Play Nice James Hird rushed to hospital - suspected overdose

Bulldog Joe

Premiership Player
May 23, 2008
3,787
1,575
Tasmania
AFL Club
Western Bulldogs
Let's get back to Hirdy Joe, and how he's in a dark place atm due in some part to the odd campaigners unfairly sheeting the responsibility for the whole saga on him, like you have. What do you reckon?
Hirdy is apparently in a dark place, but it is primarily because he and Essendon spent so much time, money and energy fighting the charges, rather than accept the errors and move on.

You, however, are clearly in a dark place because you do not comprehend logical reasoning and are completely obsessed with an episode that you have no control or influence over.

Perhaps you might be advised to move on with your life.
 

Bombfire

Club Legend
Sep 19, 2007
2,639
784
Napier St.
AFL Club
Essendon
You need to understand the differences between not comfortably satisfied and innocent.

To decide someone is innocent you need to have proof of innocence, not merely a minor doubt on their guilt.

You are talking utter garbage. You don't decide someone is innocent based on proof of innocence.

Go and do some basic research.

That's the sort of misinformed stuff Hirdy had do deal with and caused him lots of anguish.
 

Bombfire

Club Legend
Sep 19, 2007
2,639
784
Napier St.
AFL Club
Essendon
Hirdy is apparently in a dark place, but it is primarily because he and Essendon spent so much time, money and energy fighting the charges, rather than accept the errors and move on.

You, however, are clearly in a dark place because you do not comprehend logical reasoning and are completely obsessed with an episode that you have no control or influence over.

Perhaps you might be advised to move on with your life.
No Joe- he's in a dark place because jokers like you perpetuate the myth HiRD was responsible for the program and its failings and repercussions.
 

Bulldog Joe

Premiership Player
May 23, 2008
3,787
1,575
Tasmania
AFL Club
Western Bulldogs
You are talking utter garbage. You don't decide someone is innocent based on proof of innocence.

Go and do some basic research.

That's the sort of misinformed stuff Hirdy had do deal with and caused him lots of anguish.

I am so sorry.

Your comprehension again fails.

A finding of not guilty is not a finding of innocence.
To find someone innocent is a definitive statement and requires proof. Our justice system does not actually do that and hence returns verdicts of guilty or not guilty.

The case involving Essendon did not have the same proof standards as a criminal case because of the WADA code conditions that they signed up for.

No Joe- he's in a dark place because jokers like you perpetuate the myth HiRD was responsible for the program and its failings and repercussions.

I perpetuate no myths.
Hird was the head coach and at the very least instigated the employment of those who ran the program at Essendon. Hird at the very least should have been aware of the program and thus he (as the head of the high performance program) was ULTIMATELY responsible for its instigation and operation.
 
Last edited:

Bombfire

Club Legend
Sep 19, 2007
2,639
784
Napier St.
AFL Club
Essendon
I don't want to speak to his motives as I don't know him or his relationship with his son but I do think that running the whole scenario through the media isn't what is best for his son's health. Maybe reputation is more important than health, I don't know but it's not something I would do.
So you wouldn't do it but Hirdy's dad is a candidate to do it, even though you have nothing to do with them.

That's a disgracefully proposition to put out there and you should really think about retracting that comment because it's a downright disgrace and is the sort of postulation that would do nothing to improve his situation.

Anyone revelling in Hirdy's plight are scum.
 

MaddAdam

Cancelled
10k Posts Bay 13: Vintage Bay Podcaster North Melbourne - North 2012 Player Sponsor North Melbourne - North 2011 Player Sponsor North Melbourne - North 2010 Player Sponsor North Melbourne - North 2009 Player Sponsor
Jun 8, 2011
25,408
32,891
In the not so distant future
AFL Club
North Melbourne
No Joe- he's in a dark place because jokers like you perpetuate the myth HiRD was responsible for the program and its failings and repercussions.

I'm ah, certainly not revelling in the situation he's in, but just maybe he's there because he was responsible for the program's inception and thus by definition its failings and repercussions.
 

SonofSamsquanch

Enjoy decent coffee but don't dunk yer biscuits
Mar 31, 2016
19,258
44,969
Victoria
AFL Club
North Melbourne
The case involving Essendon did not have the same proof standards as a criminal case because of the WADA code conditions that they signed up for

This seems to be the part the foamers cannot grasp. The players signed an agreement which they were found to have broken.

