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

Status
Not open for further replies.

(Log in to remove this ad.)

Doss

Super Moderator
Joined
Aug 1, 2011
Posts
70,943
Likes
96,294
AFL Club
Essendon
Thread starter Admin #44,352
The general football poster has gone beyond the 'Sarah' call and tbh most won't give a damn if the call is found to be a set up.

The impact at the time of the call which I admit upset me greatly achieved the desired effect.
Which is exactly what it was designed to do, if it was a fake. Tug at the heart strings, particularly of those with children.
 

Doss

Super Moderator
Joined
Aug 1, 2011
Posts
70,943
Likes
96,294
AFL Club
Essendon
Thread starter Admin #44,354
I do wonder though if that, other than some essendon fans, anyone really gaf anymore anyway...
They don't. It's eighteen months ago now in any case.

As I said, it's something of a sideshow anyway, if illegal drug use is actually proven.

But, as also said, it leaves open the question of just what else the AFL manipulated.
 

Mercurial89

Norm Smith Medallist
Joined
Apr 20, 2011
Posts
9,927
Likes
12,236
Location
Melbourne
AFL Club
Essendon
They don't. It's eighteen months ago now in any case.

As I said, it's something of a sideshow anyway, if illegal drug use is actually proven.

But, as also said, it leaves open the question of just what else the AFL manipulated.
Thats why people dont understand the Hird court action. They have all stopped caring about it all, even Essendon supporters dont want him to go through with it because we just want it over. Our rage has subsided over the injustice of it all and we just want it to be finished so we can enjoy football again.

But if you put yourself in the shoes of the people that have been the victims of the AFL's manipulation I totally understand why you would fight on and not give up until it was recognised what had gone on (unfortuantly i also believe since time has passed thats not something you can win). It must be maddening to know what has gone on but because of the views people have on drugs in sport, the means of obtaining information or conducting an investigation are justified by the overall goal of catching "drug cheats".

This is where the system is broken, ASADA are trying to catch drug cheats, instead of investigate possible drug cheating. If your sole purpose is to catch and punish, any evidence gathered, testimony heard or action undertaken by your organisation are going to be with the assumption that the individual/s that you are targeting are guilty.
Thats why this has been such a mess, an ivestigation does not = guilt, just as a court deciding a verdict does not always = correct judgement made (though an unsuccessful appeal sways that signifcantly). The public hear one snippet of someone proposing to be a mother and they are sold. Just as people on Bigfooty hear something about evidence and are accepting of that as fact.
 

expires

Club Legend
Joined
May 20, 2014
Posts
1,233
Likes
561
Location
vic
AFL Club
Essendon
Thats why people dont understand the Hird court action. They have all stopped caring about it all, even Essendon supporters dont want him to go through with it because we just want it over. Our rage has subsided over the injustice of it all and we just want it to be finished so we can enjoy football again.

But if you put yourself in the shoes of the people that have been the victims of the AFL's manipulation I totally understand why you would fight on and not give up until it was recognised what had gone on (unfortuantly i also believe since time has passed thats not something you can win). It must be maddening to know what has gone on but because of the views people have on drugs in sport, the means of obtaining information or conducting an investigation are justified by the overall goal of catching "drug cheats".

This is where the system is broken, ASADA are trying to catch drug cheats, instead of investigate possible drug cheating. If your sole purpose is to catch and punish, any evidence gathered, testimony heard or action undertaken by your organisation are going to be with the assumption that the individual/s that you are targeting are guilty.
Thats why this has been such a mess, an ivestigation does not = guilt, just as a court deciding a verdict does not always = correct judgement made (though an unsuccessful appeal sways that signifcantly). The public hear one snippet of someone proposing to be a mother and they are sold. Just as people on Bigfooty hear something about evidence and are accepting of that as fact.
Almost 100% with this. It isn't the legality of the investigation that is the problem. It is the morality of how the gathered information was arranged that's the issue. Think that's going to be a hard wrong to rectify through a challenge to the legality of the investigation is the problem.
 

mxett

Brownlow Medallist
Joined
Jul 1, 2007
Posts
23,135
Likes
8,862
Location
Melbourne
AFL Club
Essendon
Thats why people dont understand the Hird court action. They have all stopped caring about it all, even Essendon supporters dont want him to go through with it because we just want it over. Our rage has subsided over the injustice of it all and we just want it to be finished so we can enjoy football again.
I think everyone understands the AFL should not have used its powers over players in their interviews. But they also can see that the players had legal representation at the time, and together they agreed to the process knowing these powers were being used. To me they therefore gave up their rights freely at the time. Furthermore, the result of this illegal use of power was that players ended up telling ASADA the truth (I hope). Isnt that what we want, the truth? How is that unreasonable?
 

