SALADA/VladFL: Slap on the wrist. - STRICTLY ESSENDON SUPPORTERS ONLY

Status
Not open for further replies.

(Log in to remove this ad.)

kfc1

Brownlow Medallist
Joined
Oct 27, 2010
Posts
11,089
Likes
9,938
AFL Club
Essendon
Perhaps Little should put out a statement that says something like:

"As I have said before, the Club recognises that it had shortcomings in governance and management practices in late 2011 and 2012. Already we have changed many things within the Club to avoid a repeat of this, and we understand that we will have to accept a penalty from the AFL for these shortcomings."

How would you feel about that Yoda_?
We have already said this multiple times. Everyone just ignores that part because the media and the simpletons focus only on TEH DRUGZZZ
 

Alfred E Neuman

Premium Platinum
Joined
Jul 25, 2013
Posts
8,006
Likes
11,417
AFL Club
Essendon

kfc1

Brownlow Medallist
Joined
Oct 27, 2010
Posts
11,089
Likes
9,938
AFL Club
Essendon
THis doesn't seem to be suing? Isn't it just asking for the case to be heard in a different medium?

James Hird is suing the AFL, lodging a claim with the Victorian Supreme Court that he has been denied natural justice in a season-long doping probe, and demanding that the case be heard by an independent tribunal instead of the league’s ‘‘conflicted’’ commission.

Read more: http://www.theage.com.au/afl/afl-news/james-hird-to-sue-over-afl-ambush-20130821-2sbrw.html#ixzz2cbFncnLv
I wouldn't expect Sam Lane to understand the difference. She's not very bright.
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

Eleven 38

Norm Smith Medallist
Joined
Apr 22, 2010
Posts
5,815
Likes
4,752
AFL Club
Essendon
Other Teams
Canucks, Cowboys, Renegades
THis doesn't seem to be suing? Isn't it just asking for the case to be heard in a different medium?

James Hird is suing the AFL, lodging a claim with the Victorian Supreme Court that he has been denied natural justice in a season-long doping probe, and demanding that the case be heard by an independent tribunal instead of the league’s ‘‘conflicted’’ commission.

Read more: http://www.theage.com.au/afl/afl-news/james-hird-to-sue-over-afl-ambush-20130821-2sbrw.html#ixzz2cbFncnLv
Reading that does anyone else get the feeling all the evidence against Hird is pretty much only come from the weapon? Lol how do they expect to uphold these charges in court if the only evidence is the weapons word vs Sir James' word...

Sent from my HTC_PN071 using Tapatalk 2
 

Alfred E Neuman

Premium Platinum
Joined
Jul 25, 2013
Posts
8,006
Likes
11,417
AFL Club
Essendon
I wouldn't expect Sam Lane to understand the difference. She's not very bright.

No. She struggles with basic concepts. I'm still confused by this article though. Is Hirdy suing the AFL and asking for a court hearing, or is he just asking for a court hearing, which has been misconstrued as suing.
 
Joined
Feb 11, 2013
Posts
514
Likes
159
AFL Club
Essendon
I'm actually very doubtful about that one. I'm very confident that AOD was above board but I'm almost certain that the "circumstantial" evidence for TB4 is close to overwhelming. I do, however, also feel that this was not agreed upon by anyone at the club.
I get the same feeling. Doesn't look good. I just hope players don't get banned. As for the officials - if TB4 was in fact administered even without their knowledge then penalties must come in to play.
 

cymarak

Go Gators !
Joined
Aug 7, 2009
Posts
2,977
Likes
4,007
Location
Over it. All of it.
AFL Club
Essendon
Other Teams
49ers, Gators
No. She struggles with basic concepts. I'm still confused by this article though. Is Hirdy suing the AFL and asking for a court hearing, or is he just asking for a court hearing, which has been misconstrued as suing.
I think - not being a lawyer - you can sue for things other than money.

In other words, suing can cover asking a court to take some action on your behalf, not necessarily to get you money.
 
Joined
Mar 25, 2007
Posts
34,705
Likes
18,586
Location
Bottom of the pack
AFL Club
Essendon
Other Teams
Arsenal
Don't... Caro is going to be out of control with that charge sheet..

New Drinking Game.. have a shot every time you actually see the foam on Caro's mouth..

Post in here if you are still sober at the end of it.
Post in here if you're not sober and we'll crack 1000 pages tonight ;)
 

BrunoV

Brownlow Medallist
Joined
May 5, 2009
Posts
14,884
Likes
18,235
AFL Club
Essendon
I'm actually very doubtful about that one. I'm very confident that AOD was above board but I'm almost certain that the "circumstantial" evidence for TB4 is close to overwhelming. I do, however, also feel that this was not agreed upon by anyone at the club.


Not even close. The infractions notices would have been issued.
 

Matthew_Lloyd

Premiership Player
Joined
Apr 27, 2013
Posts
3,389
Likes
4,026
AFL Club
Essendon
I'll make it clear again. Barring a Dank backflip, absolutely no infraction notices will be given out.

Circumstantial evidence means shit, and the only evidence they have of TB4 is the testimony of Charters.

As rines said, the AFL have thrown their final "big" punch. Their last hope is to turn the other clubs against us and stir the public up. Too bad the public's opinion will end up meaning SFA in court. We have countered all of their punches the last 6 months through all these leaks and shit, now it's Essendon's turn to gradually build up, before we deliver the devastating knock out blow
 
Joined
Aug 15, 2013
Posts
59
Likes
105
AFL Club
Essendon
I'll make it clear again. Barring a Dank backflip, absolutely no infraction notices will be given out.

Circumstantial evidence means shit, and the only evidence they have of TB4 is the testimony of Charters
But at the moment this in in the AFL "court" and the only time circumstantial evidence WONT mean anything is IF it gets into a real court because the AFL have already found EFC guilty and the charges outlined are effectively the convictions.... and the "hearing" is effectively to determine the sentences...
 

Matthew_Lloyd

Premiership Player
Joined
Apr 27, 2013
Posts
3,389
Likes
4,026
AFL Club
Essendon
But at the moment this in in the AFL "court" and the only time circumstantial evidence WONT mean anything is IF it gets into a real court because the AFL have already found EFC guilty and the charges outlined are effectively the convictions....
That won't work. For an anti-doping violation to occur, there must be more than circumstantial evidence. The AFL can bleat all they want, but in the context of the WADA rules, circumstantial evidence is not enough to warrant an infraction notice. If players are somehow given infraction notices, our lawyers would shred it to pieces
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom