News Jnr Rioli - He’s back.

Remove this Banner Ad

This is an interesting read. Apologies if already posted


I had not read that before, a few things stand out from that article.

She was allowed to continue competing after her failed test.

She said the ASADA testers were clueless when asked what would happen if she could not produce a sample. Her father was there with her also at the time.
 
Last edited:
Sounds like a completely different situation though. The early stories were that Willie couldn't pee, but obviously that turned out to be just a wild theory.
Huh? I thought it was he poured Gatorade into the test? I can only assume this was due to not being able to pee and not because he was overflowing with urine.
 

Log in to remove this ad.

Huh? I thought it was he poured Gatorade into the test? I can only assume this was due to not being able to pee and not because he was overflowing with urine.
Yes this is how I understand it as well from the information provided to the public. Very similar situations. It's not like Willie had a bag of fake urine with him.

The penalties were of note.
 
Indulging a little by watching the 2018 GF replay on Kayo. A reminder of how dangerous and dynamic we looked with Willie coming off the back of the square and often providing the extra handball to allow us to find a good option.

Need to get Willie back and return to the sexy ball movement we had that year instead of just relying on Nic’s centre dominance and predictable forward entries
 
The players association surely have to get involved by railing against AFL involvement with ASADA. 16 months for a hearing and verdict is beyond ridiculous. ASADA taking the absolute piss.
The club must be resigned to a minimum sentence otherwise if this gets overturned for whatever reason it will be a travesty.
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

Weird system. Pretty much a presumption of guilt by the entire system. Someone gets found not guilty after 24 mths of waiting (and being unable to play the whole time) and they just say what? Too bad so sad.

Least in criminal law matters they try to get things listed asap to make sure that any delay is kept to a minimum and charges aren't hanging over peoples heads. Pretty disgusting really.
 
Weird system. Pretty much a presumption of guilt by the entire system. Someone gets found not guilty after 24 mths of waiting (and being unable to play the whole time) and they just say what? Too bad so sad.

Least in criminal law matters they try to get things listed asap to make sure that any delay is kept to a minimum and charges aren't hanging over peoples heads. Pretty disgusting really.
Isn't it only 14 months
 
Could you imagine if someone was hung out to dry like this and was eventually found innocent? What recourse exists for a player to sue the AFL?
True, if you are guilty or innocent you deserve expedient justice but even more egregious if you are innocent. I think that fact that he is probably guilty they feel that can do whatever they want.
 
Sam Murray of Collingwood had to wait from August 18 2018 to August 26 2019 to get a hearing and he ended up getting 18 months for a positive test to a cocaine metabolite back in the 28th July 2018 in a gameday. So the test was August 20 2019 and we are coming up to 14 months now so I guess if we get a ruling in January that will be what near enough to 17 months? In an ideal world, he gets the 18 months that Murray got but even 2 years and we get him back for August 21 I would take that.
 
Weird system. Pretty much a presumption of guilt by the entire system. Someone gets found not guilty after 24 mths of waiting (and being unable to play the whole time) and they just say what? Too bad so sad.

Least in criminal law matters they try to get things listed asap to make sure that any delay is kept to a minimum and charges aren't hanging over peoples heads. Pretty disgusting really.

It's not really about guilt vs innocence though - they already "know" he's guilty. People almost never "get off" these charges. Essentially what you're waiting for is the sentencing hearing, not a decision on whether he did it or not.

As for the criminal justice system, while you can usually get yourself out on bail, if it's a bad enough crime and there's enough evidence you can spend your time waiting for trial in jail no problems. The Claremont serial killer was in jail for three years before his case finally went to trial, if he'd been found innocent (unlikely, but possible), it would have been "oops, sorry for those three years bud, out you go".
 

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top