I'm getting the sense that players are going to be put in a corner here and forced (by the puppeteering of the afl) to plead no fault/negligence.
Conveniently they will get no penalty and Hirdy will be gone-ski.
AFL 2015 - don't ever go against the family
My feeling too.
As long as there is plenty of room for subjectivity & the AFL are involved, the outcome will be politically expedient for the AFL.
'Comfortably satisfied' already has the stench of some contrived deal about it. Justice AFL-style...
Given the low burden of proof, the flimsy evidence and the penalty already served, I would find it unacceptable for Hird to be sacked under these circumstances.
Just because it uses words like comfortable and satisfaction does not mean a low burden of proof. Do a google search and read some law reviews on the topic. It is a much higher burden of proof than you think.
Get what you're saying but have no confidence that that's how the afl will, play this, come on, do you really?
So the AFL is going to fark over one of its most successful clubs?
The AFL is going to fark over the career of 34 players?
The AFL is going to somehow convince innocent players to agree?
You're either guilty of doping or you're not.
If we're LUCKY the AFL and some gov't types might plea for a lenient sentence similar to what the NRL players received.
A very good case exists that we took Thymosin b4. Clearly. You can even piece together a bit of it from the public domain.
Is it unfair? Yes. We never meant to dope with TB4. But tell that to Ahmed Saad.
There's also a very good case that you are a troll or at the absolute least of poor cognitive abilities. Still think AOD isn't approved for human use or perhaps you'd like to re-visit your premature comments in the Winders thread blaming injections for him leaving. :rolleyes:
There's also a very good case that you are a troll or at the absolute least of poor cognitive abilities. Still think AOD isn't approved for human use or perhaps you'd like to re-visit your premature comments in the Winders thread blaming injections for him leaving. :rolleyes:
AOD was not approved for human use. What are you talking about?
Winders should have been a one club player. He is one of the most down to earth people you could ever hope to meet.
The fact he was even considering walking out makes me sick. I stand by my comments.
As I understand AOD was not and still has not been approved for Therepeudic Use.
So berating posters on this is also bullying spin aimed at silencing them. The spin and aggression to silence falsly tries to sweep this under the carpet. It makes out that letting AOD into our club was not an act of reckless stupidity that nearly destroyed careers and reputations.
The reason we got off was damn lucky. It was because it had been assessed under S2 that it could not also be assessed under S0. How ■■■■■■ borderline is that. WADA say its banned.
The point that Doc Reid made about this being an unacceptable reputational risk taking was 100% right.
Dismiss him as as a silly old fuddy duddy but I respect the man and his courage to speak up against these morons whose risk taking has destroyed the proud reputation of this great club.
There's also a very good case that you are a troll or at the absolute least of poor cognitive abilities. Still think AOD isn't approved for human use or perhaps you'd like to re-visit your premature comments in the Winders thread blaming injections for him leaving. :rolleyes:
AOD was not approved for human use. What are you talking about?
Winders should have been a one club player. He is one of the most down to earth people you could ever hope to meet.
The fact he was even considering walking out makes me sick. I stand by my comments.
Approved for human use is what happens in stage 0-1 of the clinical trial process. It cannot proceed to human trials without actually being approved for human use - AOD is & was at stage 3 & therefore is & was absolutely approved for human use & was already beeing sold comercially in Aust & particularly the USA where it had GRAS approval & was sold in foods. Its basic stuff thats been explained here for 2 years. Everyone who's not a ignorant troll knows this. I stand by my claim that you are either a troll who ignores reality OR you are unable to comprehend truth.
Your comments in the Winders thread was that he was leaving because of the supplements saga. Since he's now staying continuing to stand by your comments highlights the weakness of your character.
As I understand AOD was not and still has not been approved for Therepeudic Use.
So berating posters on this is also bullying spin aimed at silencing them. The spin and aggression to silence falsly tries to sweep this under the carpet. It makes out that letting AOD into our club was not an act of reckless stupidity that nearly destroyed careers and reputations.
The reason we got off was damn lucky. It was because it had been assessed under S2 that it could not also be assessed under S0. How bloody borderline is that. WADA say its banned.
The point that Doc Reid made about this being an unacceptable reputational risk taking was 100% right.
Dismiss him as as a silly old fuddy duddy but I respect the man and his courage to speak up against these morons whose risk taking has destroyed the proud reputation of this great club.
Shut up about AOD for Christ sake. If either you or miss "we are guilty because the paper says so" bothered to do some research about AOD, you would find that A) it has been used in many creams sold over the counter at farking Myers B) it is used as a food additive c) if prescribed by a doctor and mixed by a compounding chemist, fark, wait for it: it's legal. Drop this unsafe, banned rubbish please.
