From the AFL's own website

Football Discussion Dustin Fletcher Hangar
161

People need to chill out.
 
It's just some survey that was anonymously filled out by club officials and staff. How the hell are the media meant to get to the bottom of it? How are they meant to "re-open the case"? The article itself is probably making a mountain out of a mole hill when as Windy Dill suggests, it's no surprise that players ordered their own legal samples. And since other clubs weren't trying to run 'cutting edge' supplemenet programs they probably had no need to keep records etc like we should have done...
 
We copped our whack and it's not that bad. We weren't a threat in finals, we can afford the fine and we have another proven coach in Bomber T who will stand up and coach. The draft picks MIGHT hurt, but there's a lot of good to come out of it as well... team bonding, membership numbers etc etc
 
Sure we were screwed over and embarassed unnecessarily, but just because other clubs might have done something doesn't make what we did right.

Time will tell, but I strongly disagree with the bolded.  Since the day the penalties were handed down it has been my contention that the draft pick losses will cost us a genuine shot at a flag with the Watson/Stanton/Goddard generation.
Draft picks taken over the next two years are unlikely to have much, if any impact on the senior team for around three years. Look at how much influence Kavanagh, Merrett, Ashby and Daniher (the first two picked in the last two drafts) have had. Sure Merrett played some handy footy, and Daniher was great for a half against GC, but I doubt either influenced our win/loss ratio.
 
When Carlton copped sanctions for salary cap rorting, they were already bottomed out. The sanctions meant that they were unable to rebuild. We already have a strong base, so I can't see the effect being anywhere near as damaging for us. And by the time we are feeling the effect of lost draft picks, our team will likely be in decline anyway, and unable to compete with the likes of GC and GWS. It might mean we fall harder as some key players retire or their influence diminishes, but that may mean we get to pick up some plumb talent for the next rebuild.
I can't think of the last time a side won the flag witout one or more of its 1st-3rd year early-round draftees playing a significant role.
 
Bradley Hill, Luke Parker, Alex Johnson, Christiansen, Beams, Sidebottom, Selwood, Rioli, Harry Taylor.  I could keep going.
 
Just because our first-year draftees haven't had big first years (barring Heppell) doesn't mean other clubs have been in the same boat.  And the better your side is, the more likely a kid is going to perform well off the bat because they have more support.
 
Not to mention that the pemalties also block us from getting any finals experience this year, and finals experience is VITAL for winning flags.  Blokes as integral to our best 22 as Ryder, Hibberd, Belly, Carlisle, Hooker, Hurley, Zaka etc etc have played at most two finals games each in their careers, both times in horrible lopsided thrashings.

While I agree that finals experience is desirable, there is no telling how missing out on the finals will affect our guys. Maybe the spur of being banned from playing finals this year when, as far as I and many others are concerned, they were entitled to be there, will prove even more vital. Let's hope so anyway.
162

RAPED !

163

icing on the cake really

164

icing on the cake really


Unfortunately it's Marzipan
165

 

There is no suggestion of any wrong doing in that article. Players are within their rights to independently source supplements, and clubs are within their rights to administer supplements to players as long as they are WADA compliant.

To date all the evidence suggests that the supplements taken by Essendon players were WADA compliant.  But, having no systems and checks in place thereby creating the potential for illegal and/or harmful substances to be administered was worth being kicked out of the finals, a heavy fine, suspensions for key personnel and stripped of draft picks.

 

...which is what the survey suggests occurred at the other clubs.

Yes we're all in it together however lucky EFC,  we created the precedent for the future.

166

i. am. extremely. annoyed.

 

extremely.

I'm furious.

167

 

 

Can we have our picks back now?
Or can the other 11 or 12 teams lose their first 2 rounds as well?


I think that is a valid question that our board should be pursuing.

 

should.

but wont.

and nothing will happen.

 

we tried to appear strong and then folded like origami when the heat got turned on 100%.

 

we would have won in court yet we didnt go there and we are now the unluckiest team in the history of sports.

 

You are NOTpowerless in all of this.  The EFC elections are in November, don't vote for any of them.

168

It was printed in The Age today as the main story.

169

From Herald Sun as at 12.30pm

 

AFL survey reveals 12 clubs used supplements without adequate supervision

 

By Al Paton  (who???????????)

 

 

TWELVE AFL clubs have conducted supplement programs that lacked "a single point of accountability".

After Essendon's extensive and largely unsupervised supplement program was exposed this year, the AFL conducted a survey of supplement use across the league.

According to a report on the league website, it found 11 other clubs were flirting with danger by using supplements that were not clearly understood or documented.

Players from nine clubs independently sourced supplements.

The survey found 12 clubs - presumably including Essendon - ran programs with "medium or high levels of supplement use".

It also found an "inappropriate definition of supplements" and "the selection process of support personnel was flawed".

An internal review by the Bombers into their sports science department in 2011-12 found "the rapid diversification into exotic supplements, sharp increase in frequency of injections, the shift to treatment offsite in alternative medicine clinics, emergence of unfamiliar suppliers, marginalization of traditional medical staff etc combine to create a disturbing picture of a pharmacologically experimental environment never adequately controlled or challenged or documented within the club."

Essendon was subsequently kicked out of the 2013 finals, fined $2 million and stripped of picks in the next two drafts for bringing the game into disrepute, while coach James Hird was banned for 12 months.

An ASADA investigation that could result in possible penalties for use of performance-enhancing drugs by Essendon players remains open.

The other 11 clubs involved in supplement use were not named by the AFL.

In response to the Essendon scandal the league moved to introduce stricter policing of sports science, and a list of AFL prohibited treatments and AFL controlled treatments will be introduced before the start of next season.

Prohibited treatments will include all substances on the WADA banned list plus drugs not approved by the Government's Therapeutic Goods Administration.

Controlled treatments will only be permitted with written approval by club doctors.

The league will also establish a register where clubs must record any use of controlled treatments.

MORE TO COME

 

http://www.heraldsun.com.au/sport/afl/afl-survey-reveals-12-clubs-used-supplements-without-adequate-supervision/story-fni5f22o-1226740824947

And the AFL have just found about this now.  I don't believe it!  Double jepody and we lost.

170

Makes me want to vomit.

171

F U CK THE A.F.L! :angry:

172

icing on the cake really

S**t cake. 

173

Essendon acted alone.

GOLD.

174

There is no suggestion of any wrong doing in that article. Players are within their rights to independently source supplements, and clubs are within their rights to administer supplements to players as long as they are WADA compliant.

True, but we got done for inadequate supervision and inadequate record keeping, not for taking illegal substances.

If and when we are penalized for the players using illegal substances, there will be point of difference between EFC and the other clubs. But for now, the inadequate  controls and supervision and record keeping is true in both instances.

175

There is no suggestion of any wrong doing in that article. Players are within their rights to independently source supplements, and clubs are within their rights to administer supplements to players as long as they are WADA compliant.

True, but we got done for inadequate supervision and inadequate record keeping, not for taking illegal substances.
If and when we are penalized for the players using illegal substances, there will be point of difference between EFC and the other clubs. But for now, the inadequate  controls and supervision and record keeping is true in both instances.
The AFL can't have its cake and eat it too. Personally I am in no doubt that prohibited substances were taken yet the investigation failed to prove who took them. Therefore the AFL pinned us on trumped up charges. Unless they confirm my fears and admit players used banned substances the way they acted will always look one sided and anti Essendon, especially when evidence such as these surveys come to light.
176

The major difference is that the 11 other clubs didn’t get named in an ACC report, and then ask to be investigated by ASADA.

Wrong place, wrong time.

177

The major difference is that the 11 other clubs didn't get named in an ACC report, and then ask to be investigated by ASADA.
Wrong place, wrong time.

Regardless, NOW is the time they should be facing the music.

 

Cmon, we as supporters MUST voice this by pure volume. We cannot sit idly by and watch other clubs laugh their ■■■■■ off, escaping any form of punishment. This is an absolute farce, and the only thing that makes it worse, are jon ralph's and caro's refusing to make ANY mention of this at all! Obviously, because they've got their head in the sand about other clubs doing it too!

 

How as supporters can we make our voices heard?! Demetriou has to come out and do something, but only after some pressure. He's a little weasle of a human being and won't come up for air at all. We CANNOT let this just fade away!

178

well if this the case some other clubs were headed down the same path using whatever supplements " people in glass houses shouldnt throw stones;

179

It depends if you believe the players got given banned substances or not.

I do. And I think there was enough circumstantial evidence to issue infractions if the AFL wanted to. And that’s why we folded.

We got thrown to the wolves no doubt. An obvious scapegoat. But the AFL will cover anything up until it becomes public. If it does, then you are on your own. And an ACC report is about as public as you can get.

As I said… Wrong place, wrong time, but ‘everybody else was doing it’ isn’t a defence.

180

something has to happen here, cant cop that.