Theirs was not a criminal case, but a commercial case, thus there was a different standard as you point out. It has been wisely stated in these forums how that all works, yet the likes of Phil, Bruce, the sea kayaker, ol' man Hird and a diminishing number of recalcitrants just don't seem to get it.

If the players were being tried as criminals, some of the points they make might apply. They are not being tried as criminals. And some of the points being made are simply the result of barracking, which is fine, so long as the barrackers don't start to take themselves too seriously.

I saw some very good points being made today though. If the charges are trumped up or the findings are dodgy, wouldn't at least some of the players be showing their media supporters such as that fine upstanding mr Robinson so he could help them get justice?
 

Bombfire

Club Legend
Sep 19, 2007
2,639
784
Napier St.
AFL Club
Essendon
I am so sorry.

Your comprehension again fails.

A finding of not guilty is not a finding of innocence.
To find someone innocent is a definitive statement and requires proof. Our justice system does not actually do that and hence returns verdicts of guilty or not guilty.

The case involving Essendon did not have the same proof standards as a criminal case because of the WADA code conditions that they signed up for.



I perpetuate no myths.
Hird was the head coach and at the very least instigated the employment of those who ran the program at Essendon. Hird at the very least should have been aware of the program and thus he (as the head of the high performance program) was ULTIMATELY responsible for its instigation and operation.
m
I am so sorry.

Your comprehension again fails.

A finding of not guilty is not a finding of innocence.
To find someone innocent is a definitive statement and requires proof. Our justice system does not actually do that and hence returns verdicts of guilty or not guilty.

The case involving Essendon did not have the same proof standards as a criminal case because of the WADA code conditions that they signed up for.



I perpetuate no myths.
Hird was the head coach and at the very least instigated the employment of those who ran the program at Essendon. Hird at the very least should have been aware of the program and thus he (as the head of the high performance program) was ULTIMATELY responsible for its instigation and operation.

Look Joe, let's just say the case before the AFLADT placed the burden of proof on ASADA to return a guilty finding. As it wasn't a criminal prosecution the standard of proof required was a lot more than a toss of the coin but less than beyond reasonable doubt i.e. comfortable satisfaction.

As it was a serious case with lots riding on it, the AFLADT got it right by keeping the standard pretty high for the circumstantial evidence submitted to it by ASADA and they didn't get past first base. It was very easy for the defendants to pick out some gaping holes in Benny's brief.

The EFC34 walked out of the tribunal not guilty, or alternatively still innocent of all charges levelled against them. Correct weight.

This is in undeniable contrast to the 3 monkeys at CAS who lowered the level of comfortable satisfaction to help out ASADA who went verdict shopping via WADA.

Why did ASADA go verdict shopping? You can't throw 4 plus years of hard work, albeit misguided, down the drain and come up with doughnuts can you.

All of the above adds more to the anguish endured by Hirdy, when it all should have ended clearly when the ASADA foot soldiers said to Adriana/ "we aint' got a case.
 
Last edited:

Bulldog Joe

Premiership Player
May 23, 2008
3,787
1,575
Tasmania
AFL Club
Western Bulldogs
Look Joe, let's just say the case before the AFLADT placed the burden of proof on ASADA to return a guilty finding. As it wasn't a criminal prosecution the standard of proof required was a lot more than a toss of the coin but less than beyond reasonable doubt i.e. comfortable satisfaction.

As it was a serious case with lots riding on it, the AFLADT got it right by keeping the standard pretty high for the circumstantial evidence submitted to it by ASADA and they didn't get past first base. It was very easy for the defendants to pick out some gaping holes in Benny's brief.

This is in undeniable contrast to the 3 monkeys at CAS who lowered the level of comfortable satisfaction to help out ASADA who went verdict shopping via WADA.

Why did ASADA go verdict shopping? You can't throw 4 plus years of hard work, albeit misguided, down the drain and come up with doughnuts can you.

All of the above adds more to the anguish endured by Hirdy, when it all should have ended clearly when the ASADA foot soldiers said to Adriana/ "we aint' got a case.
You are very good at making stuff up. Pity you couldn't find a way to also understand.