Mercurial89

Norm Smith Medallist
Joined
Apr 20, 2011
Posts
9,927
Likes
12,236
Location
Melbourne
AFL Club
Essendon
I think everyone understands the AFL should not have used its powers over players in their interviews. But they also can see that the players had legal representation at the time, and together they agreed to the process knowing these powers were being used. To me they therefore gave up their rights freely at the time. Furthermore, the result of this illegal use of power was that players ended up telling ASADA the truth (I hope). Isnt that what we want, the truth? How is that unreasonable?
Having legal representaion present for a process shouldnt be taken as an agreeance to the process.

In regards to the bolded i view it as the same situation as when people discuss privacy/security/terrorism. There is often an arguement that the means of obtaining the information are unethical, even if its for a "greater good" like stopping an attack. Does that make torture, incareration to the degrees that we see acceptable? Whos to say but its a similar arguement, do the ends justify the means? In this case courts and public opinion say yes.
Personally i dont think ASADA broke the law, they used a loophole, good for them. It may not be illegal, but that doesnt make it ok. It all depends on how you view things. I try to take the stance of, if this were happening to me would i want a loophole used to get around obstacles that were in the investigators way. Id probably say no, but id also like to think id tell the truth no matter what the process. Which i think is the point, the players testimony may not have changed at all if the investigation was ran a different way, they were not given that chance though so we cant know.



* please dont take this out of context me comparing this to terrosism, that is not my intention. It is however a good example of peoples rights being worked around in pursuit of a greater goal
 

mxett

Brownlow Medallist
Joined
Jul 1, 2007
Posts
23,135
Likes
8,862
Location
Melbourne
AFL Club
Essendon
Having legal representaion present for a process shouldnt be taken as an agreeance to the process.

In regards to the bolded i view it as the same situation as when people discuss privacy/security/terrorism. There is often an arguement that the means of obtaining the information are unethical, even if its for a "greater good" like stopping an attack. Does that make torture, incareration to the degrees that we see acceptable? Whos to say but its a similar arguement, do the ends justify the means? In this case courts and public opinion say yes.
Personally i dont think ASADA broke the law, they used a loophole, good for them. It may not be illegal, but that doesnt make it ok. It all depends on how you view things. I try to take the stance of, if this were happening to me would i want a loophole used to get around obstacles that were in the investigators way. Id probably say no, but id also like to think id tell the truth no matter what the process. Which i think is the point, the players testimony may not have changed at all if the investigation was ran a different way, they were not given that chance though so we cant know.



* please dont take this out of context me comparing this to terrosism, that is not my intention. It is however a good example of peoples rights being worked around in pursuit of a greater goal
I agree the process wasnt appropriate, but that shouldnt mean the information collected isnt appropriate. If ASADA did start again, and they players told the truth like they should, why should their testimonies be any different?
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

Mercurial89

Norm Smith Medallist
Joined
Apr 20, 2011
Posts
9,927
Likes
12,236
Location
Melbourne
AFL Club
Essendon
I agree the process wasnt appropriate, but that shouldnt mean the information collected isnt appropriate. If ASADA did start again, and they players told the truth like they should, why should their testimonies be any different?
Im not saying it isnt, nor am i saying it would be any different.

What i am saying is i totally understand why Hird would want this at least acknowledged as inappropriate. Thats as far as im willing to go without knowing more details. I dont want it all thrown out, i just want proper process followed, with ethical behaviour from all parties. Then let the chips fall where they may.