As I understand AOD was not and still has not been approved for Therepeudic Use.
So berating posters on this is also bullying spin aimed at silencing them. The spin and aggression to silence falsly tries to sweep this under the carpet. It makes out that letting AOD into our club was not an act of reckless stupidity that nearly destroyed careers and reputations.
The reason we got off was damn lucky. It was because it had been assessed under S2 that it could not also be assessed under S0. How ■■■■■■ borderline is that. WADA say its banned.
The point that Doc Reid made about this being an unacceptable reputational risk taking was 100% right.
Dismiss him as as a silly old fuddy duddy but I respect the man and his courage to speak up against these morons whose risk taking has destroyed the proud reputation of this great club.
See there you go again Dodga old mate. Indignation righteous or otherwise from you just does not cut it. The point that you and this bomberjez character want to ignore is that guilt has to has to be proved and not inferred. This infernal process has to run its course and all the theories and assumption that any of us make are worth a pince of chicken crap in the end.
Anyone who dismisses Doc Reid is fool, but remember he as the Club Doctor was responsible ultimately for the medical program. It has always given me great heart out of all this that the AFL took no action against him, and with that enquiring mind of yours, you may want to ask why?
As I understand AOD was not and still has not been approved for Therepeudic Use.
So berating posters on this is also bullying spin aimed at silencing them. The spin and aggression to silence falsly tries to sweep this under the carpet. It makes out that letting AOD into our club was not an act of reckless stupidity that nearly destroyed careers and reputations.
The reason we got off was damn lucky. It was because it had been assessed under S2 that it could not also be assessed under S0. How bloody borderline is that. WADA say its banned.
The point that Doc Reid made about this being an unacceptable reputational risk taking was 100% right.
Dismiss him as as a silly old fuddy duddy but I respect the man and his courage to speak up against these morons whose risk taking has destroyed the proud reputation of this great club.
Shut up about AOD for Christ sake. If either you or miss "we are guilty because the paper says so" bothered to do some research about AOD, you would find that A) it has been used in many creams sold over the counter at farking Myers B) it is used as a food additive c) if prescribed by a doctor and mixed by a compounding chemist, fark, wait for it: it's legal. Drop this unsafe, banned rubbish please.
a b and c are all irrelevant.
This should not be forgotten and history re-written and the truth lost. This is at the heart of the matter. This is one substance (along with TB4) that has ruined our great clubs reputation.
S0 -Any pharmacological substance which is not addressed by any of the subsequent sections of the Prohibited List and with no current approval by any governmental regulatory health authority for human therapeutic use (eg drugs under pre-clinical or clinical development or discontinued, designer drugs, substances approved only for veterinary use) is prohibited.
We got off because eventually it was deemed that it had been considered by the subsequent sections of the Prohibited List but not that it had been approved for human therapeutic use.
This issue goes to the heart of who is responsible for this mess and the risk taking. It took a team of QC's half a year to figure out how to get us out of that, that's how clear cut it was.
It wasn't nothing. It was grey as all fark. It was an incredibly dangerous risk to have taken with our club's reputation.
As I understand AOD was not and still has not been approved for Therepeudic Use.
So berating posters on this is also bullying spin aimed at silencing them. The spin and aggression to silence falsly tries to sweep this under the carpet. It makes out that letting AOD into our club was not an act of reckless stupidity that nearly destroyed careers and reputations.
The reason we got off was damn lucky. It was because it had been assessed under S2 that it could not also be assessed under S0. How bloody borderline is that. WADA say its banned.
The point that Doc Reid made about this being an unacceptable reputational risk taking was 100% right.
Dismiss him as as a silly old fuddy duddy but I respect the man and his courage to speak up against these morons whose risk taking has destroyed the proud reputation of this great club.
Shut up about AOD for Christ sake. If either you or miss "we are guilty because the paper says so" bothered to do some research about AOD, you would find that A) it has been used in many creams sold over the counter at farking Myers B) it is used as a food additive c) if prescribed by a doctor and mixed by a compounding chemist, fark, wait for it: it's legal. Drop this unsafe, banned rubbish please.
a b and c are all irrelevant.
This should not be forgotten and history re-written and the truth lost. This is at the heart of the matter. This is one substance (along with TB4) that has ruined our great clubs reputation.
S0 -Any pharmacological substance which is not addressed by any of the subsequent sections of the Prohibited List and with no current approval by any governmental regulatory health authority for human therapeutic use (eg drugs under pre-clinical or clinical development or discontinued, designer drugs, substances approved only for veterinary use) is prohibited.
