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

Status
Not open for further replies.
Joined
Jan 7, 2005
Posts
59,857
Likes
61,063
Location
Down the rabbit hole
AFL Club
Essendon
Other Teams
Fatebringer
ASADA still out there taking down the big players...

Holmes unsuccessful in bid to reduce anti-doping ban

DANIEL Holmes will have to sit out the rest of the Hutchinson Builders TRL Premiership season after his bid to appeal a two-year anti-doping sanction was unsuccessful.

Holmes submitted a urine sample to an Australian Sports Anti-Doping Authority official on June 1, 2013 after playing a game for Central Division at the state championship at the Sunshine Coast.

The sample contained traces of salbutamol over the accepted threshold and ASADA notified Holmes such over the phone.

Salbutamol was a substance that appeared in asthma medication, with Holmes having taken 20 doses of Ventolin in the previous 24 hours for his diagnosed respiratory issues and acute flu-like symptoms.

A B-sample was later tested and it was also positive for the presence of salbutamol over the allowed threshold, which was 16 puffs of a 100mg Ventolin inhaler per day according to the ASADA website.

.....


Richard Ings ‏@ringsau 3h3 hours ago
ASADA imposes a 2 year ban for a salbutamol puffer reading above the threshold. What penalty is the fair one?
yes but:



His appeal was heard by an independent tribunal on Wednesday night and was unsuccessful meaning Holmes was banned from participating in sport until February 6 next year.




It's a bit hard to pass judgement without knowing the facts. For some reason an independent tribunal ruled against him. Personally thought I agree that anti-doping seems to throw up some horribly unfair outcomes, but I'm just not always prepared to believe the word of the athlete on face value
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

Despair

Club Legend
Day Off
Joined
Jul 5, 2013
Posts
2,766
Likes
7,107
Location
Königsbrunn, Germany
AFL Club
Essendon
yes but:



His appeal was heard by an independent tribunal on Wednesday night and was unsuccessful meaning Holmes was banned from participating in sport until February 6 next year.




It's a bit hard to pass judgement without knowing the facts. For some reason an independent tribunal ruled against him. Personally thought I agree that anti-doping seems to throw up some horribly unfair outcomes, but I'm just not always prepared to believe the word of the athlete on face value
Agreed with Lance here. Ventolin is a bronchodilator that can have similar affects to clenbuterol when abused. I'm not saying Holmes is guilty, but just because ventolin primary serves as a medicine, does not mean it cannot be abused.
 

rumply

Brownlow Medallist
Joined
Apr 11, 2002
Posts
16,779
Likes
16,401
Location
Under Her Eye
AFL Club
Essendon
Other Teams
Iggles, 76ers
yes but:



His appeal was heard by an independent tribunal on Wednesday night and was unsuccessful meaning Holmes was banned from participating in sport until February 6 next year.




It's a bit hard to pass judgement without knowing the facts. For some reason an independent tribunal ruled against him. Personally thought I agree that anti-doping seems to throw up some horribly unfair outcomes, but I'm just not always prepared to believe the word of the athlete on face value

Doubtful the tribunal had any choice but to confirm the suspension - the real issue as I read it is the 2 years for being 4 puffs over the allowed limit - seems harsh given Ings highlights many examples of warnings given for similar offences.
 

Andronicus

Brownlow Medallist
Joined
Sep 28, 2007
Posts
14,468
Likes
14,652
AFL Club
Essendon
Thats a good point. Surely if they are found guilty they cant be given 2 years? Obviously they have to into account to provisional suspensions but they would have be absolute campaigners not to take into account all the other delays which ASADA had a huge part in.

Something tells me they wont though they will want the maximum time they can get.
If there was any doubt about this it was removed when they lodged the appeal at the eleventh hour.
 

JayDon

Club Legend
Joined
Oct 17, 2013
Posts
1,302
Likes
591
Location
Home
AFL Club
Essendon
I'd be delighted to see Dank called in. Let's hear it all!!!

Might this be the forum he is looking for?

Maybe more than a spreadsheet will be presented? Might expose some 'real' truths?

Call him or decline the appeal WADA! Time will tell a bit I'm thinking? Do they want to know?

Infact, the AFL might want Dank so they can lose WADA!? $$$ All in the timing.
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

scottmclaren

All Australian
Joined
Aug 23, 2013
Posts
655
Likes
757
AFL Club
Essendon
Doubt it - WADA has to produce new evidence - It's still a case of no signed affidavits or testimony from key witnesses - ASADA still couldn't prove that the compounded substance was TB4. Nothing has changed.
They also could never prove which players were administered the compounded substance if in fact it could be proven to be delivered to EFC.
 

Run and carry

All Australian
Joined
Jun 8, 2014
Posts
694
Likes
564
AFL Club
Essendon
A bit has been made since the appeal that the key difference between the WADA case and the ASADA case is that WADA may be able to call Dank, Alavi, and Chartres to testify.

With no understanding of the investigation and CAS can Dank sit in the dock and refuse to talk about specifics or go the "I can't recall" number? Obviously a forgetful witness would not be beneficial. I realise he may have to relinquish records, documents etc but I'm just interested as to how much he would be required to disclose verbally and would there be any consequences if he is not forthcoming.
 

yaco55

Hall of Famer
Joined
Jul 25, 2007
Posts
35,446
Likes
11,868
Location
hong kong
AFL Club
Essendon
A bit has been made since the appeal that the key difference between the WADA case and the ASADA case is that WADA may be able to call Dank, Alavi, and Chartres to testify.

With no understanding of the investigation and CAS can Dank sit in the dock and refuse to talk about specifics or go the "I can't recall" number? Obviously a forgetful witness would not be beneficial. I realise he may have to relinquish records, documents etc but I'm just interested as to how much he would be required to disclose verbally and would there be any consequences if he is not forthcoming.
Yes a hundred times.
 

Dan Cooper

Victory Salute
Joined
Sep 26, 2013
Posts
8,071
Likes
4,801
Location
Red Corner
AFL Club
Essendon
Other Teams
Boxing
Western Bulldogs Chairman Peter Gordon is appalled WADA is appealing the case of the Essendon 34

Western Bulldogs president Peter Gordon says he is “appalled” by the World Anti-Doping Agency move to appeal the case of the “Essendon 34”.

Lawyer Gordon acted for 2 of the players now at the Bulldogs in ASADA’s failed AFL Anti-Doping Tribunal prosecution.

Gordon was critical of ASADA’s decision to spurn its opportunity to appeal the tribunal finding, a move that opened the door for WADA to attempt what he described as a “re-prosecution” of the players.

“Any lawyer who values basic common law principles and notions of justice will be as appalled as I am that the ASADA/WADA show continues in this way,” Gordon said.

“(There is an) abolition of the right to silence, reversal of the onus of proof, hearings in secret, abolition of the rule against double jeopardy.

“It’s really disappointing and I think it is a misnomer to call this an appeal — it is not an appeal, they (ASADA) had a right to appeal and they chose not to exercise it.

“So instead, this is a re-prosecution — we don’t make people charged with serious criminal offences go through that let alone these guys.”

http://www.heraldsun.com.au/sport/a...-the-essendon-34/story-fni5fazt-1227356830938
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom