ASADA issues show-cause notices to Essendon players

[azabob]

Disagree. Totally believable, unfortunately. Shattered.

Shattered? Really?

[Sedat]

So punish the guy no longer involved in the sport, don't say exactly why he's been punished, clear the Essendon players by association, and sweep the real questions under the rug while highlighting how tough they've been on the perpetrators, and then get a few AFL media stooges to back you? Sounds like a play from chapter one of the AFL's how orchestrate a result playbook.

Yep, that's it in a nutshell, which is why it will be a complete waste of time for ASADA to appeal. Hand over the keys to WADA and get this case heard by the CAS, where the AFL has no influence whatsoever in orchestrating a result.

Every single week that these 34 players continue to run around makes a mockery of the game. Not to mention Hird still being involved in any capacity. In AFL, it is more criminal to lay a $5 bet on a multi than it is to be systematically fed a years supply of PEDs. What a pathetic, contrived competition.

[Ghost Dog]

Ahmed Saad downs a drink with too many of the wrong sort of vitamins, out for a long stretch. These guys get off lightly. Not fair

[Topdog]

So Dank is guilty of providing prohibited drugs to Essendon Football Club and their athletes but Essendon players were not guilty of taking prohibited drugs. I must say I am slightly confused. Who took these drugs?

8(B) The Tribunal is comfortably satisfied that the former support person violated clause 11.7 of the AFL Code by attempting to traffick in, by selling, giving, transporting, sending, delivering and/or distributing to a third party or parties, namely the Essendon Football Club and athletes of the club, prohibited substances in a product known as Humanofort, namely Insulin Growth Factor 1 (IGF-1), Insulin Growth Factor 2 (IGF-2), Mechano Growth Factor (MGF), Fibroblast Growth Factor (FGF), Follistatin and Thymosin Beta 4, between about January 2012 and September 2012.

and what does this have to do with the AFL

13(A) The Tribunal is comfortably satisfied that the former support person violated clause 11.7 of the AFL Code by trafficking in, by selling, giving, transporting, sending, delivering and/or distributing, to a third party or parties who were customers of the Medical Rejuvenation Clinic, a prohibited substance of substances, including namely GHRP6 and Mechano Growth Factor, between November 2011 and September 2012.

[LostDoggy]

Shattered? Really?

Yeah, I am shattered. I was hoping there was something left of the game I grew up loving. This result is another of the nails in the coffin of a competition where any team — especially ours — has half a fighting chance.

[bornadog]

But no one can prove the players took anything illegal?

End of story

[Before I Die]

But no one can prove the players took anything illegal?

End of story

The burden of proof is' comfortable satisfaction'. The tribunal is comfortably satisfied there were prohibited drugs at the football club. Who else were they for? Who else used them?

I think ASADA will appeal and I think it is quite likely the appeal will be successful.

[jeemak]

So Dank is guilty of providing prohibited drugs to Essendon Football Club and their athletes but Essendon players were not guilty of taking prohibited drugs. I must say I am slightly confused. Who took these drugs?

and what does this have to do with the AFL

The key word is "attempting". If he had have successfully trafficked in to the club the banned substances then they would have been able to be confident they were to be used at EFC. It seems the thing missing once again is satisfactory record keeping, which ultimately is the reason why EFC and its players seem to be off the hook.

On the second quote within your post, I can only assume that as an AFL accredited person the supply of such substances to a third party with the intent for it to be used on AFL players or otherwise is against the code to which all AFL employees are subject.

The burden of proof is' comfortable satisfaction'. The tribunal is comfortably satisfied there were prohibited drugs at the football club. Who else were they for? Who else used them?

I think ASADA will appeal and I think it is quite likely the appeal will be successful.

It's important to note that ASADA/WADA have a chain of process that allows the club, the code and its regulatory or governance systems to deal with these matters first. If there is clear evidence, this is a good system, though as we've seen so far there isn't clear evidence and we've had to allow the EFC to self report and go through the ASADA sanctioned AFL process.

If ASADA decides to appeal then it has more comprehensive access to evidence and testimony from first hand witnesses than the AFL process does, through government legislative provisions.

Whilst the media has moved on, using the EFC as a tool for generating parochialism and better ratings, listener or readership, the AFL, the AFLPA and the EFC would be quietly shitting themselves in the lead up to Tuesday COB. The lawyers will be licking their lips.

[GVGjr]

But no one can prove the players took anything illegal?

End of story

I know I look at this way too simply but if there is a paper trail that indicates that the wrong supplements were purchased then I think it's up to the club to advise where those supplements are if, as they say, they haven't been administered to the players with all their injections.
If they haven't been used then where are they?

[jeemak]

I know I look at this way too simply but if there is a paper trail that indicates that the wrong supplements were purchased then I think it's up to the club to advise where those supplements are if, as they say, they haven't been administered to the players with all their injections.
If they haven't been used then where are they?

I think that's where the difference between the AFL process is left short. The burden on evidence isn't strong enough, and its powers are limited.

The present situation suggests to me the penalties on the EFC and Hird were not strong enough in the first place, as the juxtaposition on all concerned now leaves the AFL wanting to sweep the saga under the carpet, and ASADA/WADA swinging in the breeze as a toothless tiger.

[SonofScray]

The whole thing stinks. It has played out exactly as I expected. EFC have blatantly cheated and in doing so endangered the health of their employees and have have come out of it relatively unscathed because they were sufficiently deceitful and devious.

Add to that the fact that key witnesses confidently pulled up on their stories after meeting the wealthiest EFC coterie group reps....

[Sedat]

But no one can prove the players took anything illegal?

End of story

This is the response the grubs at AFL HQ want from all of us. Let's all move on, nothing to see here...

The AFL don't want to know what was injected into the Essendon players nor do most gullible supporters it seems. Cheating through performance-enhancing means makes a mockery of the sport in question. All reasonable evidence links the exact dosages and quantities for a banned PED ordered, compounded and delivered to Essendon's sports science employee - these exact doses were injected into the players but because the evidence was shredded, we're all just supposed to forget about this minor hiccup and pretend it never happened. Unbelievable.

[FrediKanoute]

I like many here am disallusioned and disgusted. There are moments when good people need to stand up and do what is unpopular. The AFL collectively have failed - as guardians of the game they have looked to the short term and not the long term good of the game.

[bornadog]

No appeal from ASADA.

[LostDoggy]

I might be reading too much into McDevitt's comments but I gather ASADA are furious with the AFL for rolling over on this issue and have absolutely zero faith in getting justice from an AFL appeals tribunal. One of the primary reasons given for not appealing was to enable WADA to take the case on much sooner (if they so decide) and go directly to the CAS, where there would be far less ability for the AFL to pressure a result. It's a shame it has to come to that, and if it does occur and the CAS rule against Essendon, I hope they're equally as scathing of the AFL and its role in this saga. I honestly don't mind if this drags on another ten years — justice will be worth it, if it comes.