We got off because eventually it was deemed that it had been considered by the subsequent sections of the Prohibited List but not that it had been approved for human therapeutic use.
This issue goes to the heart of who is responsible for this mess and the risk taking. It took a team of QC's half a year to figure out how to get us out of that, that's how clear cut it was.
It wasn't nothing. It was grey as all fark. It was an incredibly dangerous risk to have taken with our club's reputation.
Didn't ASADA say a little while back that they knew all along AOD wasn't anything they could go us on? Was the press sending themselves on wild goose chases.
As I understand AOD was not and still has not been approved for Therepeudic Use.
So berating posters on this is also bullying spin aimed at silencing them. The spin and aggression to silence falsly tries to sweep this under the carpet. It makes out that letting AOD into our club was not an act of reckless stupidity that nearly destroyed careers and reputations.
The reason we got off was damn lucky. It was because it had been assessed under S2 that it could not also be assessed under S0. How ■■■■■■ borderline is that. WADA say its banned.
The point that Doc Reid made about this being an unacceptable reputational risk taking was 100% right.
Dismiss him as as a silly old fuddy duddy but I respect the man and his courage to speak up against these morons whose risk taking has destroyed the proud reputation of this great club.
Pretty much it. Incredibly baffling decision making.
As I understand AOD was not and still has not been approved for Therepeudic Use.
So berating posters on this is also bullying spin aimed at silencing them. The spin and aggression to silence falsly tries to sweep this under the carpet. It makes out that letting AOD into our club was not an act of reckless stupidity that nearly destroyed careers and reputations.
The reason we got off was damn lucky. It was because it had been assessed under S2 that it could not also be assessed under S0. How bloody borderline is that. WADA say its banned.
The point that Doc Reid made about this being an unacceptable reputational risk taking was 100% right.
Dismiss him as as a silly old fuddy duddy but I respect the man and his courage to speak up against these morons whose risk taking has destroyed the proud reputation of this great club.
Shut up about AOD for Christ sake. If either you or miss "we are guilty because the paper says so" bothered to do some research about AOD, you would find that A) it has been used in many creams sold over the counter at farking Myers B) it is used as a food additive c) if prescribed by a doctor and mixed by a compounding chemist, fark, wait for it: it's legal. Drop this unsafe, banned rubbish please.
a b and c are all irrelevant.
This should not be forgotten and history re-written and the truth lost. This is at the heart of the matter. This is one substance (along with TB4) that has ruined our great clubs reputation.
S0 -Any pharmacological substance which is not addressed by any of the subsequent sections of the Prohibited List and with no current approval by any governmental regulatory health authority for human therapeutic use (eg drugs under pre-clinical or clinical development or discontinued, designer drugs, substances approved only for veterinary use) is prohibited.
We got off because eventually it was deemed that it had been considered by the subsequent sections of the Prohibited List but not that it had been approved for human therapeutic use.
This issue goes to the heart of who is responsible for this mess and the risk taking. It took a team of QC's half a year to figure out how to get us out of that, that's how clear cut it was.
It wasn't nothing. It was grey as all fark. It was an incredibly dangerous risk to have taken with our club's reputation.
For farks sake Dodga, how many times does this ■■■■■ need to be explained to you. This is the written word so I can't talk to you real slow, but maybe if you read slowly it might sink in, either that or you are being deliberately obtuse.
AOD was considered under S2 not S0 when Dank provided it to the club. As such it was not banned, on the advice of ASADA.
AOD was not classified as banned by WADA under S0 until 2 months after we had self reported, more than 12 months after it was used.
ASADA's own investigators stated on the record to all the players and the club that ASADA would not pursue them for AOD because it would be impossible to make a doping case of it.
This was all established over 12 months ago, and for you to be banging on about it still indicates that you have your own agenda that seemingly no amount of proof will change. Why don't you take your tin foil hat, your good friend Bomberjez and your holier than thou attitude and do us all a favour by leaving this thread. Your continuous harping on subjects that have repeatedly been proven to be farcical is now just becoming irritating.
As I understand AOD was not and still has not been approved for Therepeudic Use.
So berating posters on this is also bullying spin aimed at silencing them. The spin and aggression to silence falsly tries to sweep this under the carpet. It makes out that letting AOD into our club was not an act of reckless stupidity that nearly destroyed careers and reputations.
The reason we got off was damn lucky. It was because it had been assessed under S2 that it could not also be assessed under S0. How bloody borderline is that. WADA say its banned.
The point that Doc Reid made about this being an unacceptable reputational risk taking was 100% right.
Dismiss him as as a silly old fuddy duddy but I respect the man and his courage to speak up against these morons whose risk taking has destroyed the proud reputation of this great club.
Shut up about AOD for Christ sake. If either you or miss "we are guilty because the paper says so" bothered to do some research about AOD, you would find that A) it has been used in many creams sold over the counter at farking Myers B) it is used as a food additive c) if prescribed by a doctor and mixed by a compounding chemist, fark, wait for it: it's legal. Drop this unsafe, banned rubbish please.
a b and c are all irrelevant.
This should not be forgotten and history re-written and the truth lost. This is at the heart of the matter. This is one substance (along with TB4) that has ruined our great clubs reputation.
S0 -Any pharmacological substance which is not addressed by any of the subsequent sections of the Prohibited List and with no current approval by any governmental regulatory health authority for human therapeutic use (eg drugs under pre-clinical or clinical development or discontinued, designer drugs, substances approved only for veterinary use) is prohibited.
We got off because eventually it was deemed that it had been considered by the subsequent sections of the Prohibited List but not that it had been approved for human therapeutic use.
This issue goes to the heart of who is responsible for this mess and the risk taking. It took a team of QC's half a year to figure out how to get us out of that, that's how clear cut it was.
It wasn't nothing. It was grey as all fark. It was an incredibly dangerous risk to have taken with our club's reputation.
For farks sake Dodga, how many times does this ■■■■■ need to be explained to you. This is the written word so I can't talk to you real slow, but maybe if you read slowly it might sink in, either that or you are being deliberately obtuse.
AOD was considered under S2 not S0 when Dank provided it to the club. As such it was not banned, on the advice of ASADA.
AOD was not classified as banned by WADA under S0 until 2 months after we had self reported, more than 12 months after it was used.
ASADA's own investigators stated on the record to all the players and the club that ASADA would not pursue them for AOD because it would be impossible to make a doping case of it.
This was all established over 12 months ago, and for you to be banging on about it still indicates that you have your own agenda that seemingly no amount of proof will change. Why don't you take your tin foil hat, your good friend Bomberjez and your holier than thou attitude and do us all a favour by leaving this thread. Your continuous harping on subjects that have repeatedly been proven to be farcical is now just becoming irritating.
Is there any part of that you don't understand?
And people were wondering why the old thread got nuked.
Approved for human use is what happens in stage 0-1 of the clinical trial process. It cannot proceed to human trials without actually being approved for human use - AOD is & was at stage 3 & therefore is & was absolutely approved for human use & was already beeing sold comercially in Aust & particularly the USA where it had GRAS approval & was sold in foods. Its basic stuff thats been explained here for 2 years. Everyone who’s not a ignorant troll knows this. I stand by my claim that you are either a troll who ignores reality OR you are unable to comprehend truth.
Your comments in the Winders thread was that he was leaving because of the supplements saga. Since he’s now staying continuing to stand by your comments highlights the weakness of your character.
GRAS approval conditionally came in June 2012. We were injecting it BEFORE it was even allowed as a 1mg insertion in food in the U.S…which is completely irrelevant anyway.
It did not receive full GRAS approval until 2014.
The WADA code states you can compound it. True. It also states that it does not have TGA approval then it is banned. Which way do you want it?
AOD is not approved for human use. I quote… ‘The drug has not been granted approval by Australia’s Therapeutic Goods Administration, or any other health authority in the world, for human use and is therefore banned by the World Anti-Doping Agency’
The fact players like Winders and Ryder consider leaving is an absolute tragedy.
Drugs aren’t often approved before clinical trials are completed.
As I understand AOD was not and still has not been approved for Therepeudic Use.
So berating posters on this is also bullying spin aimed at silencing them. The spin and aggression to silence falsly tries to sweep this under the carpet. It makes out that letting AOD into our club was not an act of reckless stupidity that nearly destroyed careers and reputations.
The reason we got off was damn lucky. It was because it had been assessed under S2 that it could not also be assessed under S0. How bloody borderline is that. WADA say its banned.
The point that Doc Reid made about this being an unacceptable reputational risk taking was 100% right.
Dismiss him as as a silly old fuddy duddy but I respect the man and his courage to speak up against these morons whose risk taking has destroyed the proud reputation of this great club.
Shut up about AOD for Christ sake. If either you or miss "we are guilty because the paper says so" bothered to do some research about AOD, you would find that A) it has been used in many creams sold over the counter at farking Myers B) it is used as a food additive c) if prescribed by a doctor and mixed by a compounding chemist, fark, wait for it: it's legal. Drop this unsafe, banned rubbish please.
a b and c are all irrelevant.
This should not be forgotten and history re-written and the truth lost. This is at the heart of the matter. This is one substance (along with TB4) that has ruined our great clubs reputation.
S0 -Any pharmacological substance which is not addressed by any of the subsequent sections of the Prohibited List and with no current approval by any governmental regulatory health authority for human therapeutic use (eg drugs under pre-clinical or clinical development or discontinued, designer drugs, substances approved only for veterinary use) is prohibited.
We got off because eventually it was deemed that it had been considered by the subsequent sections of the Prohibited List but not that it had been approved for human therapeutic use.
This issue goes to the heart of who is responsible for this mess and the risk taking. It took a team of QC's half a year to figure out how to get us out of that, that's how clear cut it was.
It wasn't nothing. It was grey as all fark. It was an incredibly dangerous risk to have taken with our club's reputation.
For farks sake Dodga, how many times does this ■■■■■ need to be explained to you. This is the written word so I can't talk to you real slow, but maybe if you read slowly it might sink in, either that or you are being deliberately obtuse.
AOD was considered under S2 not S0 when Dank provided it to the club. As such it was not banned, on the advice of ASADA.
AOD was not classified as banned by WADA under S0 until 2 months after we had self reported, more than 12 months after it was used.
ASADA's own investigators stated on the record to all the players and the club that ASADA would not pursue them for AOD because it would be impossible to make a doping case of it.
This was all established over 12 months ago, and for you to be banging on about it still indicates that you have your own agenda that seemingly no amount of proof will change. Why don't you take your tin foil hat, your good friend Bomberjez and your holier than thou attitude and do us all a favour by leaving this thread. Your continuous harping on subjects that have repeatedly been proven to be farcical is now just becoming irritating.
Is there any part of that you don't understand?
Mate I get it.
I'm not saying its illegal. I'm saying is borderline as all fark!. It easily could have gone either way which should NEVER EVER be the case.
If it was so simple then why did our PR team and lawyers not come out and smash it out of the park on Day 1?
The point is that people like yourself try to make out that it was perfectly fine and black and white and not a risk.
Rather than abuse and patronize why don't you explain what exactly constitutes being "considered under S2".
Dank's phone call to WADA where they say, "go and refer to ASADA and whether its been approved for therepedic use" and Dank replies with "thank you for confirming that its not banned under S2"?
You see what Dank has done there?
He has exploited a loophole and pinned some unsuspecting WADA employee to their word. So Dank can fall back and say "well WADA said its not banned under S2 when I rang them" and so that means it can't be banned under S0 so its all fine to risk the entire destruction of the EFC on it. Roll the dice .
Call me and Reid fuddy duddies. But that "confirmation" is a disgrace.
Based on that alone. I'd have had the bloke out the door the moment I found out.
That's farking atrocious risk taking and more so its a shifty, dishonest, hiding behind loopholes, taking interpretations of the wording in the law approach. Complete Smartest guy in the room arrogance.
They teach you in Year 10 Legal Studies that Judges can chose to interpret the law with a general broad brush interpretation (spirit of the law) or they can take a narrow focused interpretation.
Dank rolled the dice on the club that his narrow interpretation was fine and risked the existence of the club we all love and the careers of all these people on it.
enough about AOD guys. It may have been a dodgey call using it, but we're not being investigated for it. Move on.
K. There are people here still spouting factually incorrect information.
Can we get some access to start topics and actually follow an issue through from every perspective? I think we'll find the standard improving.
That way, if somebody doesn't want to hear about AOD, they can simply not click that thread.
Lets open blitz up to become an information resource and place for proper discussion.
Yes we're rose coloured EFC supporters...but we can deal with it.
How about, when the actual responsible policing body says it's not dodgy, both in private and in public, and clearly state they will not be investigating anyone for using it, you take their word for it jez?
How about, when the actual responsible policing body says it's not dodgy, both in private and in public, and clearly state they will not be investigating anyone for using it, you take their word for it jez?
Just a thought.
Alright Jez, Dodga and others who want to debate AOD, here is a thread to go nuts in.
This thread comes with conditions however:
1. Do not attempt to bring up AOD again in the ASADA thread, any such posts about AOD will be deleted from that thread, if you continually fail to heed this warning, you will be suspended.
2. The mod team believe AOD isn't an issue worth discussing any longer, so we shan't be wasting our time actively modding this thread - enter with that in mind. With that being said if you feel a poster has been unnecessarily abusive, report the post and we shall deal with them.