Certified Legendary Thread Sympathy for *essendon II - over 6500 days since EFC won a final / AC signs w NM, EFC implode / RIP D2D and T_S

[Wild Bill]

This is gold - they keep a secret tape for 3 years but when it comes to the medical reports and what drugs they were injected with there is not 1 scrap of paper!!!

 

[Daniltchenko You Beauty]

 

[LT Smash]

Interesting and entertaining listening. Not sure what changes by its release.

Hird and his posse were pissed off that the players were going to be charged. That's the bombshell revelation. I reckon I had an inkling that this was the case. That an opposition party politician sees something new here to provoke an inquiry is more about opportunism than anything else.

 

[Tas]

Nothing surprising, I think the AFL acted in good faith with Essendon, the AFL tried to move heaven and earth to sweep this under the carpet and didn't punish the players in their own investigation. However, they don't control WADA. It was looking like they were able to influence ASADA and strike a deal but WADA stepped in and didn't want to do a deal. What did they expect the AFL to do?

 

[LuvtheKangas]

^ Agree with the sentiment, but in no way does this constitute the AFL acting in good faith.

 

[Horace]

All I can say is so very very sad.

Once again my most sincere sympathy for *essendon.

 

[utility]

Hilarious.

Conduct offsite, undocumented injection program without proper medical oversight or governance involving shady figures and shady substances being investigated by the Australian Crime Commission - and they are upset that the AFL was going to take faux action against them?

This is donial at epic levels.

The *club deserved to be banned from competing in the AFL for two years like cycling teams are banned when are large number of participants are guilty of doping offences. They are bloody lucky they weren't.

Eejits.

 

[utility]

As a footnote, the Cypriot and his understudy, along with many other in the AFL, are lawyers by profession.

Lawyers are shape shifters when it comes to language, so if they misinterpreted Gilligan then they're absolute fools. They should have known what to expect as the Cypriot was around for years and demonstrated his modus operandi for all to see.

 

[Mav]

Um... this is not evidence of anything. It's just a recording of the usual suspects getting their undies in a bunch. If they think this proves their innocence or the AFL's guilt then I'm afraid they are continuing on their delusional ways.

It proves they were trying to weasel their way out of it, and do deals to get the players off. At no stage was the integrity of the competition ever considered.

As a footnote, the Cypriot and his understudy, along with many other in the AFL, are lawyers by profession.

Lawyers are shape shifters when it comes to language, so if they misinterpreted Gilligan then they're absolute fools. They should have known what to expect as the Cypriot was around for years and demonstrated his modus operandi for all to see.

But but, they had Tania and she took notes!

 

[muttley45]

Gilligan was right when he said he was happy with the way he had handled things, still received his annual bonus AFAIK, so performance was ok, yeah ? .

 

[Sheezel2Wardlaw]

Where is the full recording?

 

[Nate7]

So Hird calls them (The AFL commission most likely) liars...

 

[gokangas]

Hird and his posse were pissed off that the players were going to be charged. That's the bombshell revelation. I reckon I had an inkling that this was the case. That an opposition party politician sees something new here to provoke an inquiry is more about opportunism than anything else.

I get that but not sure what this changes. Think this was already obvious. Its the story that never ends.

 

[SpiderBurton22]

I get that but not sure what this changes. Think this was already obvious. Its the story that never ends.

This story was leaked by a group with links to *Hird in order to bring about a parlamentary inquiry into ASADA and the AFLs conduct during the saga. They are people connected to the club who have overdosed on the Kool Aid.

Also, for this to be released it had to have the permission of those whose voices were recorded. Therefor, by giving his approval for this to be released *Hirdy is up to this to his eyeballs.

 

[Tas]

^ Agree with the sentiment, but in no way does this constitute the AFL acting in good faith.

Acting in good faith means a sincere intention to act fairly with someone. There isn't any evidence to suggest Gilligan didn't act in good faith. I think he had an agreement with ASADA and he took that to the table with Essendon. WADA came in a lot later, sacked the ASADA head and said no deal and appealed the AFL's verdict. Unless you believe Gilligan had concocted that scenario with WADA then he was acting in good faith.

 

[ozzyoslo]

Nothing surprising, I think the AFL acted in good faith with Essendon, the AFL tried to move heaven and earth to sweep this under the carpet and didn't punish the players in their own investigation. However, they don't control WADA. It was looking like they were able to influence ASADA and strike a deal but WADA stepped in and didn't want to do a deal. What did they expect the AFL to do?

Exactly Tas .... but when Little states the AFL turns around on what they said days before hints to me a phone call from the government and or someone who had better dealing/experience in these situations may have ensued.

 

[astrovic]

Acting in good faith means a sincere intention to act fairly with someone. There isn't any evidence to suggest Gilligan didn't act in good faith. I think he had an agreement with ASADA and he took that to the table with Essendon. WADA came in a lot later, sacked the ASADA head and said no deal and appealed the AFL's verdict. Unless you believe Gilligan had concocted that scenario with WADA then he was acting in good faith.

Not quite. The evidence coming out of *Essendon/Hird's Federal Court appeal was that the AFL tried to put in place a deal with ASADA that if the AFL made their investigative powers available to ASADA (the AFL's powers being greater than ASADA's by virtue of the terms of the contracts they have with players and clubs), then ASADA would buy the AFL into the process of what happened to the players and let the AFL have a say in that.

The AFL thought they had ASADA agreeing to that, and I suspect sold that line to *Essendon, but when push came to shove ASADA told the AFL in no uncertain terms that they weren't about to let any sporting organisation have a say in how they go about prosecuting breaches of the code.

As I understand it, this leaked recording is basically Gilligan telling *Essendon that ASADA isn't playing ball so all bets are off the table in terms of what happens to the players, and furthermore the only way to try and protect the players from prosecution is to have a show trial of *Essendon in which it gets smashed for bringing the game into disrepute, on the basis that if they do that then maybe ASADA will feel mollified that the appropriate responsible people have been punished enough and leave the players alone.

So the AFL whacked *Essendon, Hird et al, but ASADA went ahead and went after the players anyway. WADA came much later, however it is possible they had a say in ensuring ASADA didn't buy into the AFL's schemes (not sure about that)

IMO the AFL were completely naive in thinking they could influence ASADA into not prosecuting. Why on earth would a prosecutorial body like ASADA engage in such a gross conflict of interest and dereliction of duty? I agree with you however that when the AFL was talking to *Essendon about winning ASADA over, they honestly (but naively) thought they could pull it off.

Further, *Essendon was completely naive in thinking that the AFL could pull off a stunt like working ASADA over. I mean, they had lawyers all over this - where were those lawyers warning *Essendon that no matter what the AFL was saying to them, the likelihood that they could achieve what they were trying to achieve was pretty remote, and *Essendon shouldn't be relying on that happening?

Paul Little later lamented that if they knew at the start what they later knew, they never would have co-operated with the AFL/ASADA investigation. I accept this, up to a point. It is true to say that they co-operated, in that they made copious amounts of documents, emails, text messages etc etc available and made players and staff available to be interviewed, when they could have instead pulled all the stops to avoid having to do any of that and fought like cats and dogs to not have to (yes, their contracts with the AFL obliges them to, but there are always ways and means to fight about that and frustrate the process). However of course they didn't fully co-operate as it is blindingly obvious that the AFL/ASADA weren't provided with the good stuff, the real dirt about what really went on in 2012.

But at any rate, the point about Little's comment is that he was lamenting that early in the process *Essendon bought into the AFL's overtures that they could sweet talk ASADA, and "co-operated" in the hope and expectation that that would occur. Little wasn't involved at that point in time. I see him as almost saying "I could have told you so" - he knew that it was a mistake (and it was) to believe in the AFL and co-operate, and that *Essendon would have been better off fighting the process and making life difficult for both the AFL and ASADA.

It's all a bit embarrassing. The AFL come out of this as a bunch of hamfisted wannabe manipulating muppets (holy moly news flash for no one!) and *Essendon come out as being a combination of dishonest, guilty as sin, immoral and completely naive. They honestly thought that through the AFL there was a way to avoid any scrutiny, and had the gall to complain when that didn't materialise. Then - even better - Little laments that by doing so, *Essendon missed a golden opportunity to take the approach of every white collar criminal ever - deny everything, co-operate with nothing, refuse to hand over anything (that they couldn't shred in advance) and litigate, litigate, litigate until they give up in exasperation. Eventually that became the exact strategy they adopted in the Federal Court, but by that time they had co-operated enough that ASADA had enough dirt to hang the players. Too Little, too late.

TL;DR - hahahaha suck on it Bombers flogs.

 

[ozzyoslo]

I get that but not sure what this changes. Think this was already obvious. Its the story that never ends.

EFC just wants the punters to know their side of the story .... they also wants to sling some mud in the direction of the AFL. Theyre still acting like a brattish child wanting their cake and eating it as well.

 

[ozzyoslo]

astrovic , nice post
Just one thing I would like to add to that was when the NRL team got caught out, they stuck their hands up and bent over and copped their right whack. >>>> * didn't do that > hence the saying The *donialists*

Backing up your last paragraph the NRL didn't get involved in their situation, where the AFL (wanting to protect their brand in their quest for total domination) did.

 

[ozzyoslo]

From the eating of lollies and the clearest voice, my bet is Bomber Thompson.

Yes definitely, I thought it was peanuts he was eating.

 

[Mav]

Not quite. The evidence coming out of *Essendon/Hird's Federal Court appeal was that the AFL tried to put in place a deal with ASADA that if the AFL made their investigative powers available to ASADA (the AFL's powers being greater than ASADA's by virtue of the terms of the contracts they have with players and clubs), then ASADA would buy the AFL into the process of what happened to the players and let the AFL have a say in that.

The AFL thought they had ASADA agreeing to that, and I suspect sold that line to *Essendon, but when push came to shove ASADA told the AFL in no uncertain terms that they weren't about to let any sporting organisation have a say in how they go about prosecuting breaches of the code.

As I understand it, this leaked recording is basically Gilligan telling *Essendon that ASADA isn't playing ball so all bets are off the table in terms of what happens to the players, and furthermore the only way to try and protect the players from prosecution is to have a show trial of *Essendon in which it gets smashed for bringing the game into disrepute, on the basis that if they do that then maybe ASADA will feel mollified that the appropriate responsible people have been punished enough and leave the players alone.

So the AFL whacked *Essendon, Hird et al, but ASADA went ahead and went after the players anyway. WADA came much later, however it is possible they had a say in ensuring ASADA didn't buy into the AFL's schemes (not sure about that)

IMO the AFL were completely naive in thinking they could influence ASADA into not prosecuting. Why on earth would a prosecutorial body like ASADA engage in such a gross conflict of interest and dereliction of duty? I agree with you however that when the AFL was talking to *Essendon about winning ASADA over, they honestly (but naively) thought they could pull it off.

Further, *Essendon was completely naive in thinking that the AFL could pull off a stunt like working ASADA over. I mean, they had lawyers all over this - where were those lawyers warning *Essendon that no matter what the AFL was saying to them, the likelihood that they could achieve what they were trying to achieve was pretty remote, and *Essendon shouldn't be relying on that happening?

Paul Little later lamented that if they knew at the start what they later knew, they never would have co-operated with the AFL/ASADA investigation. I accept this, up to a point. It is true to say that they co-operated, in that they made copious amounts of documents, emails, text messages etc etc available and made players and staff available to be interviewed, when they could have instead pulled all the stops to avoid having to do any of that and fought like cats and dogs to not have to (yes, their contracts with the AFL obliges them to, but there are always ways and means to fight about that and frustrate the process). However of course they didn't fully co-operate as it is blindingly obvious that the AFL/ASADA weren't provided with the good stuff, the real dirt about what really went on in 2012.

But at any rate, the point about Little's comment is that he was lamenting that early in the process *Essendon bought into the AFL's overtures that they could sweet talk ASADA, and "co-operated" in the hope and expectation that that would occur. Little wasn't involved at that point in time. I see him as almost saying "I could have told you so" - he knew that it was a mistake (and it was) to believe in the AFL and co-operate, and that *Essendon would have been better off fighting the process and making life difficult for both the AFL and ASADA.

It's all a bit embarrassing. The AFL come out of this as a bunch of hamfisted wannabe manipulating muppets (holy moly news flash for no one!) and *Essendon come out as being a combination of dishonest, guilty as sin, immoral and completely naive. They honestly thought that through the AFL there was a way to avoid any scrutiny, and had the gall to complain when that didn't materialise. Then - even better - Little laments that by doing so, *Essendon missed a golden opportunity to take the approach of every white collar criminal ever - dent everything, co-operate with nothing, refuse to hand over anything (that they couldn't shred in advance) and litigate, litigate, litigate until they give up in exasperation. Eventually that became the exact strategy they adopted in the Federal Court, but by that time they had co-operated enough that ASADA had enough dirt to hang the players. Too Little, too late.

TL;DR - hahahaha suck on it Bombers flogs.

