Peter Gordon explores Swiss appeal and injunction on suspension

[Sir Hugh Percy]

The players have a difficult task in a sporting club setting. Every time the club doctor goes to give a player a local anaesthetic injection, for stitches or pain relief, the player must check if the substance is compliant. Every time a trainer runs on to the field to give a player a drink from a bottle the player really needs to check the content of the bottle if they are to protect themselves under the WADA code. I wonder how often this was happening prior to 2013? I wonder how often it happens today?

Oh, for a world where the club doctor is across everything you're getting and has checked it all off for you and gave you the feedback you needed, and you trusted him and he trusted you. Why can't we live in that world?

 

[Lance Uppercut]

Apologies, I hadn't seen your views expressed since the CAS outcome, so it's refreshing to read.

I think it's important to accept the umpires decision. But not only that, I never denied there was worrying evidence, and you know I'm cynical enough to have no problem with the concept that it's feasible my club and my one time idol are competitive enough to take it too far. These things happen

 

[Muggs]

The players have a difficult task in a sporting club setting. Every time the club doctor goes to give a player a local anaesthetic injection, for stitches or pain relief, the player must check if the substance is compliant. Every time a trainer runs on to the field to give a player a drink from a bottle the player really needs to check the content of the bottle if they are to protect themselves under the WADA code. I wonder how often this was happening prior to 2013? I wonder how often it happens today?

A doctor is a bit different though than a non accredited "sports scientist". The players were criticised for not checking with the doc..

After being given the local anaestheic the should than declare if they get tested in the next 7 days.

if they than found to have taken a banned substance it may be something they can get a backdated TUE for (something that is possible if declared, much less likely if not declared) if for genuine medical reasons.

As for the trainer, the player could protect himself from this via ensuring that there are good processes within the club to ensure that there is only approved substances going into that bottle.

 

[mxett]

And I've said it before, the fact that someone else may have been speeding as well is not a defence to speeding. The rules say don't speed, saying look over there is not a valid defence.

poor example. The failure of Essendon players to complete the ASADA testing forms has been used to indicate intent. This assumes that all other AFL players fill the form out correctly. Have you got evidence of this?

 

[Proper Gander]

Well done Mxett. Again you've cracked the case wide open. CAS shouldn't bother too much with appointing esteemed judges - they should really leave it up to you.

 

[mxett]

A doctor is a bit different though than a non accredited "sports scientist". The players were criticised for not checking with the doc..

After being given the local anaestheic the should than declare if they get tested in the next 7 days.

if they than found to have taken a banned substance it may be something they can get a backdated TUE for (something that is possible if declared, much less likely if not declared) if for genuine medical reasons.

As for the trainer, the player could protect himself from this via ensuring that there are good processes within the club to ensure that there is only approved substances going into that bottle.

even so, if there is a breakdown in the process the player is still at fault in ASADA's eyes. How would a player ensure that the sports drinks were compliant every time? Practically speaking this just would not happen. The player must eventually trust their club appointed staff

 

[mxett]

Well done Mxett. Again you've cracked the case wide open. CAS shouldn't bother too much with appointing esteemed judges - they should really leave it up to you.

yep, exactly what I said. Good job

 

[Doss]

hmm interesting.

You do realise that my position is that EFC cheated by doping their players, right? And that I don't even believe the players were completely innocent victims? And that whilst I would support an appeal if it could get up I wouldn't support an injunction on the sentence?

All I ever wanted was to make a judgement based on all the facts and to reserve judgement until that day. When it was such that the players were cleared I took that on face value. I take the CAS verdict the same way.

But of course, I have Essendon under my user name and have the temerity to have opinions that aren't complete and utter groupthink, so hey, you're probably right eh. Derp

Don't be silly, Lance. We know all Essendon supporters are one big hive mind.

 

[Strapping Young Lad]

I think it's important to accept the umpires decision. But not only that, I never denied there was worrying evidence, and you know I'm cynical enough to have no problem with the concept that it's feasible my club and my one time idol are competitive enough to take it too far. These things happen

Yes, we can get back to being cynical protagonists together now?

 

[The 747]

poor example. The failure of Essendon players to complete the ASADA testing forms has been used to indicate intent. This assumes that all other AFL players fill the form out correctly. Have you got evidence of this?

No, you are missing the point. The other players are not relevant they were not charged with taking prohibited substances. IF they were charged with that, then whether they completed their forms properly would be an issue. And as a further point, if the players useless defence didn't produce any evidence of other players not filling in the form properly to rebut the presumption of deceit, that's on them.

 

[Strapping Young Lad]

Don't be silly, Lance. We know all Essendon supporters are one big hive mind.

And you're the queen bee!

 

[Proper Gander]

Don't be silly, Lance. We know all Essendon supporters are one big hive mind.

Who is the Queen?

Edit: I'm not sure what I meant this to sound like, but I wasn't totally aiming for it to sound like it does.

