Jim05 wrote:Despite being provisionally banned the AFL has allowed Jetta, Del'ollio, Lovett-Murray and Alwyn Davey to play in the NTFL despite all 4 receiving infraction notices. Wouldnt think WADA would be too happy with that id imagine
How many of them still on your list Jim?
None of those are but I thought that anyone with an infraction notice was banned from all football Australia wide. Leading player manager and lawyer Peter Jess has said that if AFL are allowing this it means ASADA's case is weak at best. This ties into the rumour that was on SEN a couple of days ago that ASADA's own barristers have told them that they dont have a case and is recommending that they withdraw all charges. Probably just more crap though
Or it means these 4 players will be undertaking their own legal proceedings against the EFC if they get banned?
Jim05 wrote:So going by the last bit if players got suspended we could play them in our VFL side to get match fitness?
No because the VFL is a official AFL match. Every football league in Australia follow AFL rules and codes.
Isn't the NTFL league an official AFL match which those Essendonplayers have been allowed to play in
Yeah I think once they are found guilty they would be banned from any footy. As I understand it they are only provisionally suspended, by playing they waive all rights for penalties to be backdated so would now cop the full brunt
ASADA is seeking Supreme Court subpoenas in a desperate bid to force reluctant witnesses Shane Charter and Nima Alavi to give evidence in the Essendon anti-doping hearings. The Australian Sports Anti-Doping Authority has conceded the pair will not voluntarily attend the AFL tribunal, putting its case against 34 current and former Bombers players in jeopardy. Lawyers for ASADA will seek subpoenas against Charter and Alavi in the coming days under the Commercial Arbitration Act. It will be up to the court to decide whether they can be compelled to appear and answer questions in an AFL anti-doping tribunal case. The surprise move was outlined this morning at a directions hearing involving lawyers for all parties. The tribunal had set a tentative date of December 15 for the start of the hearings but it is possible the case against the “Essendon 34” will be delayed until January. Charter is the biochemist ASADA claims supplied the banned peptide Thymosin beta-4 to former Bombers sports scientist Stephen Dank in 2012 and Alavi the pharmacist who allegedly compounded the drug. Without their evidence — and the opportunity for the players’ lawyers to cross-examine them — ASADA’s case will be difficult to prove. A bid by ASADA to rely on transcripts of record of interviews with Charter and Alavi last year will also be rejected by lawyers for the players. Neither Alvai nor Charter have signed affidavits regarding their knowledge or involvements in Essendon’s 2012 supplements program. Dank has point-blank refused to co-operate with ASADA’s investigations.
Yep, id be doing cartwheels if it panned out that way. Long way to go yet though
Um ASADA still have enough evidence without them. There is a no needle policy in the code. At the moment the know the players have had ejections they just don't have the proof what they have taken. For players that's still bad. The players will have to prove what they have taken, which all they can do is admitted to taking a band substance. The only win for the players is more then likely won't receive a 2 year ban. The players will still receive a ban, the afl can't afford them not to.
We're on this journey together, One Heart, One Club and they will Never Ever Tear Us Apart.
Yep, id be doing cartwheels if it panned out that way. Long way to go yet though
Um ASADA still have enough evidence without them. There is a no needle policy in the code. At the moment the know the players have had ejections they just don't have the proof what they have taken. For players that's still bad. The players will have to prove what they have taken, which all they can do is admitted to taking a band substance. The only win for the players is more then likely won't receive a 2 year ban. The players will still receive a ban, the afl can't afford them not to.
Dont ASADA have to prove what was taken. Last time I checked in a legal case the prosecution must show that he parties are guilty beyond reasonable doubt. Granted this is the AFL tribunal/hearing where the AFL legal team believes players should spin or pirouette out of contests, so we can't use a logical arguement here. Still the AFL amd ASADA need to prove what was taken not the players proving what they did not take.
Read my reply. It is directed at you because you have double standards
Yep, id be doing cartwheels if it panned out that way. Long way to go yet though
Um ASADA still have enough evidence without them. There is a no needle policy in the code. At the moment the know the players have had ejections they just don't have the proof what they have taken. For players that's still bad. The players will have to prove what they have taken, which all they can do is admitted to taking a band substance. The only win for the players is more then likely won't receive a 2 year ban. The players will still receive a ban, the afl can't afford them not to.
Dont ASADA have to prove what was taken. Last time I checked in a legal case the prosecution must show that he parties are guilty beyond reasonable doubt. Granted this is the AFL tribunal/hearing where the AFL legal team believes players should spin or pirouette out of contests, so we can't use a logical arguement here. Still the AFL amd ASADA need to prove what was taken not the players proving what they did not take.
With drugs in sport I think its a matter of the players needing to prove they didn't take drugs rather than ASADA proving they did.
