Dank 7.30 report re Essendon and substances

[STFU Donnie]

If the cops are in the driveway I'm sure your Mum would check to see if you had any hooch under your pillow.
That does not make your Mum complicit in weed smoking, especially if she does not find any...

And what would you call it if she found some and flushed it?

 

[Pantsless]

I love how everyone was hanging sh*t on Dank before the 7:30 report.​

​

Since the 7.30 report has aired, all I've been reading is people cherry picking his comments and treating them like gospel and treating him like the messiah to suit there own agenda.​

​

What I don't see from these people, is the acknowledgement that:​

​

1. He said he never injected any players with banned drugs​

2. He's says he's been cleared by the ACC​

​

You can't take some comments and ignore others.​

​

If he's lying about the above, why is the other stuff complete gospel??​

He doesn't suggest he injected the coaches with banned drugs in any locations. Hell, I can buy supplements with HGH on-line. Maybe he sent Hirdy a email with a link to a supplements website. He doesn't say.​

​

Lets focus on what he did say.​

 

[stugots]

What I do think though is that coaching staff taking prohibited substances is ridiculously stupid even if they were technically allowed to.

I tend to agree but we don't know who took what & in what context any substances were taken, so have to wait & see, but as to it breaching any codes, well that looks highly unlikely to me.

 

[Lyyynnnchy]

I love how everyone was hanging sh*t on Dank before the 7:30 report.​

​

Since the 7.30 report has aired, all I've been reading is people cherry picking his comments and treating them like gospel and treating him like the messiah to suit there own agenda.​

​

What I don't see from these people, is the acknowledgement that:​

​

1. He said he never injected any players with banned drugs​

2. He's says he's been cleared by the ACC​

​

You can't take some comments and ignore others.​

​

If he's lying about the above, why is the other stuff complete gospel??​

​

He doesn't suggest he injected the coaches with banned drugs in any locations. Hell, I can buy supplements with HGH on-line. Maybe he sent Hirdy a email with a link to a supplements website. He doesn't say.​

​

Lets focus on what he did say.​

He said he never intravenously injected players with banned drugs. Many more ways to administer performance enhancing drugs. I think he chose his words very carefully

 

[jonbe54]

He said he never intravenously injected players with banned drugs. Many more ways to administer performance enhancing drugs. I think he chose his words very carefully

The whole interview was a travesty and a joke, just about useless regarding fact finding actually.

 

[cymarak]

Thats why WADA doesn't rely solely on positive tests, something like possession of prohibited substances or their presence on Essendon's premise can be enough to lay the charges.

So which players would get banned if prohibited substances were found on Essendon's premises ? Or if a coach had prohibited substances ?

Players have strict liability in terms of what they take / are injected with / etc, but surely they can't be automatically held liable for anything on Essendon premises, or that coaches have.

 

[Lyyynnnchy]

The whole interview was a travesty and a joke, just about useless regarding fact finding actually.

Agreed, looks like there was a bit of discussion on what could and couldnt be asked and what could and couldnt be pushed

 

[jonbe54]

Agreed, looks like there was a bit of discussion on what could and couldnt be asked and what could and couldnt be pushed

Agreed par for the course when an interviewee is lawyered up with lawyer present though.

 

[Ancient Tiger]

There would be peptides out there that are yet to be approved for human consumption and banned by WADA. AOD-9604 would be but one after it was mentioned as being used by sporting teams in the ACC report.

Untested substances

Untested substances

AOD-9604

AOD-9604

Why did the ACC interview Dank?

Have the ACC interviewed other sports scientists to check up on their use of supplements?

I would like to see what hit the cutting room floor after the lawyers watched the two hour interview.

Don't think that sports scientists aren't ahead of the curve and beating the drug testers before they come up with a test for the newer supplements.

Dank dodged the question about how the peptides were administered to the players. As dodgy as the belief that you receive vitamin injections via a vein, not into your muscles.

This is not a correct interpretation of banned substances under WADA!

I have pointed out this in the mega thread. If you examine what WADA prohibits, it often doesn't individually name drugs, it categorizes them.
AOD-9604 is a peptide and analog of a growth hormone releasing substance. It promotes muscle growth as well as fat loss.
It therefore clearly comes under section S2 of the prohibited substance list.