 

[Proper Gander]

Abasi probably didn't mean to sound like that either

Edit: changed my mind on this one

 

[Lance Uppercut]

Yes, we can get back to being cynical protagonists together now?

indeed

 

[Muggs]

even so, if there is a breakdown in the process the player is still at fault in ASADA's eyes. How would a player ensure that the sports drinks were compliant every time? Practically speaking this just would not happen. The player must eventually trust their club appointed staff

You taking it to the extremes, if the players can demonstrate they took reasonable steps and checked this and than it happens they can than argue they got spiked, which is grounds for no fault.. I.e elimination of penalty.

In the EFC the players did zero checking themselves...

Will also note that the latest changes to the WADA code and the prohibited association list now also has the support staff in the firing line.

 

[mxett]

No, you are missing the point. The other players are not relevant they were not charged with taking prohibited substances. IF they were charged with that, then whether they completed their forms properly would be an issue. And as a further point, if the players useless defence didn't produce any evidence of other players not filling in the form properly to rebut the presumption of deceit, that's on them.

Of course they are relevant! The Essendon players were not charged with failing to declare substances on their ASADA test forms. To use that information as a basis of intent we would need to see if this was common practice for AFL players, whether charged with doping or not.

 

[mxett]

You taking it to the extremes, if the players can demonstrate they took reasonable steps and demonstrate this and than it happens they can than argue they got spiked, which is grounds for no fault.. I.e elimination of penalty.

In the EFC the players did zero checking themselves...

Will also note that the latest changes to the WADA code and the prohibited association list now also has the support staff in the firing line.

but thats the point, how many players are actively ensuring their clubs staff use WADA compliant drinks? Or are they just assuming the club is looking after this for them? I'm not comparing this to Essendon's failings, I'm using it as an example of were the WADA code is difficult in a club setting.

 

[Ancient Tiger]

The players have a difficult task in a sporting club setting. Every time the club doctor goes to give a player a local anaesthetic injection, for stitches or pain relief, the player must check if the substance is compliant. Every time a trainer runs on to the field to give a player a drink from a bottle the player really needs to check the content of the bottle if they are to protect themselves under the WADA code. I wonder how often this was happening prior to 2013? I wonder how often it happens today?

The problem here is that it wasn't the club doctor. It wasn't even a doctor prescribing or giving the injections of "supplements". If you can't see the difference then there is absolutely no chance of you accepting that what the players did was plain dumb.

 

[QuietB]

The players have a difficult task in a sporting club setting. Every time the club doctor goes to give a player a local anaesthetic injection, for stitches or pain relief, the player must check if the substance is compliant. Every time a trainer runs on to the field to give a player a drink from a bottle the player really needs to check the content of the bottle if they are to protect themselves under the WADA code. I wonder how often this was happening prior to 2013? I wonder how often it happens today?

No. A professional organisation needs to make sure all of the injections and the drink in the bottle is WADA compliant.

And when an unprofessional organisation says something along the lines of "we are going to inject you with a bunch of stuff that goes right up to the line of what is legal, but do not tell Dr Reid and do not tell anyone else and do not put any details on your testing forms" and you comply with all of the directions of your football club, and none of the directions of ASADA or the AFL, then you are more than a little culpable.

 

[Doss]

And you're the queen bee!

Who is the Queen?

Edit: I'm not sure what I meant this to sound like, but I wasn't totally aiming for it to sound like it does.

Those cowardly queen bees.

 

[mxett]

The problem here is that it wasn't the club doctor. It wasn't even a doctor prescribing or giving the injections of "supplements". If you can't see the difference then there is absolutely no chance of you accepting that what the players did was plain dumb.

see the post above, Im not comparing it to Essendon's situation

 

[Ancient Tiger]

Of course they are relevant! The Essendon players were not charged with failing to declare substances on their ASADA test forms. To use that information as a basis of intent we would need to see if this was common practice for AFL players, whether charged with doping or not.

It only really matters if you have a new injection regime that you are so worried about, you get the club to write up consent forms. It's there to protect the player. Some on your board have said it is there to protect you if you get a positive AAF. The truth is it is there to protect you if you are suspected of doping. The players were, and in the end none admitted to anything. A fatal result.

 

[Muggs]

but thats the point, how many players are actively ensuring their clubs staff use WADA compliant drinks? Or are they just assuming the club is looking after this for them? I'm not comparing this to Essendon's failings, I'm using it as an example of were the WADA code is difficult in a club setting.

It's no different to any other sport, pretty much all professional atheltes rely on support staff to some extent, be it coach, trainer, caddy in golf, your pit crew in motor racing. It's rare now days to have the athelte wholly on their own.

 

[TheArchivist]

but thats the point, how many players are actively ensuring their clubs staff use WADA compliant drinks? Or are they just assuming the club is looking after this for them? I'm not comparing this to Essendon's failings, I'm using it as an example of were the WADA code is difficult in a club setting.

Oh come on, mxett - be realistic. If clubs are using gatorade or powerade - you know, the drinks with the little cardboard seal you have to peel off before you can drink it - then you're fairly safe in assuming that a commercially-available electrolyte drink full of sodium and sugar is WADA compliant. The WADA code is *not* difficult in a club setting.

 

[Randomizor]

I'm still yet to see/hear why the players would lie directly to a Doping Control Officer when asked about their supplement usage over the last 7 days.