CAS were able, through the WADA appeal, to retry the case. At this point the AFL lost control of the case and verdict was handed down that CAS were comfortably satisfied that the Essendon 34 had taken illegal substances. This was in line with the WADA code.

What you fail to concede, that simple accurate record taking would have proven the innocence of the Essendon players. The failure to keep those records has led them to the current position (Hird and all), unless of course they are truly guilty.

This entire saga would not exist if Essendon had played by the rules and no amount of bleating will change that fact.
 

Muggs

Premiership Player
Jan 16, 2015
4,048
5,985
Your local dark alley
AFL Club
Adelaide
This is in undeniable contrast to the 3 monkeys at CAS who lowered the level of comfortable satisfaction to help out ASADA who went verdict shopping via WADA.

Wouldn't say it's undeniable that CAS lowered the burden of proof.

Look at one of the key bits of evidence the molecular testing of the substance the chemist working for Alvai sent to Dank.

At the AFLADT the ASADA expert witness agreed with the players expert witness they could not be sure the substance tested was TB4. That's a lot of doubt right there when your own expert witness can't attest to your evidence. If expert witnesses can't be sure how can the panel?

At CAS the players expert witness agreed with WADAs witness the substance was in fact TB4 with a high degree of confidence. Not a great defence when your expert witness agreed with the prosecution. If expert witnesses on both sides agree the panel is highly unlikely to disagree with them.

It's differences like this that changes results.
 

Bombfire

Club Legend
Sep 19, 2007
2,639
784
Napier St.
AFL Club
Essendon
You again show your difficulty with comprehension.

I said it was the ULTIMATE responsibility of Hird. That does not mean others do not also have responsibility.
Joe mate - don't change your story now, ULTIMATE is a recent introduction to your ramblings. Go and have a look, while you do that I'm jumping into the pool. Cheerio
 
Sep 3, 2002
17,785
9,524
In a good place
AFL Club
Collingwood
Other Teams
NBA Winning Machines/Dallas Cowboys
Why did ASADA go verdict shopping? You can't throw 4 plus years of hard work, albeit misguided, down the drain and come up with doughnuts can you.
.

Surely your not that dense. ASADA knew that they were never going to get a fair hearing with the AFL stage managed "tribunal". The same AFL tribunal that cleared all the players but found dank guilty. ........Mcdevitt knew this so he did the smart thing and went straight to the big boys

The laughable thing out of this whole saga was that the AFL wanted this go away more than essendon and the only one smart enough to see this was Evans, but no your club and Jimmy boy wanted to fight every inch of the way. It was quite amusing seeing a Club metaphorically digging itself a bigger hole day by day, week by week....

As Whatley said the game was up as soon as CAS got involved because the AFL knew they couldn't contrive an outcome. The " Adults finally entered the room" and they didn't stuff around with your pissant club.

I really wish a reporter out there would go hard on the AOD financials - that's the big unknown story out of all of this but our AFL media are too pissweak to even go near it
 
Last edited:
Oct 7, 2007
11,151
14,183
Perth
AFL Club
Fremantle
Other Teams
East Freo, Liverpool, Cardinals
Wouldn't say it's undeniable that CAS lowered the burden of proof.

Look at one of the key bits of evidence the molecular testing of the substance the chemist working for Alvai sent to Dank.

At the AFLADT the ASADA expert witness agreed with the players expert witness they could not be sure the substance tested was TB4. That's a lot of doubt right there when your own expert witness can't attest to your evidence. If expert witnesses can't be sure how can the panel?

At CAS the players expert witness agreed with WADAs witness the substance was in fact TB4 with a high degree of confidence. Not a great defence when your expert witness agreed with the prosecution. If expert witnesses on both sides agree the panel is highly unlikely to disagree with them.

It's differences like this that changes results.

You could also add the burden of proof required by the AFLADT was widely criticised for being impossible to achieve. The burden of proof applied by the CAS members was in line with the previous anti-doping decisions. I would include in the standards applied by the Australian jurist nominated by the players. Like a great many other facts, this is another factor studiously ignored by the few who are so desperate to manufacture something to complain about.

This is yet another example of the authorities, in this case CAS being criticised for actually doing things correctly. Much as CAS has been repeatedly criticised for dealing with the players as a group rather than individually, even though that was the decision of the players themselves. It seems the case against the authorities is entirely based on dishonesty as evidenced by what we see daily on the HTB.

I guess if you can't argue the facts, you have to make up something to get outraged over and try to shout down anybody talking sense.
 
Oct 7, 2007
11,151
14,183
Perth
AFL Club
Fremantle
Other Teams
East Freo, Liverpool, Cardinals
Just maybe it's more complex than that

Clearly it is not that simple.

So far, 34 players, Thompson and Dank have also been sanctioned for their roles, so it is definitely not being sheeted home to one person.

It's my view that others should have been sanctioned as well but I'm being forced to assume that there was not sufficient evidence to hold those others accountable
 
Oct 7, 2007
11,151
14,183
Perth
AFL Club
Fremantle
Other Teams
East Freo, Liverpool, Cardinals
Also the fact that the 2009 code had less charges that could apply to support staff.

That may well be the case but that doesn't explain it.

Hird, Thompson, Reid (sort of) were dealt with not by ASADA but by the AFL. I'm failing to see why people like Corcoran, Robson etc were not included in the 'bringing the game into disrepute' net. Its odd that only some of those involved were tackled by the AFL and not all. I would include the board and management in the process if you are actually looking at governance failures.

You have to ask if the AFL knows more than they are saying and thats why only some have been singled out.
 

Muggs

Premiership Player
Jan 16, 2015
4,048
5,985
Your local dark alley
AFL Club
Adelaide
That may well be the case but that doesn't explain it.

Hird, Thompson, Reid (sort of) were dealt with not by ASADA but by the AFL. I'm failing to see why people like Corcoran, Robson etc were not included in the 'bringing the game into disrepute' net. Its odd that only some of those involved were tackled by the AFL and not all. I would include the board and management in the process if you are actually looking at governance failures.

You have to ask if the AFL knows more than they are saying and thats why only some have been singled out.

Corcoran was suspended for 6 months, 2 months suspended. http://www.afl.com.au/news/2013-08-27/essendon-penalties

Once you get to the management and board level there is a degree of separation that makes it hard to go after them directly, you also run into the Reid type issues (particularly with the board) where they shut out?

Also is the role of the AFL or the members of the club to penalise at this level?
 
Oct 7, 2007
11,151
14,183
Perth
AFL Club
Fremantle
Other Teams
East Freo, Liverpool, Cardinals
Corcoran was suspended for 6 months, 2 months suspended. http://www.afl.com.au/news/2013-08-27/essendon-penalties

Once you get to the management and board level there is a degree of separation that makes it hard to go after them directly, you also run into the Reid type issues (particularly with the board) where they shut out?

Also is the role of the AFL or the members of the club to penalise at this level?

I see it as the role of the AFL as they have the power to apply penalties. Members of a club generally do not and can't conduct a balanced investigation anyway. Sanctions need to be applied from outside the club. Expecting members, who can't act as a coordinated body is unreasonable
 
Jan 16, 2016
4,275
9,068
AFL Club
Melbourne
That may well be the case but that doesn't explain it.

Hird, Thompson, Reid (sort of) were dealt with not by ASADA but by the AFL. I'm failing to see why people like Corcoran, Robson etc were not included in the 'bringing the game into disrepute' net. Its odd that only some of those involved were tackled by the AFL and not all. I would include the board and management in the process if you are actually looking at governance failures.

You have to ask if the AFL knows more than they are saying and thats why only some have been singled out.
The fact the AFL walked of with its tail between its leg when Reid stood up tells me there is more back story that has not come to light. For all the attacking they did to fold the Reid case as soon as he sought an appearance in court with Vlad was pathetic.
 
Oct 7, 2007
11,151
14,183
Perth
AFL Club
Fremantle
Other Teams
East Freo, Liverpool, Cardinals
The fact the AFL walked of with its tail between its leg when Reid stood up tells me there is more back story that has not come to light. For all the attacking they did to fold the Reid case as soon as he sought an appearance in court with Vlad was pathetic.

Yeah, I've wondered why it happened that way.

Maybe it was all spin on the part of the AFL in lining up some 'heads to roll' or maybe it was a case of they knew more than they could prove, I don't know. I'm still of the view that the AFL jumped in too early because they wanted to be 'seen to be doing something'. Natural justice really required them not to take action until the process was completed but justice and the AFL are often at a some form of disconnect
 
Back