Great post. I would seriously like to see The HS or Cash Stapped Age publish that.

 

[Jade]

Oh yeah?

Well you're small.

You should feel bad.

 

[blackshadow]

Not quite. The evidence coming out of *Essendon/Hird's Federal Court appeal was that the AFL tried to put in place a deal with ASADA that if the AFL made their investigative powers available to ASADA (the AFL's powers being greater than ASADA's by virtue of the terms of the contracts they have with players and clubs), then ASADA would buy the AFL into the process of what happened to the players and let the AFL have a say in that.

The AFL thought they had ASADA agreeing to that, and I suspect sold that line to *Essendon, but when push came to shove ASADA told the AFL in no uncertain terms that they weren't about to let any sporting organisation have a say in how they go about prosecuting breaches of the code.

As I understand it, this leaked recording is basically Gilligan telling *Essendon that ASADA isn't playing ball so all bets are off the table in terms of what happens to the players, and furthermore the only way to try and protect the players from prosecution is to have a show trial of *Essendon in which it gets smashed for bringing the game into disrepute, on the basis that if they do that then maybe ASADA will feel mollified that the appropriate responsible people have been punished enough and leave the players alone.

So the AFL whacked *Essendon, Hird et al, but ASADA went ahead and went after the players anyway. WADA came much later, however it is possible they had a say in ensuring ASADA didn't buy into the AFL's schemes (not sure about that)

IMO the AFL were completely naive in thinking they could influence ASADA into not prosecuting. Why on earth would a prosecutorial body like ASADA engage in such a gross conflict of interest and dereliction of duty? I agree with you however that when the AFL was talking to *Essendon about winning ASADA over, they honestly (but naively) thought they could pull it off.

Further, *Essendon was completely naive in thinking that the AFL could pull off a stunt like working ASADA over. I mean, they had lawyers all over this - where were those lawyers warning *Essendon that no matter what the AFL was saying to them, the likelihood that they could achieve what they were trying to achieve was pretty remote, and *Essendon shouldn't be relying on that happening?

Paul Little later lamented that if they knew at the start what they later knew, they never would have co-operated with the AFL/ASADA investigation. I accept this, up to a point. It is true to say that they co-operated, in that they made copious amounts of documents, emails, text messages etc etc available and made players and staff available to be interviewed, when they could have instead pulled all the stops to avoid having to do any of that and fought like cats and dogs to not have to (yes, their contracts with the AFL obliges them to, but there are always ways and means to fight about that and frustrate the process). However of course they didn't fully co-operate as it is blindingly obvious that the AFL/ASADA weren't provided with the good stuff, the real dirt about what really went on in 2012.

But at any rate, the point about Little's comment is that he was lamenting that early in the process *Essendon bought into the AFL's overtures that they could sweet talk ASADA, and "co-operated" in the hope and expectation that that would occur. Little wasn't involved at that point in time. I see him as almost saying "I could have told you so" - he knew that it was a mistake (and it was) to believe in the AFL and co-operate, and that *Essendon would have been better off fighting the process and making life difficult for both the AFL and ASADA.

It's all a bit embarrassing. The AFL come out of this as a bunch of hamfisted wannabe manipulating muppets (holy moly news flash for no one!) and *Essendon come out as being a combination of dishonest, guilty as sin, immoral and completely naive. They honestly thought that through the AFL there was a way to avoid any scrutiny, and had the gall to complain when that didn't materialise. Then - even better - Little laments that by doing so, *Essendon missed a golden opportunity to take the approach of every white collar criminal ever - dent everything, co-operate with nothing, refuse to hand over anything (that they couldn't shred in advance) and litigate, litigate, litigate until they give up in exasperation. Eventually that became the exact strategy they adopted in the Federal Court, but by that time they had co-operated enough that ASADA had enough dirt to hang the players. Too Little, too late.

TL;DR - hahahaha suck on it Bombers flogs.

Excellent post.

Also remember what brought it all tumbling down, the ACC investigation... the ACC passed the results of their investigation through to ASADA. From the ACC evidence ASADA knew that * doped but legally they weren't able to use the ACC evidence prosecute their case so had to do their own investigation so they enlisted the "cooperation" of the AFL.

 

[Firestarter]

Oh yeah?

Well you're small.

You should feel bad.

I feel great wearing pants that fit my crotch.

 

[Jade]

I feel great wearing pants that fit my crotch.

Yeah Pumpkin Patch helps a lot of guys out.