I cannot understand why people cannot see this. Even the reports are incorrect!

 

[Pie eyed]

And what would you call it if she found some and flushed it?

I did not even hint that she found any, only that a normalMum/Footy administration would check first before opeing the door.
You assumed something was found.

 

[Pantsless]

He said he never intravenously injected players with banned drugs. Many more ways to administer performance enhancing drugs. I think he chose his words very carefully

OK, so if he gave it to them as a milk shake, how does he still get cleared by the ACC?

He gives the players banned substances and gets charged by the ACC...which hasn't happened.

Or the whole things bullcrap incl. the bit about the coaches...

 

[STFU Donnie]

I did not even hint that she found any, only that a normalMum/Footy administration would check first before opeing the door.
You assumed something was found.

I did nothing of the sort! I was quoting another poster.

 

[SleazySimon]

Dank also said they were WADA compliant.

ASADA will go through the logs that were kept to see if that was true.

I'm not sure what else anyone can look at seeing that it all happened last year.

Surprised so many are gullible to believe anything this guy says. He admitted coaches were taking drugs outside the WADA guidelines. What does that say from a leadership perspective? It's more than likely that sort of behavior would flow on to the playing group. We don't have proof of anything yet though.

This interview raised more questions than questions answered, especially contradictory bit about James Hird knowing about it.

 

[jonbe54]

OK, so if he gave it to them as a milk shake, how does he still get cleared by the ACC?

He gives the players banned substances and gets charged by the ACC...which hasn't happened.

Or the whole things bullcrap incl. the bit about the coaches...

Dank is obviously full of s**t and couldn't lie straight in bed but how that affects his dealings with Essendon is anyone's guess atm.

 

[PieBeast]

So which players would get banned if prohibited substances were found on Essendon's premises ? Or if a coach had prohibited substances ?

Players have strict liability in terms of what they take / are injected with / etc, but surely they can't be automatically held liable for anything on Essendon premises, or that coaches have.

The ones that signed the waivers and were administered Subcutaneous injections of-site?

In all seriousness I wouldn't have a clue about the nitty gritty of it, all I know is WADA doesn't need categorical proof to lay the charges. And its quite possible this would apply in this case.

 

[stugots]

So which players would get banned if prohibited substances were found on Essendon's premises ? Or if a coach had prohibited substances ?

Players have strict liability in terms of what they take / are injected with / etc, but surely they can't be automatically held liable for anything on Essendon premises, or that coaches have.

exactly

 

[jonbe54]

exactly

WADA are known to be like a bull in a china shop when they get a sniff of anything slightly off colour and are quite capable of making big bruiser weight lifters go 15 shades of white at the mere mention of the name. They are quite capable of laying charges without conclusive evidence and going ahead with a long running investigation, bullying and coercing all involved until they get to the bottom.

I don't say its right or that the Dons are guilty, however if WADA has a lead that they believe MAY lead to a prosecution, I wouldn't want to be the one standing in their way

 

[Pantsless]

Dank is obviously full of s**t and couldn't lie straight in bed but how that affects his dealings with Essendon is anyone's guess atm.

The sad thing is, it's become a "he said-she said" soap opera except Essendon can't defend themselves. Whether Dank is lying or not doesn't really matter.

Either the players are clean or they're not. They were tested last year and came up clean, but weren't tested for stuff like GHRP-6.

It's up to ASADA to get it tested. If they're dirty, then they'll get suspended. Hird/Robson/Evans are gone. Massive fines. We'll probably lose every game for the next 5 seasons.

Everything else is irrelevant.

 

[jonbe54]

The sad thing is, it's become a "he said-she said" soap opera except Essendon can't defend themselves. Whether Dank is lying or not doesn't really matter.

Either the players are clean or they're not. They were tested last year and came up clean, but weren't tested for stuff like GHRP-6.

It's up to ASADA to get it tested. If they're dirty, then they'll get suspended. Hird/Robson/Evans are gone. Massive fines. We'll probably lose every game for the next 5 seasons.

Everything else is irrelevant.

