integrity.
 

The Dustbin

Loyal & Proud EFC Member
Joined
Feb 24, 2004
Posts
9,284
Likes
2,968
Location
Allan T. Hird Stand
AFL Club
Essendon
Other Teams
Liverpool, Canterbury, 49ers,Lakers
I agree - But clubs A complains to the AFL, ASADA target tests EFC players, shit-storm from ACC - On basis of previous AFL forces EFC to self report.
Yes that happened. Again, the ACC were investigating the bikies pre club/s complaining the AFL - the paper trail from the Como is what linked the bikies/Dank to EFC.
 

CBombers17

Club Legend
Joined
Jul 7, 2014
Posts
1,956
Likes
2,114
AFL Club
Essendon
All he does is try and prove our players are drug cheats.. like all the time.

Charters has been on record stating he doesn't believe the EFC players were given banned substances.. what more does he want?

The guy has a fair dinkum crush on EFC burning and you think it is a fair question??
I've heard this exact same thing from a source close to him (Dank would never give banned drugs to the players knowingly).

That and Dank is no fool with records - impeccable was the word used.
 

fishardansin

Brownlow Medallist
Joined
Apr 6, 2008
Posts
15,127
Likes
10,051
Location
coburg
AFL Club
Essendon
Other Teams
Australian cricket team
I've heard this exact same thing from a source close to him (Dank would never give banned drugs to the players knowingly).

That and Dank is no fool with records - impeccable was the word used.
Danky!!! How's it going mate?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom