Essendon players could boycott NAB Challenge games if AFL doesn't backdate anti-doping bans

[yaco55]

Leaks from who? What the AFL wanted and what ASADA gave them were not the same.

You better ask Roy Masters where he obtained his leaks. And the other documents come from the federal court.

 

[yaco55]

How is that even possible? As a lawyer he must be able to read the Anti-Doping code and realise the final responsibility rests with the players. Sure Dank is likely the central villainhe nuances of the piece but that doesn't exclude everybody else from their responsibilities. This is another puff piece from him to try and steer towards a result that would suit his club.

Gordon is a lawyer - I imagine he'd be over all the nuances of the case.

 

[yaco55]

Ninety One pages on, but yet we are missing the most important issue - Why have non-infracted players threatened to boycott the NAB Cup ? Why are EFC and the AFL walking on eggshells in their dealings with players ?

This issue needs further exploration.

 

[yaco55]

They don't need 20 top up players.

Only 18 on the list from 2012.

44 (plus rookies) - 18 is enough to field a team.

The notion of top up players is crazy.

Been telling you guys and girls for a week that 10 to 15 top up players are needed - But of course the experts on the HTB know better than the AFL head of footy operations, the AFLPA and EFC.

 

[yaco55]

That still doesn't address the question of "promises by whom"?
(EFC, AFL, ASADA, ...??)

I'd suggest the AFL and the AFLPA reassured players everything will be OK - There has to be a reason why non-infracted players are disinclined to play NAB Cup - There must be a reason why the AFL and EFC have been cautious in their dealings with players.

 

[yaco55]

Wonder if all this boycott talk was purely player driven and players and club are no longer on the same page anymore or not as much. A power shift with players now acting in their own interests and stuff the club.

Someone who is getting the drift - Actually think the issue is with the AFL and less directly with the AFLPA and EFC - I suppose when the AFL is known as a 'can do organisation' but can be seen to have failed miserably - And this was driven by players who have no infraction notices

It's tough walking on eggshells - they can break.

 

[Leather Poisoning]

You haven't noticed the 2 year propaganda campaign from your club?

Been telling you guys and girls for a week that 10 to 15 top up players are needed - But of course the experts on the HTB know better than the AFL head of footy operations, the AFLPA and EFC.

the concept of 'needed' is a bit dicey.

They don't need 10-15 to field a team, as they have enough players and reserves to put a team together (unless they have 3 injuries in the list of players not receiving INs.

They need 10-15 to protect the identity of the players, which is completely unwarranted as Ryder, crameri, etc can handle having their names out in the public.

Protecting anonymity
Backdated bans
Negotiating penalties

We are getting used to some very strange ideas here.

 

[NoAFLinmycomp]

Ninety One pages on, but yet we are missing the most important issue - Why have non-infracted players threatened to boycott the NAB Cup ? Why are EFC and the AFL walking on eggshells in their dealings with players ?

This issue needs further exploration.

And .... why are clean players still sticking up for their dirty team mates, what's in it for them?

There's competition within any team for positions on the field and the outcomes also affect careers, earning potential, egos, etc.
I know I'd be pretty pissed if I had it confirmed that I had been training, competing and playing with juiced-up players within my own team, let alone from other clubs.

Level-playing field is level - on your own ground as much as everyone elses.

Those non-infracted players, after 2 years, have the right to tell the infracted players and the club to **** off. Here is their time to shine, to be clean and mean, better and fairer, than the others.

 

[womack]

Someone who is getting the drift - Actually think the issue is with the AFL and less directly with the AFLPA and EFC - I suppose when the AFL is known as a 'can do organisation' but can be seen to have failed miserably - And this was driven by players who have no infraction notices

It's tough walking on eggshells - they can break.

maybe there is a player on the list who wasn't on the list if you know what I mean?

 

[onemancyclone]

And .... why are clean players still sticking up for their dirty team mates, what's in it for them?

One thing is terminal to any player's career: pissing off the coach.

 

[NoAFLinmycomp]

One thing is terminal to any player's career: pissing off the coach.

Ah - back to one of the root causes of the problem then. I wonder what it might look like at the moment then, had Hird been removed after the B&F last year.

 

[Obeanie1]

In what way are you able to draw a similarity between the AFL anti-doping tribunal and the Federal court action?

Strange logic.

In the case of the 34 players, we know that ASADA has no direct evidence of any player having used TB4 (let alone all 34).

ASADA appears to be putting much faith in a document of dubious evidentiary value, the generically worded so-called "consent" forms.

Another plank in ASADA's strategy is to somehow align the individual injection regimes of the players with an imagined template injection schedule for TB4.

That's before we even get to MRC undertaking much business with Charter and Alavi before and during the period in question involving such substances used in their anti-aging clinic.

They were always up against it.

However, most, if not all of the 30 charges in relation to the one support staff member are likely to be successfully prosecuted (well you'd hope so, given they are not being contested and the bulk of the tribunal hearing was actually spent on those 30 charges).

Interesting choice of working you use here. "Imagined template injection schedule for TB4"

Why do you describe it as "imagined" when records exist of the chemist texting Dank with this template?

The injection regime described in the text also matches perfectly the injection regime stipulated on TB4's formal prescription data sheet. It has been alleged / reported that players have admitted being injected with "Thymo" in the exact regime as advised by the chemist to Dank. Then Dank on national TV admitted to using TB4 and then changed his statement after finding out it was a banned substance.

So I don't see how any of that has been "imagined" at all. It's actually well substantiated by the chemist, Dank, the drugs prescription instructions, the players AND Dank admitting on national TV he used it on players. The fact that neither Dank nor Essendon kept clear records is also relevant.

Obviously you think otherwise but all of that in my mind provides 'comfortable satisfaction' that TB4 was administered to players and not "imagined" by anyone.

 

[Obeanie1]

Assuming Ryder is one of these... Port Adelaide must surely be pissed off.

Monfries, too... but Ryder was the key for one more game for the club than last season, right?

They wouldn't be pissed off if with a plea bargain he missed 3 or 6 games at the start of the year instead of half or the entire season.

Last time I looked the GF was the last game of the season not the first.

 

[Obeanie1]

Ninety One pages on, but yet we are missing the most important issue - Why have non-infracted players threatened to boycott the NAB Cup ? Why are EFC and the AFL walking on eggshells in their dealings with players ?

This issue needs further exploration.

I thought the most important point was the uncontrolled drug experiment being conducted on players in 2012?

Why are non-infracted teammates showing unity with the players with infraction notices?

Because they are a team and teammates stick together.

Because they and the club believe this provides bargaining power / leverage with the AFL to lessen any potential penalties the AFL may be required to hand out.

Because by doing this they hope the AFL will see what may happen if a big penalty is handed out.

 

[onemancyclone]

I thought the most important point was the uncontrolled drug experiment being conducted on players in 2012?

Why are non-infracted teammates showing unity with the players with infraction notices?

Because they are a team and teammates stick together.

Because they and the club believe this provides bargaining power / leverage with the AFL to lessen any potential penalties the AFL may be required to hand out.

Because by doing this they hope the AFL will see what may happen if a big penalty is handed out.

Bingo. And the funny thing for those players - some of which in their 30s - is that 500 players nominated for the national draft, and 400 weren't drafted.

These clowns, who will be banned, who won't be playing, who won't be paid, think they're the only footballers to put on an oval on Saturday. ******* go for it guys.

But what will happen to the whole competition if they're rubbed out? Shock horror. It means there will be a team as s**t as GWS was in 2012, and the team that might have finished 10th this year will finish 9th. Armageddon. Yep, go for it guys, hold us to "ransom."

Just about as pathetic as their wage demands on the basis they could be earning 10 times more at Manchester United. Go for it. Knock on Manchester United's door and walk in to the starting 11.

 

[Bluelegs]

Ninety One pages on, but yet we are missing the most important issue - Why have non-infracted players threatened to boycott the NAB Cup ? Why are EFC and the AFL walking on eggshells in their dealings with players ?

This issue needs further exploration.

By all reports it was the players call to boycott, to protect their mates. However, I feel like this is a situation where some of the players who did not receive notices and were listed in 2012 would be keen to play, but the peer pressure for solidarity would be too detrimental to their relationships at the club to ask to play. I expect some of these players have been directly or indirectly bullied into this position by their peers.

 

[nineteen eighty]

those emails were between Dank and Alavi, not Essendon. How would Essendon be aware of these exactly?

Dank was an employee of EFC. He was Essendon.

Further to that, Hird sacked the nutritionist who dared question Dank's methods.

Wasn't it Hird who also had Corcoran use "united nations skills" on Reid after he had the program stopped?

If I could be bothered I could name several other items that point to EFC knowing.

 

[mxett]

Dank was an employee of EFC. He was Essendon.

Further to that, Hird sacked the nutritionist who dared question Dank's methods.

Wasn't it Hird who also had Corcoran use "united nations skills" on Reid after he had the program stopped?

If I could be bothered I could name several other items that point to EFC knowing.

they were emails beteen Dank and Alavi, so unless he told Essendon the contents of these emails they would not have known. This was my point, nothing else.

