by bennymacca » Tue Aug 12, 2014 5:42 pm
by smac » Tue Aug 12, 2014 5:45 pm
by JK » Tue Aug 12, 2014 5:56 pm
smac wrote:And they'll cop a whack for it, if that is the final finding.
The anti doping rules also state there is a prescribed method for investigations - they should be made to follow it.
by RustyCage » Tue Aug 12, 2014 5:56 pm
by JK » Tue Aug 12, 2014 5:58 pm
RustyCage wrote:I don't care what the afl did leak or say to people or what Andy D did or didn't know, they aren't the ones who did the wrong thing.
by RustyCage » Tue Aug 12, 2014 6:15 pm
by stan » Tue Aug 12, 2014 7:08 pm
by Jim05 » Tue Aug 12, 2014 7:26 pm
stan wrote:Twitter feed is great. Im not sure if I have ever heard his many "I do not recalls"
by lebron » Tue Aug 12, 2014 9:32 pm
by JK » Tue Aug 12, 2014 9:36 pm
lebron wrote:But treat it like any criminal case. Yes, Essendon appears to have done the wrong thing, but if the evidence/investigation was 'illegal' or marred with inconsistencies, Essendon should/will get away with it. Example, Police arrest a person for a break and enter, however DNA was obtained unlawfully from the suspect and when interviewed, he made admissions but wasn't read his rights appropriately. Court will rule DNA and interview is inadmissable. I have a feeling a lot of evidence and interviews will be inadmissable as a result of these current hearings!
by lebron » Tue Aug 12, 2014 9:51 pm
by Red Rocket » Tue Aug 12, 2014 9:53 pm
bennymacca wrote:and the anti doping rules state a list of banned and acceptable substances. anything not on the list is counted as banned (which is likely what has happened here)
by smac » Tue Aug 12, 2014 9:57 pm
lebron wrote:I would think a challenge to the High Court on the grounds of it being unconstitutional for the reasons of 'double jeopardy' would be a short hearing in Essendon/James Hird/the players favour.
On another note, I'm happy people are standing up to the dictatorship of the AFL for once. Hopefully soon we'll see umpires judged fairly and held accountable, a journalist stick it to Malthouse and Bruce McAvaney told to leave commentating!
by Red Rocket » Tue Aug 12, 2014 10:02 pm
RustyCage wrote:I don't care what the afl did leak or say to people or what Andy D did or didn't know, they aren't the ones who did the wrong thing.
by Red Rocket » Tue Aug 12, 2014 10:06 pm
smac wrote:lebron wrote:I would think a challenge to the High Court on the grounds of it being unconstitutional for the reasons of 'double jeopardy' would be a short hearing in Essendon/James Hird/the players favour.
On another note, I'm happy people are standing up to the dictatorship of the AFL for once. Hopefully soon we'll see umpires judged fairly and held accountable, a journalist stick it to Malthouse and Bruce McAvaney told to leave commentating!
No, in this instance they just start again.
by bennymacca » Tue Aug 12, 2014 10:27 pm
Red Rocket wrote:bennymacca wrote:and the anti doping rules state a list of banned and acceptable substances. anything not on the list is counted as banned (which is likely what has happened here)
Thymosin Beta 4 is the only drug they are being linked to.
They dont have a case to answer for AOD as ASADA have confirmed it was legal at the time
by smac » Tue Aug 12, 2014 10:47 pm
Red Rocket wrote:smac wrote:lebron wrote:I would think a challenge to the High Court on the grounds of it being unconstitutional for the reasons of 'double jeopardy' would be a short hearing in Essendon/James Hird/the players favour.
On another note, I'm happy people are standing up to the dictatorship of the AFL for once. Hopefully soon we'll see umpires judged fairly and held accountable, a journalist stick it to Malthouse and Bruce McAvaney told to leave commentating!
No, in this instance they just start again.
I dont think they will start again.
The money spent by ASADA has blown out and the government doesnt have the funds to give ASADA anymore.
I think we will see some political power play with the Libs whacking Labor over the way the whole thing was handled and even a parliamentary enquiry perhaps. Can see the Libs cutting the purse strings and even scaling down ASADA especially after Andruska's debacle today
by Red Rocket » Tue Aug 12, 2014 11:17 pm
bennymacca wrote:Red Rocket wrote:bennymacca wrote:and the anti doping rules state a list of banned and acceptable substances. anything not on the list is counted as banned (which is likely what has happened here)
Thymosin Beta 4 is the only drug they are being linked to.
They dont have a case to answer for AOD as ASADA have confirmed it was legal at the time
really? as far as i am aware it came out the other day that AOD9604 has been deemed safe for human use in the US, but that wasnt the case when they were using it, and in any event is explicitly named as banned by the AFL
http://www.heraldsun.com.au/sport/afl/d ... a3a8524d21
by bennymacca » Tue Aug 12, 2014 11:45 pm
Competitions SANFL Official Site | Country Footy SA | Southern Football League | VFL Footy
Club Forums Snouts Louts | The Roost | Redlegs Forum |