Remove this Banner Ad

Essendon's Problem Doesn't Exist - Dank

  • Thread starter Thread starter erbenz
  • Start date Start date
  • Tagged users Tagged users None

🥰 Love BigFooty? Join now for free.

Status
Not open for further replies.
coryne said:
Dank himself has confirmed that he was never been given advice that he is able to use AOD. He was told that it wasn't prohibited under S2 but he blatantly ignored the S0 clause. Any " legal advice that raises concerns about the prospects of any AOD9604 action succeeding" may simply be threat from the EFC/Dank's lawyers saying that they have been given permission from WADA to use the substance, so there is/was a chance that prosecuting the club/mad scientist was unclear. Is has since become clear that Dank had no such permission (both WADA and Dank claim permission wasn't given) so so ASADA's claim would be strengthened.
Click to expand...

I have very very little trust in Dank.

And, yes, it may be pressure from EFC, or Dank's lawyers that are causing it, No ones knows though.

Dank claims he was given permission to use it, since it was available on the commercial market. His claim was that since it was commercially available, and he wanted to use it in a compounding manner, which he claims the ASADA rep said they were fine with, than S0 did not apply, and he was checking if S2 applied.

This whole thing is a mess.
 
DonsRule said:
I have very very little trust in Dank.

And, yes, it may be pressure from EFC, or Dank's lawyers that are causing it, No ones knows though.

Dank claims he was given permission to use it, since it was available on the commercial market. His claim was that since it was commercially available, and he wanted to use it in a compounding manner, which he claims the ASADA rep said they were fine with, than S0 did not apply, and he was checking if S2 applied.

This whole thing is a mess.
Click to expand...


Understatement of the CENTURY ...................


Dank thought he was smart, could stay ahead og the pack/field by importing banned substances from China through Carter and then get his compounding pharmacist mate Nima to make them all legal. His philosophy was "if I have to wait for concrete evidence that stuff worked then I wouldn't be able to use anything" (paraphrased from a The Age interview a month back) which illustrates his ethical mindset in such matters and willingness to push the boundaries.


He thought he found loopholes around the drug code, but has been caught out MASSIVELY and is dragging down other clubs/people with him. That said those that worked with him still had a duty of care to insure what he was doing was correct/legal and WADA has made it clear to the players it was their responsibility to ensure what ever goes into their bodies was compliant with the WADA code. A single club official/doctor/player plugging AOD9604 into the Check Substance interface on the ASADA website and following up the concerns that the item was not listed would have made this whole issue null and void.
 

Log in to remove this Banner Ad

If it was as black and white as many of you believe the players would already be suspended, it doesn't take a genius to realise there is a lot more to this than we know.

Another thing, if it doesn't come from WADA, ASADA (Richard Ings is not ASADA), the AFL or Essendon, it may be best not to believe it for now, the papers have gotten so much wrong through this yet people keep on believing every headline.
 
Don't understand why people are holding their breath for the Ziggy's report.

There wont be anything in it whatsoever. The guy is an old high school friend of David Evans. Do you honestly believe he is going to "find" anything that will hurt his beloved mates football club???

Seriously!
 
mOccO said:
Don't understand why people are holding their breath for the Ziggy's report.

There wont be anything in it whatsoever. The guy is an old high school friend of David Evans. Do you honestly believe he is going to "find" anything that will hurt his beloved mates football club???

Seriously!
Click to expand...


I don't believe that essendon supporters of borderline intelligence believe the report is anything other than a PR exercise.

They are simply going to hold it over their heads to help stop the shit raining in from above.
 
Snake_Baker said:
"They won't field a team next year" - Patrick Smith guesSEN
Click to expand...


The AFL won't allow this to occur, they would have to either modify/cancel their television rights as Channel 7/Fox require 9 games/week under the current deal. I could see the club playing for 0 points, with a VFL level side before I could see them not fielding any side next year ..........
 
mOccO said:
Don't understand why people are holding their breath for the Ziggy's report.

There wont be anything in it whatsoever. The guy is an old high school friend of David Evans. Do you honestly believe he is going to "find" anything that will hurt his beloved mates football club???

Seriously!
Click to expand...

At the least it will shed some light on the practises and the processes that occured.
It will be factually, which is more than we have had for a long time. So I can see why people are hanging out for it. But it will not close many doors re: ASADA.
 

Remove this Banner Ad

Kaiser Powser said:
At the least it will shed some light on the practises and the processes that occured.
It will be factually, which is more than we have had for a long time. So I can see why people are hanging out for it. But it will not close many doors re: ASADA.
Click to expand...

It won't shed light on crapola and it will be factual only in mitigation.
 
larson said:
If it was as black and white as many of you believe the players would already be suspended, it doesn't take a genius to realise there is a lot more to this than we know.

Another thing, if it doesn't come from WADA, ASADA (Richard Ings is not ASADA), the AFL or Essendon, it may be best not to believe it for now, the papers have gotten so much wrong through this yet people keep on believing every headline.
Click to expand...

Players haven't even been interviewed yet. :rolleyes: SOME in here have suggested the players in question (apparently the 6 sacrificial lambs) that took a known banned substance should be stood down pending the outcome of the investigation. Most though know that until player interviews take place, no action will be taken. Whilst the process is slower than ALL of us like, it has to be thorough and complete.
 

🥰 Love BigFooty? Join now for free.

jenny61_99 said:
Players haven't even been interviewed yet. :rolleyes: SOME in here have suggested the players in question (apparently the 6 sacrificial lambs) that took a known banned substance should be stood down pending the outcome of the investigation. Most though know that until player interviews take place, no action will be taken. Whilst the process is slower than ALL of us like, it has to be thorough and complete.
Click to expand...

The only way ASADA/WADA act quick in those situations is if a major event is coming up, for the reason, I think it will be complete before the finals.

But, it leaves a rather interesting issue, if players are banned from this, the 6 as of yet unmentioned players, for 6 months (weather Essendons hand was forced by someone or not, they did come forward and asked to be investigated) and the players Cooperate, and receive 6 month bans, than, they are likly just to miss a few games, aren't they?

If charges were laid after Round 21/22, they'd be only banned for 1/2 rounds/games
 
DonsRule said:
The only way ASADA/WADA act quick in those situations is if a major event is coming up, for the reason, I think it will be complete before the finals.

But, it leaves a rather interesting issue, if players are banned from this, the 6 as of yet unmentioned players, for 6 months (weather Essendons hand was forced by someone or not, they did come forward and asked to be investigated) and the players Cooperate, and receive 6 month bans, than, they are likly just to miss a few games, aren't they?

If charges were laid after Round 21/22, they'd be only banned for 1/2 rounds/games
Click to expand...



I am sure part of the ASADA/WADA rules is the bans must be taken in season, and if the AFL tried to implement them during the pre-season then WADA/ASADA can appeal that decision.
 
coryne said:
I am sure part of the ASADA/WADA rules is the bans must be taken in season, and if the AFL tried to implement them during the pre-season then WADA/ASADA can appeal that decision.
Click to expand...

In season, yes, but as was pointed out elsewhere. does that mean, a 2 year ban is 4 seasons?

No disagreeing if the bans were in place in October, than , it would be delayed to the season, but the ban started in season, and rolled on...
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Remove this Banner Ad

Remove this Banner Ad

🥰 Love BigFooty? Join now for free.

Back
Top Bottom