 

[BlueWorld]

Ninety One pages on, but yet we are missing the most important issue - Why have non-infracted players threatened to boycott the NAB Cup ? Why are EFC and the AFL walking on eggshells in their dealings with players ?

This issue needs further exploration.

Players sticking up for their team mates. How unusual is that.

 

[BlueWorld]

Gordon is a lawyer - I imagine he'd be over all the nuances of the case.

He also has a vested interest.

 

[nineteen eighty]

Just a thought here.

If computer files were deleted, does anybody know if they were later recovered? I'm aware that, as part of the investigation, an accounting firm was used to access people's telephones to extract messages. Recovering data from hard disks is even simpler in most cases and even fragments of files can be very revealing. Perhaps this is the source of the belief that the 'thymo-whatever' being used was TB4, especially if numerous references were located on various machines.

I have no idea if this is the source of that belief but it is certainly a plausible explanation.

If they conducted a forensic audit and if there were files (or versions of files) that were on any of the laptops audited, it will have been found. Impossible to not have been found. Have dealt with forensic audit teams and what they can find on hard disks is truly impressive.

I know a forensic audit was conducted at Cronulla. I would be blown away if one wasn't conducted at EFC.

 

[evo]

If they conducted a forensic audit and if there were files (or versions of files) that were on any of the laptops audited, it will have been found. Impossible to not have been found. Have dealt with forensic audit teams and what they can find on hard disks is truly impressive.

I know a forensic audit was conducted at Cronulla. I would be blown away if one wasn't conducted at EFC.

I reckon they did one on Charter's computer. That could've been pretty revealing.

 

[nineteen eighty]

I reckon they did one on Charter's computer. That could've been pretty revealing.

Yeah that's where the found supply chains. Would be blown away if others weren't also examined.

Like I said, we don't know the half of what ASADA have on EFC and the players. What we do know however does not bode well for them.

 

[Tazmania]

Just a thought here.

If computer files were deleted, does anybody know if they were later recovered? I'm aware that, as part of the investigation, an accounting firm was used to access people's telephones to extract messages. Recovering data from hard disks is even simpler in most cases and even fragments of files can be very revealing. Perhaps this is the source of the belief that the 'thymo-whatever' being used was TB4, especially if numerous references were located on various machines.

I have no idea if this is the source of that belief but it is certainly a plausible explanation.

The thing with databases is that when people outside of IT use this term they are invariably referring to an excel spreadsheet. I would say in this case it is almost definitely a spreadsheet given it wasn't setup by IT.

Now the wonderful thing that most people don't know about word, excel and PowerPoint is the even when you delete content from the page, it actually remains in the metadata behind the scenes that everyday people can't see.

Having come from a law enforcement background we were made very conscious of this and instructed to use redaction software to remove this content before passing statement etc to defence lawyers....who know about it and can recover it and use it against the prosecution.

The AFL called in Deloitte forensic people to recover information from essendons pc's and phones. I would say that if any content was deleted it has been recovered.

 

[imperial_oz]

The thing with databases is that when people outside of IT use this term they are invariably referring to an excel spreadsheet. I would say in this case it is almost definitely a spreadsheet given it wasn't setup by IT.

Now the wonderful thing that most people don't know about word, excel and PowerPoint is the even when you delete content from the page, it actually remains in the metadata behind the scenes that everyday people can't see.

Having come from a law enforcement background we were made very conscious of this and instructed to use redaction software to remove this content before passing statement etc to defence lawyers....who know about it and can recover it and use it against the prosecution.

The AFL called in Deloitte forensic people to recover information from essendons pc's and phones. I would say that if any content was deleted it has been recovered.

That was close to my thought. Unless you have a good understanding of what you are doing, even using a very basic product like Access to produce a database isn't very easy to do. probably impossible for somebody with no IT training. I would expect that Excel or similar was used.

Even deleted files can be recovered in part or in full unless intentionally overwritten. Files can be recovered from the recycle bin or even from unallocated space by searching on file headers and footers (file signatures. Fragments can be recovered by doing text searches on unallocated space and Excel files have signatures for different sheets, so they can be detected as well.

Unless the files themselves are physically overwritten, it is fairly common to recover fragments at the very least.

Windows also keeps shadow files from restore points and earlier copies of files can be recovered from those artefacts and they are also not easily visible to the average user.

Then there are backups that contain earlier copies of files.

I'd love to know what was found on the various computers and backups. Considering the time it can take to do a thorough analysis, some of this material may not have been available when the interim report was finished.