Player Watch Sam Murray - (Delisted 2019)

[left at home]

This is really one strange case. Is there an end in sight to it.
Probably when he is back training with us is when we will know the outcome.
Never seen this before.

 

[legendstatus]

I still fail to see how an outcome hasn’t reached and communicated

Mind boggling!


On iPhone using BigFooty.com mobile app

 

[sr36]

I din't think you were allowed to do either? or is that only at a professional level?

You can't play anywhere from positive finding until verdict, but you can train from positive finding until verdict. From verdict you can't do either until the end of the penalty. He could actually train with us if he and we wanted him to.

 

[Kappa]

it'd be funny if he sits out a full 2 years then ASADA announces he's been cleared of any wrong-doing.

Someone needs to take that inept organisation to court.

 

[jackcass]

it'd be funny if he sits out a full 2 years then ASADA announces he's been cleared of any wrong-doing.

Someone needs to take that inept organisation to court.

Pleaded guilty so I think we've moved well beyond that possibility.

 

[Kappa]

Pleaded guilty so I think we've moved well beyond that possibility.

What if he sits out 2 years then the punishment ends up being 1 year?

 

[jackcass]

What if he sits out 2 years then the punishment ends up being 1 year?

I doubt it. I think it's a negotiation on penalty that is delaying the finalization of this. Offered 4, wants 2.

 

[Chameleon75]

I doubt it. I think it's a negotiation on penalty that is delaying the finalization of this. Offered 4, wants 2.

I suspect the AFL tribunal has given two and ASADA is appealing for there to be a delay in announcement.

 

[jackcass]

I suspect the AFL tribunal has given two and ASADA is appealing for there to be a delay in announcement.

You may well be right but there's certainly some haggling going on behind the scenes, just not sure what beard we'll end up with.

 

[Chameleon75]

You may well be right but there's certainly some haggling going on behind the scenes, just not sure what beard we'll end up with.

Haggling is in AFL’s DNA, problem is the anti doping code has oversight by ASADA and WADA, the scope to reach agreement inconsistent with the code is very limited.

 

[sideswipe]

Haggling is in AFL’s DNA, problem is the anti doping code has oversight by ASADA and WADA, the scope to reach agreement inconsistent with the code is very limited.

There are quite a number of avenues by which the "automatic 4 years" can be reduced - set out in the Code.

 

[Chameleon75]

There are quite a number of avenues by which the "automatic 4 years" can be reduced - set out in the Code.

To be honest I’m familiar with the old code but haven’t gone through the new code in detail.

I don’t doubt you, but I’d imagine you would need to satisfy some criteria other than the AFL struck up a deal.

 

[sideswipe]

To be honest I’m familiar with the old code but haven’t gone through the new code in detail.

I don’t doubt you, but I’d imagine you would need to satisfy some criteria other than the AFL struck up a deal.

Go to clauses 10.4-10.6.

https://www.wada-ama.org/sites/default/files/resources/files/wada_anti-doping_code_2018_english_final.pdf

As I understand it, Murray's reps would be asking for a reduction under the "no significant fault" clause, ie. I took a banned substance thinking it would be out of my system by competition time. So it becomes more of a "mistake" rather than an effort to enhance performance. Not sure the AFL has too much to do with this part of the process, other than being kept informed. The "negotiations" would be between Murray's representatives and ASADA. Once they reach a mutually acceptable penalty (this is likely the difficult bit), ASADA can present the matter including a recommended penalty, to the Anti-doping rules violation panel. Am presuming the recently elected member for Waringah is no longer a panel member.

 

[Chameleon75]

Go to clauses 10.4-10.6.

https://www.wada-ama.org/sites/default/files/resources/files/wada_anti-doping_code_2018_english_final.pdf

As I understand it, Murray's reps would be asking for a reduction under the "no significant fault" clause, ie. I took a banned substance thinking it would be out of my system by competition time. So it becomes more of a "mistake" rather than an effort to enhance performance. Not sure the AFL has too much to do with this part of the process, other than being kept informed. The "negotiations" would be between Murray's representatives and ASADA. Once they reach a mutually acceptable penalty (this is likely the difficult bit), ASADA can present the matter including a recommended penalty, to the Anti-doping rules violation panel. Am presuming the recently elected member for Waringah is no longer a panel member.

As I said I need to go through it. But you should be referring to the afl anti doping code as there can and is some variation from the wada code.

As I understand it the ADRV panel makes a determination on infraction notices being issued, but the afl tribunal is who determines the penalties.

From memory the process was (not sure if it’s still the case), ASADA notify the player of the test results and issue a show cause notice, from there it goes to the ADRV who issue an infraction notice and enter it on the register of findings, from there it goes to the afl tribunal for a hearing and ultimately issue a penalty. ASADA have a right to appeal to the afl tribunal, and after that wada have a right to appeal to CAS.

I understand he can argue that he didn’t intend to have the substance but the afl anti doping code says you need to demonstrate it (from memory). Demonstrating may be what proves difficult.

 

[cityslick1]

Mess. Need to move on ASAP. Who was the second round pick we gave up on in super draft to land him..?

 

[sideswipe]

As I said I need to go through it. But you should be referring to the afl anti doping code as there can and is some variation from the wada code.

As I understand it the ADRV panel makes a determination on infraction notices being issued, but the afl tribunal is who determines the penalties.

From memory the process was (not sure if it’s still the case), ASADA notify the player of the test results and issue a show cause notice, from there it goes to the ADRV who issue an infraction notice and enter it on the register of findings, from there it goes to the afl tribunal for a hearing and ultimately issue a penalty. ASADA have a right to appeal to the afl tribunal, and after that wada have a right to appeal to CAS.

I understand he can argue that he didn’t intend to have the substance but the afl anti doping code says you need to demonstrate it (from memory). Demonstrating may be what proves difficult.

Wont claim to know the actual process particularly well. But I was under the impression that as a WADA signatory, the AFL is bound by the WADA Code, with offences to be dealt with under that, and that the AFL Anti-Doping Code was more along the lines of a procedural document? Especially for the leagues below the AFL?

 

[Chameleon75]

Wont claim to know the actual process particularly well. But I was under the impression that as a WADA signatory, the AFL is bound by the WADA Code, with offences to be dealt with under that, and that the AFL Anti-Doping Code was more along the lines of a procedural document? Especially for the leagues below the AFL?

Afl is a wada signatory so their anti doping code is inline with the wada code and is signed off by asada. But when players are in breach it’s under the afl code and disciplinary bodies that they are subjected.

There are slight differences for example under the wada code if a team has two or more players breach the code the team as a whole is suspended. Under the afl code team sanctions are at the discretion of the afl as well as it’s nature. Hence Essendon got fine and draft pick penalties, and us with Thomas and keefe escaped sanction.

India for example have privacy protection under their laws and are exempt from wada where abouts provisions (although that may have changed as there was a proposal to amend their laws a couple of years ago).

Once an infraction is issued it goes through the afl process, asada can be invited to present the case as per the Essendon doping fiasco.

 

[Black_White]

What if he sits out 2 years then the punishment ends up being 1 year?

Would prefer he sit out the rest of his career.
Or at least never, ever, pull on the Black and White stripes again.
Because he has, and is an embarrassment to our club.

 

[Kappa]

Would prefer he sit out the rest of his career.
Or at least never, ever, pull on the Black and White stripes again.
Because he has, and is an embarrassment to our club.

Did you ever see the list Josh Thomas made about pies players who had done drugs?

 

[Bay Pie]

Mess. Need to move on ASAP. Who was the second round pick we gave up on in super draft to land him..?

Nathan Murphy. We got him with a later pick anyway.

 

[sr36]

Did you ever see the list Josh Thomas made about pies players who had done drugs?

In my teens and twenties the overwhelming majority of people I knew used illegal drugs at some stage.

 

[Kappa]

In my teens and twenties the overwhelming majority of people I knew used illegal drugs at some stage.

That is the reality, but some like to bury their heads in the sand. Particularly among afl players it's rife, our last president even said so.

 

[CFC2010]

That is the reality, but some like to bury their heads in the sand. Particularly among afl players it's rife, our last president even said so.

Our last CEO not President.

 

[Black_White]

Did you ever see the list Josh Thomas made about pies players who had done drugs?

No.
But a list, produced by a convicted performance enhancing drug abuser, means pretty much squat unless those on the list have tested positive to drugs.
To even consider such a list to be the truth, and not a lever to position a person in a better place, is absolute fantasy.
And if such a list exists, and can be proven to be authored by Thomas, would be pretty much grounds for instant dismissal.
Thomas ain’t the sharpest tool in the shed, but he isn’t that stupid.
I call fake news.

 

[Black_White]

In my teens and twenties the overwhelming majority of people I knew used illegal drugs at some stage.

Fantastic. And most people’s experience.
How many of your mates were AFL listed players?
How many of your mates were counselled every 12 months about the importance of knowing what they ingested? And the repercussions to their 6 figure salary if they ingested the wrong thing?
I think zero of your mates on all counts.
The general public can do as they please.
Professional athletes are sat down and told of the implications of ingestion every year.
No comparison. Only idiots can’t understand.