******* hell. The flimsy ******* crap they are basing their judgements on is shocking. And they are potentially ruining careers and lives in the process.
3 blokes are willing to ruin careers and lives based on nothing. Now that the reasoning behind their decision is known this is nothing but corruption any ******* way you slice it.
So if we were to lose Watson and Stanton to retirement and Hooker, Colyer and three or four others with no draft pick compensation we will be uncompetitive for the next 5 years won't we? We will have plenty of room in our cap for free agents ourselves but it is not as though anybody would choose to play for us unless they weren't particularly wanted by another and we couldn't afford to pay the maximum amount at any rate. I doubt we will be able to pay for the training facilities either - expect them to be sold.
Try as I might - and I am trying very hard - I just don't see how the club gets past this without the AFL saying "enough is enough" and actually helping us rather than washing their hands as they witness our complete destruction.
It is all very well to blame the club but whatever they have done in the past is irrelevant to what decisions should be made today. EFC is essentially powerless in all this. Mere passengers. If the AFL decide they want us to be in the comp then they have to actually make some tough decisions. If they would prefer a slow bleed with uncompetitive games for the next five years and diminishing crowds then they should keep on doing what they are doing.
Essendon supporters would probably be around 10-15 per cent of all supporters. Can the AFL live without them? Is losing practically all of them worth it just so some columnists refrain from writing some sanctimonious horse excrement (about this issue at least, they will still do so about some other issue of course)?
absolutely shocking treatment! They are basically accusing McVeigh of lying, and ruining his career and reputation, based on his tan.....in 2012! Unbelievable!!
Some are calling for the club to now be charged with drug violation. lance uppercut's argument that it has already happened doesn't quite cut it with such people. And I had forgotten the more than 2 player thing when I got involved in a discussion.
But yes from the AFL angle it appears no more charges will be coming.
Jake Niall on the radio actually said that the AFL could go down that path. Whether he is right or not, not sure but suppose it makes sense. Withdraw from WADA is withdrawing from being prosecuted by WADA. Not going to happen so doesn't matter much.
If nothing else, it would take at least a year to get an individual drug code drawn up and agreed on by the AFL and AFLPA which the government also agrees to for the purposes of funding
So if we were to lose Watson and Stanton to retirement and Hooker, Colyer and three or four others with no draft pick compensation we will be uncompetitive for the next 5 years won't we? We will have plenty of room in our cap for free agents ourselves but it is not as though anybody would choose to play for us unless they weren't particularly wanted by another and we couldn't afford to pay the maximum amount at any rate. I doubt we will be able to pay for the training facilities either - expect them to be sold.
Try as I might - and I am trying very hard - I just don't see how the club gets past this without the AFL saying "enough is enough" and actually helping us rather than washing their hands as they witness our complete destruction.
It is all very well to blame the club but whatever they have done in the past is irrelevant to what decisions should be made today. EFC is essentially powerless in all this. Mere passengers. If the AFL decide they want us to be in the comp then they have to actually make some tough decisions. If they would prefer a slow bleed with uncompetitive games for the next five years and diminishing crowds then they should keep on doing what they are doing.
Essendon supporters would probably be around 10-15 per cent of all supporters. Can the AFL live without them? Is losing practically all of them worth it just so some columnists refrain from writing some sanctimonious horse excrement (about this issue at least, they will still do so about some other issue of course)?
It will be what it is. We may lose none, we may lose 6 who knows. They may all stay.
We could be like Carlton have been and at the bottom for a while but if we do lose players then it will be important not to go down the Carlton's previous direction and try and fill too many gaps. We had a good draft this year so it would count as year 1 of the rebuild. More early picks at the end of this year and the next.
Will be a huge kick in the pants if they all left and would set us back 5 or 6 years but if they are building with young blokes like the Dogs have it can be an exciting 6 years watching it come together.
No matter what happens at the end of 2016 the only way for us now is forward. The pain is the goal may be pushed back a number of years.
As far as the home at Tulla goes, it will not be sold. May take longer to pay off but will not be sold and like Carlton the AFL will give us help in the future if we need it.
back to the case for any legal eagles - why the hell did our lawyers agree to 'strands in a cable' and not stick to links in a chain? This seems to be the crux of our problem/loss?
It seems we tried to argue but it was too late - we had already agreed to this?
That was one of the dodgy bits about it for me too:
My reading: it basically said he tried to get it from china which we have evidence of.. but we're not sure if its for the club, or either of his 2 side businesses, and even though there is no evidence to say it got to Australia, we just assume he got it from somewhere else - to which there is no evidence of that either
How I read it, this is the problem with strands in a cable. You dont need to prove the whole case - they were satisfied that he wanted to us it (for whatever reason), you can just ignore the fact you cant even prove that he had it, or where he got it from or exactly what happened to it.
I got my 20 year membership badge in the mail today! Couldn't be better timing. Over the years I've probably paid for 1 day in court for the club's lawyer.
yeah my package arrived the day of the verdict! I couldn't even go to the post office to pick it up I was so gutted with football. Went and got it last night and had the 20 badge too! Damn time flies doesn't it! Yeah I would be in the tank for more than a day of lawyers fees over the years.
back to the case for any legal eagles - why the hell did our lawyers agree to 'strands in a cable' and not stick to links in a chain? This seems to be the crux of our problem/loss?
It seems we tried to argue but it was too late - we had already agreed to this?
Potentially (and i doubt we'll ever know) because like a lot of us, they ssaw the strands and thought 'so what?'. Even with the strands there seems to be a logic leap that i doubt too many lawyers would have seen coming. Maybe they miscalculated just how low the comfortable satisfaction had to be, but this decision does seem to have caught out quite a few.
On the $50m, id be interested to know how that number has been arrived at. I have no issue with all players wanting something from the club, especially for lost earnings this year, but a lot of past players seem to have been able to find employment with this hanging over their heads so how much have they lost in terms of future earnings?
Too much doom and gloom stuff. yes it is a big pineapple in the you know where but as supporters we need to look forward. Even if players leave and we are starting on a new rebuild we already have a huge block in place through this years draft. Despite all the worse case situations being reported they will not all turn out that way. We will get sued but it will be through our insurance. We have a good coaching panel in place. We have some good young players who would still be a part of our next finals challenge if it is going to be in 4 or so seasons.
We should not be worried about how it makes us feel so much. For us life goes on and our team can rebuild. The players are the only ones who should feel continued anger. They are the ones suffering.
In the end footy will go on, Essendon will go on. Does not matter how many doom and gloom stories the media write most will end up being crap.
If there are options for it to be expedited then all your wasting is a bit of coin so you might as well go for it. If I was a player I'd be doing everything possible.
If there are options for it to be expedited then all your wasting is a bit of coin so you might as well go for it. If I was a player I'd be doing everything possible.
German speed skater rubbed out by WADA and then CAS on the basis her blood profile had changed and she was still as good in her late 30's as she was 10 years earlier. No positive tests. It was for so called doping. German civil court over turned the decision and was critical of the CAS set up.
Potentially (and i doubt we'll ever know) because like a lot of us, they ssaw the strands and thought 'so what?'. Even with the strands there seems to be a logic leap that i doubt too many lawyers would have seen coming. Maybe they miscalculated just how low the comfortable satisfaction had to be, but this decision does seem to have caught out quite a few.
On the $50m, id be interested to know how that number has been arrived at. I have no issue with all players wanting something from the club, especially for lost earnings this year, but a lot of past players seem to have been able to find employment with this hanging over their heads so how much have they lost in terms of future earnings?
Probably - but the difference here so huge, it is basically the whole case. There was no evidence even close to get us under Links in a Chain - how we agreed to this is absolutely amazing and sounds like tanking!
With Strands - basically you dont need to prove the whole case and if you can think one area is fishy, the rest falls into place without the evidence behind it.
How I read it, that is the WHOLE case. We agreed to have the burden off proof so low, that we had no argument at all.
On the $50m, I agree. I fail to see how any player has lost $1 as of yet.
Incident at work this morning. A mick malthouse lookalike crows supporter gloating that the club will fold because of this. I tried to set him straight but the pompous knob was having nothing of it.
Probably - but the difference here so huge, it is basically the whole case. There was no evidence even close to get us under Links in a Chain - how we agreed to this is absolutely amazing and sounds like tanking!
With Strands - basically you dont need to prove the whole case and if you can think one area is fishy, the rest falls into place without the evidence behind it.
How I read it, that is the WHOLE case. We agreed to have the burden off proof so low, that we had no argument at all.
On the $50m, I agree. I fail to see how any player has lost $1 as of yet.
It may have been naivety by our guys, or a misunderstanding of how the 'strands' theory would be viewed by the panel, but i can understand why their thinking would have been "ok, they've got these strands, but they are all circumstantial (some very, very circumstantial), none of them show TB4 at the club and none certainly show individual players being given it. They couldn't see how the circumstances would be viewed as 'proof' that it was TB4, so they weren't worried about whether it was links, strands, drops in a bucket or nuts in a chocolate bar.
I'm thinking they viewed it in an 'australian' way where as we probably needed someone who could view it from an international POV and had a better understanding that the panel might view from a different starting place
Incident at work this morning. A mick malthouse lookalike crows supporter gloating that the club will fold because of this. I tried to set him straight but the pompous knob was having nothing of it.