The thing that confuses me is that the substance in discussion is supposedly undetectable after a few hours, therefore its unlikely to be tested positively - unless everyone involved are morons. So do they have something else they believe will fly? Wire taps? Transcripts? Insider info??

They aren't going to say while there is a chance that some may come forward and throw themselves on their tender mercies. Meanwhile bomber supporters and those who have the good of the game at heart are left twiddling their fingers and worrying like hell.

 

[Ancient Tiger]

The sad thing is, it's become a "he said-she said" soap opera except Essendon can't defend themselves. Whether Dank is lying or not doesn't really matter.

Either the players are clean or they're not. They were tested last year and came up clean, but weren't tested for stuff like GHRP-6.

It's up to ASADA to get it tested. If they're dirty, then they'll get suspended. Hird/Robson/Evans are gone. Massive fines. We'll probably lose every game for the next 5 seasons.

Everything else is irrelevant.

What we don't know is how long these peptides hang around in the blood as many are small and are broken down easily. We also do not know if the blood samples were from all players or just one or two. If it was the latter and they just happened to be players that were not taking, then of course the result will be negative. We also do not know the sensitivity or specificity of the blood test.
So you see, unless it is positive, it still may not mean that a negative result exonerates Essendon.

 

[Sunshine Saint]

Illegal drug use forever to be known as danking and those who do it as dankers.

 

[Ned_Flanders]

OK, so if he gave it to them as a milk shake, how does he still get cleared by the ACC?

He gives the players banned substances and gets charged by the ACC...which hasn't happened.

Or the whole things bullcrap incl. the bit about the coaches...

Depends upon which peptides were used. From what others have previously posted, you can group it in three categories:

1) peptides not restricted by WADA at all

2) peptides banned from any form of use by WADA

3) peptides allowed for oral/dermal use, but banned from subcutaneous injection by WADA

This is why knowing the peptides used is important. If they are in the group (3), the method of delivery is very much an issue. Milkshake is fine, injection in the belly will be an issue.

 

[Pantsless]

What we don't know is how long these peptides hang around in the blood as many are small and are broken down easily. We also do not know if the blood samples were from all players or just one or two. If it was the latter and they just happened to be players that were not taking, then of course the result will be negative. We also do not know the sensitivity or specificity of the blood test.
So you see, unless it is positive, it still may not mean that a negative result exonerates Essendon.

But that's just it..ASADA are shaking the tree because their testing procedures are inadequate. Now they've started throwing around terms like "wire taps", "surveillance". You've also linked Dank's non-football business with his employment at Essendon. So therefore, even though ASADA have no evidence against any wrongdoing, you think we're guilty. But the law doesn't care what your personal view is. They're currently being investigated by ASADA. If it turns out there's no evidence to suggest Essendon players were taking illegal substances by not having a positive result or not having any other evidence, then they are exonerated.

If they have audio recordings or emails or photos then why hasn't anyone being charged?

All they've got is gorilla and a magic 8 ball and they're tarnishing people reputations in public.

And there's people cheering them on.

 

[Pie eyed]

What we don't know is how long these peptides hang around in the blood as many are small and are broken down easily. We also do not know if the blood samples were from all players or just one or two. If it was the latter and they just happened to be players that were not taking, then of course the result will be negative. We also do not know the sensitivity or specificity of the blood test.
So you see, unless it is positive, it still may not mean that a negative result exonerates Essendon.

Next day they are undetectable.
WADA/ASADA/ACC ride out on a unicorn to tilt at windmills with a blunt, invisible, weightless sword.

 

[Pantsless]

Depends upon which peptides were used. From what others have previously posted, you can group it in three categories:

1) peptides not restricted by WADA at all

2) peptides banned from any form of use by WADA

3) peptides allowed for oral/dermal use, but banned from subcutaneous injection by WADA

This is why knowing the peptides used is important. If they are in the group (3), the method of delivery is very much an issue. Milkshake is fine, injection in the belly will be an issue.

I don't have a problem with any of that.

But Dank has come out and said he hasn't done anything that is against WADA.

Either he's telling or truth or he's lying.

As I've said, it's turning into a soap opera.