Essendon in crisis again - more of what we all knew

[Swans4ever]

Why appeal.The AFL tribunal showed that Comfortable satisfaction = a level way above what other people call comfortable satisfaction .

.
Will be the same result if they did.

So they did the right thing skipping an appeal ythat would have wasted time. & are now where they would have ended up anyway .

Me thinks some of you fumblers are a bit scared of the truth coming out .

Well answer one simple question a question that that the tribunal was asked to determine what did the players take????

[Swans4ever]

And whatever you say I want definitive proof not Remour innuendo or conjecture but proven facts!

[AFLcrap1]

Lol .
Who knows .
Apparently no one knows .
Which in itself is reason to get done .
You are supposed to know what goes into your body .
Funny how when the dhit hit the fan everyone had amnesia .

[AFLcrap1]

But I suspect you are not in the same boat as other AFL fans .
You follow the biggest legalised cheat club in the comp ,so no surprise you can't see anything wrong .

[Xman]

Lol .
Who knows .
Apparently no one knows .
Which in itself is reason to get done .
You are supposed to know what goes into your body .
Funny how when the dhit hit the fan everyone had amnesia .

yes you are, but you dont breach the WADA anti doping code for not knowing every substance you were given. Not knowing simply isnt a defence though

[Xman]

But I suspect you are not in the same boat as other AFL fans .
You follow the biggest legalised cheat club in the comp ,so no surprise you can't see anything wrong .

you seriously think most AFL fans want essendon to be given a light sentence or no penalty? Didnt you see the outrage on BF when they got off?

[Swans4ever]

Lol .
Who knows .
Apparently no one knows .
Which in itself is reason to get done .
You are supposed to know what goes into your body .
Funny how when the dhit hit the fan everyone had amnesia .

So how can they be found guilty - it is still a court of law where the appeal will be held and facts are used not innuendo or conjecture. Nice try thou!

[AFLcrap1]

Lol
Swines .
You are putting your hate of RL & fear that the AFLOL will look bad over common sense .

You remind me of fab dill .

Doesn't care if the team gets away with drugging players ,as long as the Aflol image is not damaged ..
Too late for that

[Swans4ever]

Lol
Swines .
You are putting your hate of RL & fear that the AFLOL will look bad over common sense .

You remind me of fab dill .

Doesn't care if the team gets away with drugging players ,as long as the Aflol image is not damaged ..
Too late for that

No you made the point that because WADA appealed that the verdict won be overturned and by inference the AFL tribunal was corrupt and should not have heard the case. But I was pointing out that unless there was new evidence the result most probably not change. That there is a burden of proof WADA needs to satisfy - that means they bear that burden alone Essendon players do not prove they didn't take banned substances but WADA must prove they did to a comfortable satisfaction. Now a comfortable satisfaction is a level of proof that is not often used - it is not on the balance of probabilities which is the civil standard of proof, it is arguably higher than than but less than the criminal standard of beyond a reasonable doubt. Lastly this is an appeal de nova (a fresh), so they hear the original facts again BUT they haven't said there is any fresh evidence - so again if you can't tell me what they had and ASADA couldn't why will the result change??? As to my personal feelings they cheated pure and simple and every time I see Jobe Watson (who I like as a person) I feel he should give his Brownlow back - they have brought disgrace to the game I love. But that was not the question you asked!

[AFLcrap1]

Lol you believe that .
Comfortable satisfaction levels will undoubtably vary between an AFL tribunal .
& a non AFL tribunal .

Keep ur chin up champ .
The show has only just begun .

[Swans4ever]

Lol you believe that .
Comfortable satisfaction levels will undoubtably vary between an AFL tribunal .
& a non AFL tribunal .

Keep ur chin up champ .
The show has only just begun .

Well if you know what a comfortable satisfaction is by all means enlighten me - a court of law has to apply that standard and it has to be applied consistently between courts so like I said enlighten me - and while your at it tell me how WADA are going to prove their case??

[AFLcrap1]

Talk about a corrupt corrupt corrupt sport .
How could anyone follow this abortion .
A compromised rigged draw.
An uneven playing field
& a corrupt organisation running it .


Tim LANE: The mind-boggling truth on the supplements scandal
Date
June 27, 2015 - 8:00PM





How should sports administrators act when the specific interests of the organisation they serve clash with the broader interests, health, and modern ethics of sport?

That has been a question to ponder since early extracts were published of the recently released book about the Essendon supplements saga. It's the most important question of all to emerge from the story. Bar none. Yet it has been the subject of little public examination.

The simple answer, surely, is that individual sports have no right — morally or according to the spirit of sport — to see themselves as separate from the whole. To seek to do so is to damage the fabric of the community within which they exist. Just as no individual, or family, or business, or government is above the law of the land, neither is any sporting body above standards and responsibilities laid out for the collective.

For there are standards relating to the whole of sport that necessarily apply to the component entities. The most serious of these in the modern era concern doping and match-fixing.

It says much for the AFL's power to massage the media message that it has so far avoided scrutiny.

For the revelations about the way in which football's central administration sought to achieve a managed outcome to the Essendon affair are damning.

While sporadic disclosures have appeared along the way, the impression the AFL was seeking to neutralise the Australian Sports Anti-Doping Authority's activity is now overwhelming. The statement of ASADA's former CEO, Aurora Andruska, that the
objectives of the AFL and ASADA were "almost at odds with each other" erases any last vestige of doubt.

Andruska said with brutal frankness: "They are about protecting their business, protecting their brand. We are about making sure that Australia complies with its legal obligations."

Andruska found herself having to fend off a senior bureaucrat in the federal sports ministry, Richard Eccles, as she sought to do her job. According to Andruska, Eccles sought to interfere with her handling of the case and endeavoured to represent the AFL's interests.

According to Chip Le Grand's book The Straight Dope, Andruska claims: "Eccles rang, said he had just received a call from Gillon [McLachlan]." She claims Eccles then said: "What do you think you are doing? I have just had a call from the AFL and it is going to cost them $20,000 in legal fees to respond to your letter you have just sent. It is taking time away from James Hird."

McLachlan subsequently claimed not to recall the conversation with Eccles. The then minister for sport, Kate Lundy, denied that either the AFL or federal government placed undue pressure on ASADA. "They [the AFL] were doing their utmost to develop a solution with ASADA and it is clear Mr Eccles was involved in that but I don't think that constitutes political pressure," she said.
Andruska has been a model of discretion throughout this event. She was praised by Federal Court judge John Middleton for the quality of her evidence at last year's case initiated by Essendon and James Hird. On that record, her commentary in the book can hardly be questioned.

Modern politicians, on the other hand, are pathological practitioners of spin.

This all represents a chilling reality. It suggests not only a sports administration seeking to find its way around the more dramatic outcomes threatened by an ASADA investigation, but a federal government actively trying to assist it. It is the stuff of other nations, and sports administrations, which Australians have long felt entitled to view with suspicion and derision.

On the last weekend of March 2013, less than two months after the Essendon story had broken, I wrote in this column: "The fact of the matter is that the anti-doping authority is not independent. It reports to the Minister for Sport … While the idea of government intervention in any drugs-in-sport investigation would, at first glance, appear remote, this is not necessarily so."

Now we know the truth of this.

The book has also reiterated that the chairman of the AFL Commission, Mike Fitzpatrick, involved himself in the negotiation of a settlement offer to James Hird, whose case was to be subsequently heard by the self-same AFL Commission. Previously revealed though this may be, it is eye-opening to see the detail laid out in print.

That the chairman of the Australian Sports Commission, John Wylie, would also allow himself to come into contact with such a negotiation is more than that; it is mind-boggling.

This series of inappropriate actions is arguably more scandalous than anything done by anyone at Essendon. Australian sport now lives in a glass house. As such, we should all refrain from throwing stones at flawed organisations like cycling's UCI and soccer's FIFA.

Whatever form of investigation it might take to have these events adequately addressed is warranted. The trouble is that as Australia, right to the level of federal government, has now fallen into the pit of countries that care more for sport as a business than a model of fair play, there is no one left to do it.

[Swans4ever]

Talk about a corrupt corrupt corrupt sport .
How could anyone follow this abortion .
A compromised rigged draw.
An uneven playing field
& a corrupt organisation running it .


Tim LANE: The mind-boggling truth on the supplements scandal
Date
June 27, 2015 - 8:00PM





How should sports administrators act when the specific interests of the organisation they serve clash with the broader interests, health, and modern ethics of sport?

That has been a question to ponder since early extracts were published of the recently released book about the Essendon supplements saga. It's the most important question of all to emerge from the story. Bar none. Yet it has been the subject of little public examination.

The simple answer, surely, is that individual sports have no right — morally or according to the spirit of sport — to see themselves as separate from the whole. To seek to do so is to damage the fabric of the community within which they exist. Just as no individual, or family, or business, or government is above the law of the land, neither is any sporting body above standards and responsibilities laid out for the collective.

For there are standards relating to the whole of sport that necessarily apply to the component entities. The most serious of these in the modern era concern doping and match-fixing.

It says much for the AFL's power to massage the media message that it has so far avoided scrutiny.

For the revelations about the way in which football's central administration sought to achieve a managed outcome to the Essendon affair are damning.

While sporadic disclosures have appeared along the way, the impression the AFL was seeking to neutralise the Australian Sports Anti-Doping Authority's activity is now overwhelming. The statement of ASADA's former CEO, Aurora Andruska, that the
objectives of the AFL and ASADA were "almost at odds with each other" erases any last vestige of doubt.

Andruska said with brutal frankness: "They are about protecting their business, protecting their brand. We are about making sure that Australia complies with its legal obligations."

Andruska found herself having to fend off a senior bureaucrat in the federal sports ministry, Richard Eccles, as she sought to do her job. According to Andruska, Eccles sought to interfere with her handling of the case and endeavoured to represent the AFL's interests.

According to Chip Le Grand's book The Straight Dope, Andruska claims: "Eccles rang, said he had just received a call from Gillon [McLachlan]." She claims Eccles then said: "What do you think you are doing? I have just had a call from the AFL and it is going to cost them $20,000 in legal fees to respond to your letter you have just sent. It is taking time away from James Hird."

McLachlan subsequently claimed not to recall the conversation with Eccles. The then minister for sport, Kate Lundy, denied that either the AFL or federal government placed undue pressure on ASADA. "They [the AFL] were doing their utmost to develop a solution with ASADA and it is clear Mr Eccles was involved in that but I don't think that constitutes political pressure," she said.
Andruska has been a model of discretion throughout this event. She was praised by Federal Court judge John Middleton for the quality of her evidence at last year's case initiated by Essendon and James Hird. On that record, her commentary in the book can hardly be questioned.

Modern politicians, on the other hand, are pathological practitioners of spin.

This all represents a chilling reality. It suggests not only a sports administration seeking to find its way around the more dramatic outcomes threatened by an ASADA investigation, but a federal government actively trying to assist it. It is the stuff of other nations, and sports administrations, which Australians have long felt entitled to view with suspicion and derision.

On the last weekend of March 2013, less than two months after the Essendon story had broken, I wrote in this column: "The fact of the matter is that the anti-doping authority is not independent. It reports to the Minister for Sport … While the idea of government intervention in any drugs-in-sport investigation would, at first glance, appear remote, this is not necessarily so."

Now we know the truth of this.

The book has also reiterated that the chairman of the AFL Commission, Mike Fitzpatrick, involved himself in the negotiation of a settlement offer to James Hird, whose case was to be subsequently heard by the self-same AFL Commission. Previously revealed though this may be, it is eye-opening to see the detail laid out in print.

That the chairman of the Australian Sports Commission, John Wylie, would also allow himself to come into contact with such a negotiation is more than that; it is mind-boggling.

This series of inappropriate actions is arguably more scandalous than anything done by anyone at Essendon. Australian sport now lives in a glass house. As such, we should all refrain from throwing stones at flawed organisations like cycling's UCI and soccer's FIFA.

Whatever form of investigation it might take to have these events adequately addressed is warranted. The trouble is that as Australia, right to the level of federal government, has now fallen into the pit of countries that care more for sport as a business than a model of fair play, there is no one left to do it.

And Tim Lane would know because?? Hahaha do you troll news articles looking for the slightest bad news about AFL? Hahaha you are so obsessed!

[King-Eliagh]

Essendon are currently getting their asses handed to em by blithering basketcase club stkilda.

Essendon the wealthy yuppie club Xman supports

They're doomed just like melbourne are. They'll never come back from this and they don't deserve to, cheating filthy assholes.

[Swans4ever]

Essendon are currently getting their asses handed to em by blithering basketcase club stkilda.

Essendon the wealthy yuppie club Xman supports

They're doomed just like melbourne are. They'll never come back from this and they don't deserve to, cheating filthy assholes.

Yeah and like they say time heals all wounds - with 50k members Essendon aren't going anywhere no matter how much you wish for it!!