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.)

rumply

Brownlow Medallist
Joined
Apr 11, 2002
Posts
16,776
Likes
16,394
Location
Under Her Eye
AFL Club
Essendon
Other Teams
Iggles, 76ers
This is rubbish - taking an illegal drug is not a reasonable action to use as an excuse. The burden of responsibility is on the athlete to ensure they do not consume banned substances. By taking illegal drugs such as cocaine where the manufacturer and quality/components of drug is unknown the player has exposed him or herself to a matter of potentially banned substances and suffers the consequences of this action without discount. The intent here is meaningless as the athlete chose a course of action which a normal person should not choose which put them at risk of receiving banned substances.

If the athlete did encounter a banned substance through normal everyday living (ie contaminated meat if evidence proved this) then this would be relevant. However cocaine abuse is not considered a normal everyday activity given it is illegal for the general community.

Maybe, but wtf do WADA care about cocaine use out of competition? It's an illegal practice but IF that is what has happened, they clearly have a position to argue they did not deliberately set-out to break anti doping code(s). It would be their own dumb fault but 2 years for that? Just No.
 

yaco55

Hall of Famer
Joined
Jul 25, 2007
Posts
35,446
Likes
11,866
Location
hong kong
AFL Club
Essendon
Abbott is his own man. A huge worry normally, but may pay off this time.

Libs are in public perception is no.1 mode. It may well peter out, but here's hoping Jones maintains the rage.
Senate Enquiries are set up when one party can pummel the other party - Lib's won't agree to a Senate enquiry, unless they are squeaky clean.
 
Last edited:

yaco55

Hall of Famer
Joined
Jul 25, 2007
Posts
35,446
Likes
11,866
Location
hong kong
AFL Club
Essendon
Dank had no representation, charges were brought and not defended. AFL made a submission on what should occur to this person so the tribunal know what punishment is sought.
Its a bit messy that ASADA are left hanging in their appeal window without having all the information they require. Im not defending ASADA or saying that they should appeal just that if the system were to work properly this should have been done, so they had all info in front of them.

Its not a great look and lends credence to conspiracy theories on the validity of the process.
I can understand where the angst is coming from is all im trying to say.
Dank Case and the Essendon case are separate events - Dank case also included substances provided to a Carlton coach, substances provided to a GC player, substances provided to essendon support staff and substances provided to baseball players. Dank could be convicted of any of these charges which have nothing to do with Essendon players.

There is no valid conspiracy theory.
 

Mercurial89

Norm Smith Medallist
Joined
Apr 20, 2011
Posts
9,929
Likes
12,239
Location
Melbourne
AFL Club
Essendon
Dank Case and the Essendon case are separate events - Dank case also included substances provided to a Carlton coach, substances provided to a GC player, substances provided to essendon support staff and substances provided to baseball players. Dank could be convicted of any of these charges which have nothing to do with Essendon players.

There is no valid conspiracy theory.
Im not arguing what he can be convicted on, Im not saying he shouldnt be.

I am commenting that for all their talk of an absolute slam dunk case with various and numerous charges brought against him, we still havnt received any indication on when a judgement will be found.
ASADA's appeal time is fast running out and from the outside looking in the idea that a judgement isnt being handed down deliberately until after this expires is not the most far out idea that people have had.
 

Mercurial89

Norm Smith Medallist
Joined
Apr 20, 2011
Posts
9,929
Likes
12,239
Location
Melbourne
AFL Club
Essendon
I'm not sure on what planet anyone would believe that a 4 year ban is appropriate regardless of the circumstances of the violation.
Im assuming its to take into account Olympics? Ensure that someone that has deliberately cheated cannot compete in one? If it was two years they could cheat in one games, and be back in time for the next?
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

rumply

Brownlow Medallist
Joined
Apr 11, 2002
Posts
16,776
Likes
16,394
Location
Under Her Eye
AFL Club
Essendon
Other Teams
Iggles, 76ers
I'm not sure on what planet anyone would believe that a 4 year ban is appropriate regardless of the circumstances of the violation.

Other than repeat offenders/Lance Armstrong types, yes 4 years is just sounds nuts. But didn't athletes themselves push for that? At least that was the line I recall being sold.
 

JayDon

Club Legend
Joined
Oct 17, 2013
Posts
1,302
Likes
591
Location
Home
AFL Club
Essendon
They'll find Dank guilty of having other banned substances at Essendon (Hex and another wasn't it?) - (won't be surprised if they completely ignore his involvement with other AFL clubs).

A not guilty verdict would be disastrous for the AFL - would open them to significant litigation, though either way, Dank is going to sue. He is posturing himself for a fat, fat payout from the AFL bigwigs. All you have to do is subpoena the people that matter - Lukin, Clothier, Harcourt.

