
Comon pies and drac, you guys can laugh with us too on this one! :D




Link arms and





Yeah!

xman wrote:KE, why is an even comp important?
next youll have the pitch forks out for any coaches taking multi vitaminsKing-Eliagh wrote:"Who cares" says Xman! Let us laugh at Hird, Essendon, the AFL and Xman!
Comon pies and drac, you guys can laugh with us too on this one! :D![]()
=D>
![]()
![]()
Link arms and
and
![]()
![]()
and
![]()
Yeah!
xman wrote:KE, why is an even comp important?
xman wrote:KE, why is an even comp important?
not at the moment but it depends on what you read and who you believe, its the same deal as the Crunulla sharks, where is the proof of anything taking place illegal taking place, its all allegations & hyped up stories to make head lines & grab peoples attention, so until we hear of the reports from ASADA and the Ziggy Switowski, everything in is just rumors and allegations. but hopefully buy the end of it nothing wrong has been done & the bombers & Crunulla Sharks get to have their day in court & brainless reporters Caroline Wilson & Patricks Smiths & Co are held responsible for contentiously printing BS to grab a headlinePhelpsy wrote:Doesn't look good for the bombers must say
Tidy work rabbit.Rabbit wrote:http://www.3aw.com.au/Neil_Mitchell_Blog
And today I have been through the AFL drug code. There is a very strong argument that is does cover James Hird, and in fact any official of a club.On this, the AFL drug code is unequivocal in that it applies to officials. Page eight says it applies to officials. Page five describes what an official is: “An official means coach, trainer, manager etc.”
xman wrote:KE, why is an even comp important?
How is this a change in tune?Rabbit wrote:Just some more on Big Andys tune changing in today's Melbourne media:
He describes the accusations against James Hird and Essendon as "very serious allegations... I can't think of anything more serious."
"As a parent and not just as the CEO of the AFL, the issues as reported surrounding the potential use of various substances ... are disturbing, very disturbing..."
Hird took legal supplements....where is the issue?King-Eliagh wrote:Tidy work rabbit.Rabbit wrote:http://www.3aw.com.au/Neil_Mitchell_Blog
And today I have been through the AFL drug code. There is a very strong argument that is does cover James Hird, and in fact any official of a club.On this, the AFL drug code is unequivocal in that it applies to officials. Page eight says it applies to officials. Page five describes what an official is: “An official means coach, trainer, manager etc.”
"Who cares" if hirdy's poppin pills and drugged up to the nines said Xman![]()
Looks like some important folk are gunna have to be carin about this now.
So Neil Mitchell could argue that James Hird has broken an AFL code of ethics. Hird right now would be quaking in his boots about that fine he might get from the AFL for that one.Rabbit wrote:http://www.3aw.com.au/Neil_Mitchell_Blog
And today I have been through the AFL drug code. There is a very strong argument that is does cover James Hird, and in fact any official of a club.On this, the AFL drug code is unequivocal in that it applies to officials. Page eight says it applies to officials. Page five describes what an official is: “An official means coach, trainer, manager etc.”
piesman2011 wrote:So Neil Mitchell could argue that James Hird has broken an AFL code of ethics. Hird right now would be quaking in his boots about that fine he might get from the AFL for that one.Rabbit wrote:http://www.3aw.com.au/Neil_Mitchell_Blog
And today I have been through the AFL drug code. There is a very strong argument that is does cover James Hird, and in fact any official of a club.On this, the AFL drug code is unequivocal in that it applies to officials. Page eight says it applies to officials. Page five describes what an official is: “An official means coach, trainer, manager etc.”
& after hes found to be guiltyXman wrote:And unlike the NRL the AFL will actually wait for Hird to defend himself rather than believing a guy like Dank