Remove this Banner Ad

Peter Gordon explores Swiss appeal and injunction on suspension

🥰 Love BigFooty? Join now for free.

Status
Not open for further replies.
Ancient Tiger said:
Surely if Essendon believe that they are innocent they would want to go after him. It would be a way of demonstrating to the public (and their supporters) that they really do want to get to the bottom of this. By just sitting by and letting him go, it just looks like they are too scared to disturb him because they know he can sink them further into oblivion. Even if they cannot win much by going after him, it is perception that is important. And perception at the moment is that they are too scared of what he might say. If they really think they are innocent, they really don't have much to lose.
Click to expand...

Well, no.

I think that is one of the HTB think tank ideas.

Lawyers general advice is don't ask a question you don't know the answer to, and yes, that may well be as much as he used Tb4. While people put forward yeah but you are under oath in court, people lie in court to protect the selfs, problem is being able to catch them out, and, my opinion only is, Essendon have no chance in catching him out such was the mess. Armchair Critic has mad the point taking dodgy people to court can only end badly. Take him to court for fraud (I admit there is. A big if to that, but remember he was being investigated for Medicare fraud a while back too, I don't recall many of the details, but if that was linked to Essendon, than getting players off may get him into more trouble than just Essendon

Look too at when ever the club, or AFL dried to put pressure on him, with the rogue story, he released text messages, there was the McKenzie interview etc.


I don't think Dank is anywhere near as cleaver as he likes to think he is. At the same time, I do think he has enough on Essendon where it is difficult to the club you peruse him without fallout.


I know of a local cascade here a few years. Ago, a woman was accused of stealing funds from local govt dept. A lot of the story leaked to the media before the trial.Most locals had their mind up that she was guilty what was released was rather convincing too.

It made it to trial, just a few days in the prosecutors key witness was caught out in a lie, prosecutor withdrew the case that was supposed to last a few weeks. The key witness was central to the prosecutors case. They in th end were the one stealing the money. Many locals still seem to think she was guilty based on what was read in the paper. There too would have been no case wif that witness did not take the stand.CAS didn't require that - However I do accept those are he rules the AFL signed up for adopting the wada code.

For me it is why too much media is sometimes a bad thing as it impairs people's judgement.

Even on the judgement itself what people need to understand is judgement is opinion, they l use any evidence and caselaw to make that judgement sound as appeal proof as posible. Middleton did it,the AFL tribunal did it, CAS did it.

The all do use selected information to back the verdict, thing as one lawyer out to me was (applies to Al cases here, Middleton, Afl trib, and CAS) with the information they have, they could likely still make any call they wanted to, guilt, not guilty, not fault etc. In the case of CAS the did not include some of the elements of the AFL tribunals findings indicating more or less the rogue or behind people's backs nature of Dank. Maybe CAS did not believe that, a fair reason to leave it out, but it may have also been because weakened their stance that the players were complicit. All of that does come down to opinion. Some rather qualified people mind you. Decision makers don't like to be wrong.

Even Middleton. While absolutely I accept the verdict as everyon does, he could have found enough caselaw to I have come toi the conclusion the investigation was ilegal if he chose to go there.

There is nothing dodgy or illegal in any of it. It is just how the system works.
 
Ancient Tiger said:
Being a doctor, they put their trust in me.
Click to expand...
dr-nick.gif
 
the conch said:
Agree with what you say, but I would be ashamed. It goes to a whole deficiency of sporting values, a mindset of the club, going back to Sheedy's dirty tricks and a kind of arrogance and entitlement. Come and barrack for the dogs. So much more enjoyable.
Click to expand...

Its one of those clear separations of people and club. The club represents the history, the premierships, the bad and the good times. The reason fans buy memberships and paint their missus black and red.

The people represent what you and i see/despise in this current snapshot of the EFC , and we regard as campaigners. But we must remember they are not representative of the past, nor are they of the future. It is what the fans (non kool aid) have as their belief/support to move forward.

Its a really shitty chapter in their tome, but it shouldn't change what made them an EFC supporter.

we will continue to poke the bear though
 

Log in to remove this Banner Ad

DonsRule said:
Well, no.

I think that is one of the HTB think tank ideas.

Lawyers general advice is don't ask a question you don't know the answer to, and yes, that may well be as much as he used Tb4. While people put forward yeah but you are under oath in court, people lie in court to protect the selfs, problem is being able to catch them out, and, my opinion only is, Essendon have no chance in catching him out such was the mess. Armchair Critic has mad the point taking dodgy people to court can only end badly. Take him to court for fraud (I admit there is. A big if to that, but remember he was being investigated for Medicare fraud a while back too, I don't recall many of the details, but if that was linked to Essendon, than getting players off may get him into more trouble than just Essendon

Look too at when ever the club, or AFL dried to put pressure on him, with the rogue story, he released text messages, there was the McKenzie interview etc.


I don't think Dank is anywhere near as cleaver as he likes to think he is. At the same time, I do think he has enough on Essendon where it is difficult to the club you peruse him without fallout.


I know of a local cascade here a few years. Ago, a woman was accused of stealing funds from local govt dept. A lot of the story leaked to the media before the trial.Most locals had their mind up that she was guilty what was released was rather convincing too.

It made it to trial, just a few days in the prosecutors key witness was caught out in a lie, prosecutor withdrew the case that was supposed to last a few weeks. The key witness was central to the prosecutors case. They in th end were the one stealing the money. Many locals still seem to think she was guilty based on what was read in the paper. There too would have been no case wif that witness did not take the stand.CAS didn't require that - However I do accept those are he rules the AFL signed up for adopting the wada code.

For me it is why too much media is sometimes a bad thing as it impairs people's judgement.

Even on the judgement itself what people need to understand is judgement is opinion, they l use any evidence and caselaw to make that judgement sound as appeal proof as posible. Middleton did it,the AFL tribunal did it, CAS did it.

The all do use selected information to back the verdict, thing as one lawyer out to me was (applies to Al cases here, Middleton, Afl trib, and CAS) with the information they have, they could likely still make any call they wanted to, guilt, not guilty, not fault etc. In the case of CAS the did not include some of the elements of the AFL tribunals findings indicating more or less the rogue or behind people's backs nature of Dank. Maybe CAS did not believe that, a fair reason to leave it out, but it may have also been because weakened their stance that the players were complicit. All of that does come down to opinion. Some rather qualified people mind you. Decision makers don't like to be wrong.

Even Middleton. While absolutely I accept the verdict as everyon does, he could have found enough caselaw to I have come toi the conclusion the investigation was ilegal if he chose to go there.

There is nothing dodgy or illegal in any of it. It is just how the system works.
Click to expand...
My point is that it doesn't really matter what he actually says on the witness stand. It actually doesn't matter if he lies or even tells the truth. What matters is the perception that the club really feels it did nothing wrong and by taking him to court they are acting in a way which looks like they seriously want to get to the bottom of what happened. By refusing to go after Dank it just looks like they were part of the whole doping programme.

So if Dank lies to protect himself the public will just believe he is doing just that. The club will have appeared to have at least tried to find out the truth and would have the backing of the the entire public. If he says that he gave them banned peptides then Essendon will have finally proven that CAS was correct. However they would be perceived as having been duped. Why else would a club take someone to court only to prove something they already knew but would just make them look bad? So they must have been deceived and the public sympathy will be there again.

To me it's a win win situation if the club truly feels it is innocent. They can be proactive or they can continue to bury their heads in the sand and cry out that only Dank knows what happened, hoping that their supporters believe the rhetoric.

Now if they know they are guilty and there is much more to this story than we know and they don't want the real story to come out, I can understand really why they wouldn't go after him. Otherwise they can't be any worse off chasing Dank than they currently are.
 
Beerfish said:
I've seen four flags and have every chance of seeing another before you do.. assuming you've ever seen one.

Doubt it. :)
Click to expand...
Essendons finished.
and a lot of past flags need an asterisk like for the US Postal team. Hird played. Salary cap rorting, etc.
This kind of smell will never go away.
Club management has proven broken and moribundly conservative, pig headed leadership determined by shadowy moneyed coteries keeping everything a bit in-bred, insular, jobs for the boys. Not a club that works on merit and in a way I'd be happy with ... and cares about your money or even gets you a good seat or ability to drive to the footy unless you have thousands to spend.
And then, you know, winnings not everything... that's bogan 1990's thinking
 
Percel said:
Its one of those clear separations of people and club. The club represents the history, the premierships, the bad and the good times. The reason fans buy memberships and paint their missus black and red.

The people represent what you and i see/despise in this current snapshot of the EFC , and we regard as campaigners. But we must remember they are not representative of the past, nor are they of the future. It is what the fans (non kool aid) have as their belief/support to move forward.

Its a really shitty chapter in their tome, but it shouldn't change what made them an EFC supporter.

we will continue to poke the bear though
Click to expand...
Whole club needs rebuilding now though. Collins st cancer... See my other comments/ replies above.
 
Last edited:
Ancient Tiger said:
My point is that it doesn't really matter what he actually says on the witness stand. It actually doesn't matter if he lies or even tells the truth. What matters is the perception that the club really feels it did nothing wrong and by taking him to court they are acting in a way which looks like they seriously want to get to the bottom of what happened. By refusing to go after Dank it just looks like they were part of the whole doping programme.

So if Dank lies to protect himself the public will just believe he is doing just that. The club will have appeared to have at least tried to find out the truth and would have the backing of the the entire public. If he says that he gave them banned peptides then Essendon will have finally proven that CAS was correct. However they would be perceived as having been duped. Why else would a club take someone to court only to prove something they already knew but would just make them look bad? So they must have been deceived and the public sympathy will be there again.

To me it's a win win situation if the club truly feels it is innocent. They can be proactive or they can continue to bury their heads in the sand and cry out that only Dank knows what happened, hoping that their supporters believe the rhetoric.

Now if they know they are guilty and there is much more to this story than we know and they don't want the real story to come out, I can understand really why they wouldn't go after him. Otherwise they can't be any worse off chasing Dank than they currently are.
Click to expand...

Not sure it's a win/win scenario.

Financially EFC would have to question is the cost worth it. They made a loss last year, this year is going to be a scary year financially for them, lots of unknowns at the moment on the revenue side, is membership revenue going to take a hit (both in terms of numbers of members and the make up, e.g more three games less full season tickets), ticket and corporate sales are up in the air. Was going to be a tough year for them due to the draw, last years bottom 4 finish saw them loose a lot of their prime time games, throw in a depleted team on top of this...

The costs won't be covered by legal insurance as they they plaintiff (e.g Hird and his actions against the insurance company) . We know from Chip story on Dank finances he does not have much and the one company is still a director of (the one you suggested he provided he's services through) ASIC has just placed into liquidation, so simply may not be anything to sue to force the case in a court room. His company goes bankrupt he declares himself bankrupt the moment action starts. This again may prevent a court case.

Even if it does get to a court room what to say he will even answer questions? As the defendant can he even be put on the witness stand? Sure him not saying anything probably be inferred against him, but what damages will there be is there any cash to pay EFC or do they have to wear all their legal costs?

There is also the flip side, what if he does provide testimony, TB4 is not the only banned substance he was accused of administering, Hal Hunter is suing to find out what he received, zaharakis (I believe) admitted getting other stuff such as creams just not injections. If Dank testify under oath that he administered Hexeralin or other banned substances to players x,y and z... Where does this put ASADA? Where does it put these players? Statue of limitations has got a long way to go. The recent CAS decision would also make it hard to the get the 12 month backdated no significant fault deal so got the potential to have additional players out for a season, and further bans on the EFC 34.

I see plenty of downside to sue Dank, both financially and additional bans on the players.
 
Last edited:
the conch said:
Whole club needs rebuilding now though. Collins st cancer... See my other comments/ replies above.
Click to expand...

Looks like a fair clean-out to me.

Unless, did woosha say something mean to you? Does he have to go now as well?
 
the conch said:
Essendons finished.
and a lot of past flags need an asterisk like for the US Postal team. Hird played. Salary cap rorting, etc.
This kind of smell will never go away.
Club management has proven broken and moribundly conservative, pig headed leadership determined by shadowy moneyed coteries keeping everything a bit in-bred, insular, jobs for the boys. Not a club that works on merit and in a way I'd be happy with ... and cares about your money or even gets you a good seat or ability to drive to the footy unless you have thousands to spend.
And then, you know, winnings not everything... that's bogan 1990's thinking
Click to expand...
Actually in footy winning is pretty much everything! You just have to do it, or at least be seen to do it, fair and square!

History forgets pretty quickly, the White Sox are still playing nearly 100 years after their scandal, which will always be more famous than any scandal in AFL. And the truth is if the Bulldogs hadn't been propped up for so long, they would be long gone. I don't want any more Victorian teams to go, but if the AWFUL. Get their way and it comes to that, Bulldogs will be higher on the list of prospective moves than the bombers ever will be.
 
DapperJong said:
Looks like a fair clean-out to me.

Unless, did woosha say something mean to you? Does he have to go now as well?
Click to expand...


I think he's alluding to the entire board, the ones who backed Hird and co.

I think he's got a point. Those board members are responsible, for failing to provide a safe workplace. If they had an ounce of leadership, they'd all resign.

But, given the recalcitrant nature of the club and its supporters since day one, I highly doubt that.
 

Remove this Banner Ad

thegerman said:
I think he's alluding to the entire board, the ones who backed Hird and co.

I think he's got a point. Those board members are responsible, for failing to provide a safe workplace. If they had an ounce of leadership, they'd all resign.

But, given the recalcitrant nature of the club and its supporters since day one, I highly doubt that.
Click to expand...

No pleasing some people.
 
the conch said:
Essendons finished.
and a lot of past flags need an asterisk like for the US Postal team. Hird played. Salary cap rorting, etc.
This kind of smell will never go away.
Club management has proven broken and moribundly conservative, pig headed leadership determined by shadowy moneyed coteries keeping everything a bit in-bred, insular, jobs for the boys. Not a club that works on merit and in a way I'd be happy with ... and cares about your money or even gets you a good seat or ability to drive to the footy unless you have thousands to spend.
And then, you know, winnings not everything... that's bogan 1990's thinking
Click to expand...

An oh so politically correct commentary.

Its a new era with Tanner & Worsfold well up to the task of rebuilding.

The game is played for flags, like it or not .... clubs have a tendency to be inward looking, its a part of their DNA, and every club makes blues. Doggies fans might be questioning their own lack of flags, lack of members, the saga over the pokies investment before sinking the boots in ....
 
O'Rourke Awakens!! said:
But maybe supporters rather than trolling opposition supporters should be demanding it. As a supporter I'd be wanting blood personally
Click to expand...

Wanting blood. Yep.

Wanting.

Blood.

Kill the board.

Murder them.

brb
 

🥰 Love BigFooty? Join now for free.

MagpieJo said:
Actually in footy winning is pretty much everything! You just have to do it, or at least be seen to do it, fair and square!

History forgets pretty quickly, the White Sox are still playing nearly 100 years after their scandal, which will always be more famous than any scandal in AFL. And the truth is if the Bulldogs hadn't been propped up for so long, they would be long gone. I don't want any more Victorian teams to go, but if the AWFUL. Get their way and it comes to that, Bulldogs will be higher on the list of prospective moves than the bombers ever will be.
Click to expand...

Say it ain't so, MagpieJo

Say it ain't so.
 
I need to get something off my chest... I've been ashamed of my club many times. :(
 
Sir Hugh Percy said:
I need to get something off my chest... I've been ashamed of my club many times. :(
Click to expand...
It can be tough, but you need to enjoy the ride. I hardly missed a game in the 80s. We used to sing the song if we kicked a goal. But my club doesn't define me, so you can bung shit on the Saints and it doesn't mother me. Although I might respond anyway!
 
Ancient Tiger said:
Surely if Essendon believe that they are innocent they would want to go after him. It would be a way of demonstrating to the public (and their supporters) that they really do want to get to the bottom of this. By just sitting by and letting him go, it just looks like they are too scared to disturb him because they know he can sink them further into oblivion. Even if they cannot win much by going after him, it is perception that is important. And perception at the moment is that they are too scared of what he might say. If they really think they are innocent, they really don't have much to lose.
Click to expand...

I don't think they really think they are innocent AT.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Remove this Banner Ad

Similar threads

The_Wookie
The Andrew Wilkie Allegations
Replies
17
Views
2K
pattymalone00
pattymalone00

🥰 Love BigFooty? Join now for free.

Back
Top