Trust me if the players or the club deliberately set out to cheat, or have knowingly lied about cheating i want them and the club burned to cinders, i wil wait on that point to see what comes out, i am currently of the belief that we are innocent (im trusting hte club on this) however i am waiting to see what happens, i havnt renewed my membership, i havnt donated to the players this year as i just dont know what has happened or what is going to happen.

This isnt me argueing that we should get off or that we are guilty and should suffer. I just have an issue with the process itself.
 

Pevers-Legend

Norm Smith Medallist
Joined
Oct 28, 2002
Posts
7,358
Likes
1,885
Location
Like Anyone Cares
AFL Club
Essendon
I think everyone understands the AFL should not have used its powers over players in their interviews. But they also can see that the players had legal representation at the time, and together they agreed to the process knowing these powers were being used. To me they therefore gave up their rights freely at the time. Furthermore, the result of this illegal use of power was that players ended up telling ASADA the truth (I hope). Isnt that what we want, the truth? How is that unreasonable?
So the AFL's message of do what we say or face severe sanctions fits ok with you then?

Do you work for the AFL? You seem to really try and push the legality of their case and the hopelessness of the situation for the players.
 

efcboy

Brownlow Medallist
Joined
Oct 2, 2007
Posts
10,178
Likes
7,767
Location
Essendon
AFL Club
Essendon
Other Teams
Arsenal
I think everyone understands the AFL should not have used its powers over players in their interviews. But they also can see that the players had legal representation at the time, and together they agreed to the process knowing these powers were being used. To me they therefore gave up their rights freely at the time. Furthermore, the result of this illegal use of power was that players ended up telling ASADA the truth (I hope). Isnt that what we want, the truth? How is that unreasonable?
It's the bending of the truth and testimony omissions that is unreasonable
 

DonsRule

I can't recall
Joined
Sep 9, 2004
Posts
14,900
Likes
15,613
Location
Victoria
AFL Club
Essendon
Other Teams
I can't recall
If there was one thing I'd be certain of, it's that mxett doesn't work for the AFL.
Did work for the AFL than?

Was Vlad's PA, but left when Vlad left?


:p




But yeah, no way would I say Mxett was pro AFL in all this, has largely stood up for the club and copped a lot for it on the HTB.
 

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
I agree the process wasnt appropriate, but that shouldnt mean the information collected isnt appropriate. If ASADA did start again, and they players told the truth like they should, why should their testimonies be any different?
For me, the key question is whether the way the information was collected impacts on its trustworthiness.

In other words, as long as the trustworthiness / integrity / believability of the information collected isn't compromised by how it was collected, I don't have a problem with it being used. If laws were broken as part of the collection process, then appropriate punishments / discipline should also be handed out.

So if you put a suspect in a cell and beat them to extract a confession, this seriously compromises the trustworthiness of the confession - the beating makes the confession more likely to be fake and / or the suspect telling the police just what they want to hear - which should render it legally unusable / inadmissible.

On the other hand, if you tap a phone line, but don't quite complete the paperwork 100% correctly, there may be no impact to the trustworthiness of the information collected, but there may separately be administrative sanctions against the people involved for not complying with the required process.

The issues of whether ASADA 'fairly' use the information collected, and whether their role is to properly investigate or simply to try to maximise the chances of getting a conviction, are separate issuesm that would still be relevant even if the information were collected without coercion.
 

efcboy

Brownlow Medallist
Joined
Oct 2, 2007
Posts
10,178
Likes
7,767
Location
Essendon
AFL Club
Essendon
Other Teams
Arsenal
My opinion is thus:

The ASADA Act was setup to eliminate the possibility of a controlling sporting body dictating the outcome of an investigation.

In this instance the AFL have done exactly that - the intention was (all along) to oust support staff and spare the players. This was their best result to maximise attendances and profits. This designed path was set before innocence or guilt were established. This is where it was wrong from either side of the fence. An anti-Essendon or normal fan would want justice served and if players were guilty then face normal penalties. An Essendon fan or neutral would want exoneration if found not guilty. The AFL plan would not deliver either outcome under its original design.

ASADA under their Act should have not have allowed the AFL in to act as a co-investigator and co-prosecutor. I have no issue of sharing of information but the line was crossed beyond this point.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom