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

Status
Not open for further replies.

60sbomber

Club Legend
Joined
Jul 4, 2011
Posts
1,732
Likes
1,868
Location
Frankston
AFL Club
Essendon
Considering Ben McDevitt two weeks into the job said "I would like to find out about the experiment that Ziggy Switkowski was talking about," considering there are a bunch of loons right now on twitter sending links to WADA and ASADA of the Australian article where Hird says players lied, considering Dank's interview with McKenzie was tabled as hard evidence and considering that the "thing in the newspaper" was a series of published text messages as opposed to hearsay, well yes.
Particularly after Ben McDevitt has puffed his chest out about protecting sport from cheats. If Dank works for another club and then the word Thymomodulin comes up in his discussion ... it's less that I WANT it investigated and more I'd like an explanation as to why it isn't
Correct.
There are only 2 possibilities here.
Either
1. CAS is wrong when it says that Dank would never use Thymomodulin on footballers, and every time he says "thymosin" it means "TB4", in which case a basic premise in its judgement finding the 34 guilty is wrong.
or
2. Melbourne players used TB4, and there is a damn site more hard evidence, in the form of texts from Dank to the MFC doctor, to prove this, than there was in the case of the 34.
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

Joined
Sep 23, 2014
Posts
4
Likes
13
Location
YYC
AFL Club
Essendon
Other Teams
Calgary Flames
Another senator (Bracks?) questions McDevitt.

Asks McDevitt to confirm that the club advised all players the substance was legal. Could not deny this.

Asks McDevitt to confirm that not all 34 players received the supplement. Astonishingly McDevitt confirms that this was his understanding.
Question that I would like to know the answer to here is - if McDevitt confirms his understanding the not all 34 players received the supplement as above - on what basis did he issue SCN's to those he understands did not receive the supplement. Surely those who he understands did not receive the supplement should have their SCN's withdrawn.

Of course if you understand but can't identify those who did not receive the supplement then I guess just give them all SCN's and hope they stick?

I guess CAS confirmed this is a good tactic.
 

efcboy

Brownlow Medallist
Joined
Oct 2, 2007
Posts
10,178
Likes
7,767
Location
Essendon
AFL Club
Essendon
Other Teams
Arsenal
Question that I would like to know the answer to here is - if McDevitt confirms his understanding the not all 34 players received the supplement as above - on what basis did he issue SCN's to those he understands did not receive the supplement. Surely those who he understands did not receive the supplement should have their SCN's withdrawn.

Of course if you understand but can't identify those who did not receive the supplement then I guess just give them all SCN's and hope they stick?

I guess CAS confirmed this is a good tactic.
Yeah they couldn't be sure which of the 34 received banned substances but believed some of them did so banned all of them...a more fitting penalty would have been a team penalty...say being ineligible for the 2013 season (finals)....
 

Lethal

Premiership Player
Joined
Sep 28, 2000
Posts
4,491
Likes
1,746
AFL Club
Essendon
Other Teams
Pittsburgh Penguins

Bombermania

Norm Smith Medallist
Joined
Dec 18, 2007
Posts
8,124
Likes
4,013
Location
Counting premiership cups
AFL Club
Essendon
Other Teams
Non that play Essendon

yaco55

Hall of Famer
Joined
Jul 25, 2007
Posts
35,446
Likes
11,866
Location
hong kong
AFL Club
Essendon

(Log in to remove this ad.)

scythe

Club Legend
Joined
Apr 11, 2011
Posts
1,422
Likes
967
Location
Melbourne
AFL Club
Essendon
Other Teams
Auburn Tigers, Newcastle United
If you can find a guilty verdict from no evidence, confessions, positive tests or whistleblowers, then I'm not the idiot.

Understand this and understand it well: I don't buy the notion that I have to believe the players are guilty just because some corrupt dog in a courtroom said it.

I especially don't give an atom-sized shit what anyone infers about my intelligence from my support of EFC and the 34. We are Essendon, **** the rest. Why should any of us dilute our passion for the club, or shy away from saying what needs to be said, just to be good little obedient puppies for the media?
 
Joined
Jul 9, 2012
Posts
811
Likes
627
AFL Club
Essendon
Other Teams
Vic Bushrangers, Melbourne Stars
Understand this and understand it well: I don't buy the notion that I have to believe the players are guilty just because some corrupt dog in a courtroom said it.
Spot on. 3 people think they are guilty on a very low standard of proof. Why do I just have to buy it? Why can't I have my own view on it, just like the guilty call is their view?
 

DERO

NOBODY PUTS BABY IN THE CORNER
Joined
Jan 22, 2013
Posts
12,245
Likes
16,207
Location
The Ivory Tower
AFL Club
Essendon
Other Teams
Mitcham FC
If you can find a guilty verdict from no evidence, confessions, positive tests or whistleblowers, then I'm not the idiot.

Understand this and understand it well: I don't buy the notion that I have to believe the players are guilty just because some corrupt dog in a courtroom said it.

I especially don't give an atom-sized shit what anyone infers about my intelligence from my support of EFC and the 34. We are Essendon, **** the rest. Why should any of us dilute our passion for the club, or shy away from saying what needs to be said, just to be good little obedient puppies for the media?
Scythe. No one could ever question your passion pal and I certainly respect it, make no mistake.

It is also extremely unfortunate that the players put their faith in others that they should have been able to trust and have copped a ban as a result as manifestly unfair as it is.

I also get that it is easier for some to blame others, prejudices and perceived corruption rather than accepting the truth. Unfortunately those on the outside think we look silly because of this and I am inclined to agree. Taking a "not guilty" banner to a march in support of our banned players is a stupid idea as they are not innocent.

Xavier Campbel spoke quite eloquently earlier this week on SEN when drilled by David Colbert and made comments to this effect: The march is not about refusing to accept what the club has done, it is about the future and showing support for our players. Taking a "not guilty" banner to this march gives your Colberts, Wilsons, Sam Lane QC's etc the ammunition they need to continually undermine the club's best efforts to get back on track. I suggest you replace your "Not guilty" banner with a "TIPPA" banner.
 

yaco55

Hall of Famer
Joined
Jul 25, 2007
Posts
35,446
Likes
11,866
Location
hong kong
AFL Club
Essendon
That's how I understood it as well, which I am OK with. Hopefully his sons team doesn't play too many games at the TVSC.
I'll give you an example of what a crock the rule is re ' players attending games ' - Go back over 20 years when we played at Windy Hill - Players would be unable to attend home games under the WADA guidelines - Actually how would this apply to Geelong in 2016 - Seeing they train where they play.
 
Joined
Apr 6, 2005
Posts
58,348
Likes
47,448
Location
Melbourne
AFL Club
Essendon
Other Teams
LFC, Demons, Melb City, Bears
Don't underestimate the vindictiveness of McDevitt - After Dank appeared at a Sportsmen's night at Wallis' EDFL club suddenly ASADA testers turned up at a game.
If he's outside the fence he's not contravening the rules of his ban and they can't do anything.
 

DERO

NOBODY PUTS BABY IN THE CORNER
Joined
Jan 22, 2013
Posts
12,245
Likes
16,207
Location
The Ivory Tower
AFL Club
Essendon
Other Teams
Mitcham FC
Probably better you don't misrepresent the StandbyHird campaign as well. It originated in response to the media calling for Hird's head, months before the ASADA investigation had concluded (or had even really begun actually). Hird, the players and the club were being smashed from pillar to post on the basis of rumour and innuendo. I can guarantee that many who put up money, including the business who offered to finance the whole campaign would not do so again in light of what has transpired since.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom