Show cause letters to 40 Bomber players are near according to Fairfax(Not Carro)

Remove this Banner Ad

Status
Not open for further replies.
↑
"Process is an important protection for individuals against the state." -
It's also the last resort hail mary shot for the guilty.
Laphroaig said:
It's also the last resort hail mary shot for the guilty.
Click to expand...

And so saith a certain type of lawyer that gets the big money trying to get their cheating scumbag narcisstio-sociopath rich celebrity type clients off the hook.
 

Log in to remove this ad.

Malifice said:


OK, so ASADA's new head just told the Senate that Show causes should be issued within weeks.

Not that they 'might be' issued.

Will be issued.
Click to expand...

whilst there may well be show cause notices issued to Essendon, there is also the matter of allegedly 17 show cause notices in the works for Cronulla, a far more specific number than has been raised by anyone about Essendon.

Therefore, your assumption that the show cause notices relate to the AFL does not follow. They may, but he may well be referring to NRL show cause notices.

Just thought it's worth pointing that out given you don't seem to have grasped it
 
Lance Uppercut said:
whilst there may well be show cause notices issued to Essendon, there is also the matter of allegedly 17 show cause notices in the works for Cronulla, a far more specific number than has been raised by anyone about Essendon.

Therefore, your assumption that the show cause notices relate to the AFL does not follow. They may, but he may well be referring to NRL show cause notices.

Just thought it's worth pointing that out given you don't seem to have grasped it
Click to expand...

Didn't he mention Essendon specifically the other day in relation to within a couple of weeks

“In relation to Essendon we are talking weeks, not months,” McDevitt told the Herald Sun.
 
Armchair Critic said:
Didn't he mention Essendon specifically the other day in relation to within a couple of weeks

“In relation to Essendon we are talking weeks, not months,” McDevitt told the Herald Sun.
Click to expand...
well interestingly in that article he didn't actually mention show cause notices, he talked about "matters progress(ing) to finality", which would be funny language to use about show cause really, given they are a long, long way from finality.

Obviously there's a danger in parsing language too much, but that's what he said. He didn't say show cause, and I'm merely pointing out the Malifice has made an assumption
 
Lance Uppercut said:
well interestingly in that article he didn't actually mention show cause notices, he talked about "matters progress(ing) to finality", which would be funny language to use about show cause really, given they are a long, long way from finality.

Obviously there's a danger in parsing language too much, but that's what he said. He didn't say show cause, and I'm merely pointing out the Malifice has made an assumption
Click to expand...

“In relation to Essendon we are talking weeks, not months,” McDevitt told the Herald Sun.
“I am as keen as everybody else to see these matters progress to finality.

"But in terms of when particular matters will be finalised, it’s a difficult question because what we need to do, in fairness to each of the people who have been the subject of inquiries — some of whom are players and some of whom are support staff — is that each needs to be considered individually and in their own right.

I agree a lot of Assumptions are being made but the third quote pretty much discounts (IMO) he is stating that it is heading to finality , it's more of a statement saying he is keen as everybody else for it to get to that stage
 
Lance Uppercut said:
well interestingly in that article he didn't actually mention show cause notices, he talked about "matters progress(ing) to finality", which would be funny language to use about show cause really, given they are a long, long way from finality.

Obviously there's a danger in parsing language too much, but that's what he said. He didn't say show cause, and I'm merely pointing out the Malifice has made an assumption
Click to expand...

I wouldn't want to be hanging by a thread of hope that thin.

He did mention show cause notices first up. Extracting a different meaning from the absence of the words show cause from a particular subsequent sentence is marginally valid, but very close to the boundary of putting fingers in ears and "singing I cant hear this."
 
ASADA would be foolish to be 100% clear on anything until they release everything. Any announcement they make is liable to be scrutinised by lawyers and used as fodder against them down the track.

That's the game the lawyers / EFC / HS (Slobbo) are playing. Try and not only gain public support (failed), but pressure ASADA into making an error they can exploit.
 
Laphroaig said:
I wouldn't want to be hanging by a thread of hope that thin.

He did mention show cause notices first up. Extracting a different meaning from the absence of the words show cause from a particular subsequent sentence is marginally valid, but very close to the boundary of putting fingers in ears and "singing I cant hear this."
Click to expand...

I'm sorry, where did he mention sc notices first up?
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

Lance Uppercut said:
you're entitled to do that. It's still an assumption though. Be interested in how you view SC as a finalisation of the process
Click to expand...

They wont be obviously.

After SC's the players will have 10 days to gather a reply. This will be considered by the ADRVP.

Not sure what the players (or club) can add in their defence seeing as the club seems to have lost all paperwork on what drugs were administered. All the players can really say at this point (assuming we accept the EFC version of events) is 'I dont know for sure what was injected into me'

Presuming they cant rebutt ASADA in the SC's they get entered on the RoF by the ADRVP and the AFL get notified. Following which, the player is stood down pending a trubunal hearing to determine final guilt.

At this stage I would assume the players would seek to challenge the legality of the investigation (and question due process etc) while seeking an emergency interlocutory injunction barring the AFL from standing them (the players) down. Most likely avenue will be the Federal Court as they have jurisdiction.

We will then see some serious stalling action (assuming the players get the injunction) dragging this on till the end of the season (IMO).

In the likely event that the Federal Court dismisses the application, the AFL convene, determine guilt and hand out sanctions, with ASADA able to come in over the top to appeal anything they think is bullshit tokenism from the AFL.
 
Lance Uppercut said:
so McDevitt just misspoke then
Click to expand...

You can't just ignore the third quote because it does not suit your argument.

"But in terms of when particular matters will be finalised, it’s a difficult question because what we need to do, in fairness to each of the people who have been the subject of inquiries — some of whom are players and some of whom are support staff — is that each needs to be considered individually and in their own right.
 
Lance Uppercut said:
so McDevitt just misspoke then
Click to expand...

SC notices dont finalise the process Lance. You know this of course and (to steal a line from Shawshank) you're being a little obtuse.

But SC notices are the first legal step (post investigation) into suspending a player.

And they are going to be mighty hard for the EFC and players to rebutt seeing as they have no idea themselves (and no records apparently) of what they were injecting.
 
Malifice said:
SC notices dont finalise the process Lance. You know this of course and (to steal a line from Shawshank) you're being a little obtuse.

But SC notices are the first legal step (post investigation) into suspending a player.

And they are going to be mighty hard for the EFC and players to rebutt seeing as they have no idea themselves (and no records apparently) of what they were injecting.
Click to expand...

This quote is in the exact same article right under the line Lance is using to state McDevitt is hinting it is heading towards finalisation

"But in terms of when particular matters will be finalised, it’s a difficult question because what we need to do, in fairness to each of the people who have been the subject of inquiries — some of whom are players and some of whom are support staff — is that each needs to be considered individually and in their own right.
 
Armchair Critic said:
This quote is in the exact same article right under the line Lance is using to state McDevitt is hinting it is heading towards finalisation

"But in terms of when particular matters will be finalised, it’s a difficult question because what we need to do, in fairness to each of the people who have been the subject of inquiries — some of whom are players and some of whom are support staff — is that each needs to be considered individually and in their own right.
Click to expand...

I think its fairly clear to everyone (but Lance) that McD is discussing finalising the investigation here.
 
Laphroaig said:
THE AUSTRALIAN Sports Anti-Doping Authority could serve show-cause notices to AFL players over alleged use of performance enhancing drugs within weeks.

New CEO Ben McDevitt said the agency was working towards issuing the notices with "urgency" but it did not want to "sacrifice certainty for speed"

http://www.afl.com.au/news/2014-06-04/weeks-not-months
Click to expand...
firstly, presumably that is from the senate estimates committee, which if you follow this conversation back was the exact point I was making that there was no specific mention of AFL sc compared to NRL sc. I don't really care if you think I'm trying to "hang my hat" on this, I'm merely pointing out an assumption is made, a trap you yourself have just careered into as well.
 
Armchair Critic said:
You can't just ignore the third quote because it does not suit your argument.

"But in terms of when particular matters will be finalised, it’s a difficult question because what we need to do, in fairness to each of the people who have been the subject of inquiries — some of whom are players and some of whom are support staff — is that each needs to be considered individually and in their own right.
Click to expand...
I'm not ignoring it. I just don't necessarily prescribe the same meaning to it you do.
 
Malifice said:
I think its fairly clear to everyone (but Lance) that McD is discussing finalising the investigation here.
Click to expand...
dude, Aurora announced ASADA had finalised the investigation 3 months ago...

ASADA’s investigation into possible doping offences in the NRL and AFL has officially concluded – minus an interview with the probe’s central figure: sports scientist Stephen Dank.

The major development was revealed at Wednesday’s Senate Estimates Hearing in Canberra, where ASADA boss Aurora Andruska uttered her first words about the investigation for almost nine months.

February 26, 2014 9:09PM

http://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/sp...ist-stephen-dank/story-fni3fbgz-1226838574105
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

A
This is the way to treat drug cheats
2
Replies
25
Views
1K
PoppedCorn
PoppedCorn
CASEYS9420
Moved Thread James Hird - is it time to give him a second chance at coaching an AFL club? Gil says yes! - The PEDs Forum Version
2 3 4
Replies
88
Views
6K
Caligo
Caligo

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top