I wish we called the AFL's bluff in 2013 and actually taken them to the Supreme Court just as Hird wanted to and Dr Reid threatened to do.
That's right on the mark.
 

Mr Mojo Risin

Norm Smith Medallist
Joined
Jul 15, 2008
Posts
7,369
Likes
9,438
AFL Club
Essendon
Other Teams
Celtics, Colts, Renegades, Kings
Dank had no representation, charges were brought and not defended. AFL made a submission on what should occur to this person so the tribunal know what punishment is sought.
Its a bit messy that ASADA are left hanging in their appeal window without having all the information they require. Im not defending ASADA or saying that they should appeal just that if the system were to work properly this should have been done, so they had all info in front of them.

Its not a great look and lends credence to conspiracy theories on the validity of the process.
I can understand where the angst is coming from is all im trying to say.
We don't know what was presented regarding Dank other than a few bits and pieces about GCS, Carlton and baseball. There could quite likely be more. There is also the possibility that Dank's lack of representation has muddied the waters rather than made them clearer. Additionally we don't know if it was requested of the Tribunal to consider the case against the players first due to the upcoming season and Dank later. McDefamation's comments suggest otherwise but I can't say I trust much out of his mouth. My point is that there is far too much we don't know to easily draw the conclusion about intention to deliberately wait until appeal period is over.

It's a red herring anyway as ASADA should be appealing based on the player case.
 

efcboy

Brownlow Medallist
Joined
Oct 2, 2007
Posts
10,178
Likes
7,767
Location
Essendon
AFL Club
Essendon
Other Teams
Arsenal
Maybe, but wtf do WADA care about cocaine use out of competition? It's an illegal practice but IF that is what has happened, they clearly have a position to argue they did not deliberately set-out to break anti doping code(s). It would be their own dumb fault but 2 years for that? Just No.
2 years for stupidly taking illegal drugs. Hell yes. Other footballers have copped the same penalty for consuming legal energy drinks...
 

efcboy

Brownlow Medallist
Joined
Oct 2, 2007
Posts
10,178
Likes
7,767
Location
Essendon
AFL Club
Essendon
Other Teams
Arsenal
Dank Case and the Essendon case are separate events - Dank case also included substances provided to a Carlton coach, substances provided to a GC player, substances provided to essendon support staff and substances provided to baseball players. Dank could be convicted of any of these charges which have nothing to do with Essendon players.

There is no valid conspiracy theory.
Not sure how relevant the baseball players are to the afl tribunal! Agree with the rest and you forgot to include Melbourne FC - remember Dr Dan Bates stepped down...
 

efcboy

Brownlow Medallist
Joined
Oct 2, 2007
Posts
10,178
Likes
7,767
Location
Essendon
AFL Club
Essendon
Other Teams
Arsenal
I'm not sure on what planet anyone would believe that a 4 year ban is appropriate regardless of the circumstances of the violation.
IOC wanted this so if an athlete offended at an Olympics they would still be banned when the next Olympics were held.

Edited - just realised mercurial offered the same
 

rumply

Brownlow Medallist
Joined
Apr 11, 2002
Posts
16,776
Likes
16,394
Location
Under Her Eye
AFL Club
Essendon
Other Teams
Iggles, 76ers
2 years for stupidly taking illegal drugs. Hell yes. Other footballers have copped the same penalty for consuming legal energy drinks...

& you think 2 years for mistakenly consuming a legal energy drink is acceptable?

2 years for snorting tainted drugs:drunk:, how about a mates tainted home brew supply, 2 years for that also? it's all nuts as it stands.
 

Kaiser Powser

Norm Smith Medallist
Joined
Feb 2, 2007
Posts
6,079
Likes
3,087
Location
Melbourne
AFL Club
Essendon
It is madness that players are having their careers potentially ruined for energy drinks and taking coke in the off-season.
I would have thought this whole schemozzle would have shown up how poorly the ASADA codes fits AFL and the like. The AFL should just go back to managing this themselves. These two could be given an 11 match ban, based on the accidental nature of the offense and we move on. It's madness that a body and act set up for Olympic Athletes operating to events that only occur 4 years apart is applied to a seasonal team sport.
 

Dan Cooper

Victory Salute
Joined
Sep 26, 2013
Posts
8,071
Likes
4,801
Location
Red Corner
AFL Club
Essendon
Other Teams
Boxing
It is madness that players are having their careers potentially ruined for energy drinks and taking coke in the off-season.
I would have thought this whole schemozzle would have shown up how poorly the ASADA codes fits AFL and the like. The AFL should just go back to managing this themselves. These two could be given an 11 match ban, based on the accidental nature of the offense and we move on. It's madness that a body and act set up for Olympic Athletes operating to events that only occur 4 years apart is applied to a seasonal team sport.
How can you be sure it was accidental use? I have no idea personally, but I would have thought that's a big assumption?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom