I suppose the next thing we know, might be Benny boy being offered a cushy job at the AFL or Bastion.
How long do you reckon???
Can I run this by you? Because of the WADA/CAS outcome things are looking good for Johnny Coates and his IOC/WADA/CAS buddies to get the huge lift in funding from $30m to $300m. That increase is worldwide not just Australia. Nevertheless the taxpayers will have to reach into their pockets again. And with the increase in funding will come an increase in resources and most likely administration zones, just like how the IOC is regionalized. Imagine a WADA administration region called “Pacific” region. And who is regional CEO or Director. Have a guess. Johnny Coates will have even more power and have a headkicker to do all his dirty deeds. Is this not too far fetched???
For anyone in the know, does the club unofficially support a senate inquiry?
NO
The “club” consists of members first and foremost, who elect a board that is supposed to represent their interests. There are also employees such as CEO, coaches etc who are paid to perform specific roles and the players who are central to the purpose of the club.
Of these people, the members are the ones who have a lifetime affiliation, concern for the culture and long term success of the club and never move from club to club for personal advantage. In my view the members are the “club” and many would probably support an enquiry.
For anyone in the know, does the club unofficially support a senate inquiry?
NO
The “club” consists of members first and foremost, who elect a board that is supposed to represent their interests. There are also employees such as CEO, coaches etc who are paid to perform specific roles and the players who are central to the purpose of the club.
Of these people, the members are the ones who have a lifetime affiliation, concern for the culture and long term success of the club and never move from club to club for personal advantage. In my view the members are the “club” and many would probably support an enquiry.
Yeah nah.
While I agree wholeheartedly with your assertion that the club belongs to the members I think you’ve blurred the lines significantly.
Members simply don’t and cannot possess the level of knowledge required to make decisions in the best interest of the club. To be brutally honest I’d say that very few would even want to. One only has to look at the ridiculously low voter levels for board elections to surmise that the majority of members don’t care to be involved in the running of the club, they just want to win games of footy.
Now I have no idea how the club feels re the petition or the debate enquiry or the release or non release of documents. But I’d wager, whatever their feelings, they would have good reasons for them, damn good reasons.
For anyone in the know, does the club unofficially support a senate inquiry?
NO
The “club” consists of members first and foremost, who elect a board that is supposed to represent their interests. There are also employees such as CEO, coaches etc who are paid to perform specific roles and the players who are central to the purpose of the club.
Of these people, the members are the ones who have a lifetime affiliation, concern for the culture and long term success of the club and never move from club to club for personal advantage. In my view the members are the “club” and many would probably support an enquiry.
Yeah nah.
While I agree wholeheartedly with your assertion that the club belongs to the members I think you’ve blurred the lines significantly.
Members simply don’t and cannot possess the level of knowledge required to make decisions in the best interest of the club. To be brutally honest I’d say that very few would even want to. One only has to look at the ridiculously low voter levels for board elections to surmise that the majority of members don’t care to be involved in the running of the club, they just want to win games of footy.
Now I have no idea how the club feels re the petition or the debate enquiry or the release or non release of documents. But I’d wager, whatever their feelings, they would have good reasons for them, damn good reasons.
…or perhaps they have just been told to ‘move on’ by the mothership
For anyone in the know, does the club unofficially support a senate inquiry?
NO
The “club” consists of members first and foremost, who elect a board that is supposed to represent their interests. There are also employees such as CEO, coaches etc who are paid to perform specific roles and the players who are central to the purpose of the club.
Of these people, the members are the ones who have a lifetime affiliation, concern for the culture and long term success of the club and never move from club to club for personal advantage. In my view the members are the “club” and many would probably support an enquiry.
Yeah nah.
While I agree wholeheartedly with your assertion that the club belongs to the members I think you’ve blurred the lines significantly.
Members simply don’t and cannot possess the level of knowledge required to make decisions in the best interest of the club. To be brutally honest I’d say that very few would even want to. One only has to look at the ridiculously low voter levels for board elections to surmise that the majority of members don’t care to be involved in the running of the club, they just want to win games of footy.
Now I have no idea how the club feels re the petition or the debate enquiry or the release or non release of documents. But I’d wager, whatever their feelings, they would have good reasons for them, damn good reasons.
Which is why we have to hope and trust that the board members are only thinking about what is good for the club, not thinking about personal positioning or business opportunities when they are making decisions on behalf of the club.
For anyone in the know, does the club unofficially support a senate inquiry?
No it doesn’t. Does us no good what so ever. In fact from a club perspective it just serves to keep the whole mess alive. Which is the last thing we want.
Thanks for the inside info.
Do you know if any of the players (or support staff) affected by the ASAGA support the senate inquiry?
No idea. Sorry.
Cheers.
ATM I support a senate inquiry. But, I’d change if the players affected were against it.
Actually if the players don’t want to pursue a senate hearing fair enough but they why are they still appealing the CAS decision? Why were players like Hooker so rapt that we marched on their behalf so much so it made him re-sign with us, why does Nathan Lovett-Murray tweet about the injustice of being called a drug cheat? The only ones that want this to go away are the AFL and because we have signed non disparagement clauses etc so do the board because that is what the AFL expect them to say. Of course they want it to go away of course they want the world to think Hird was the mastermind and the bad guy along with Dank. Why not Robinson, Robson, Evans & Hamilton?? why not Demetriou & McLachlin & Fitzpatrick? Why with so little effort at protecting the privacy of the players and defending Hird did the AFL insist that Essendon had a problem when it was clear from Andruska’s testimony there were other clubs of more interest? This has gone too far now it involves governments & a government department it isn’t just about whether our players were naughty boys & Dank & Hird were the devil incarnate anymore. Now we can see the full scope of the issue that citizens rights were trampled on that lies were allowed to be printed and spoken on media that no evidence was allowed to convict 34 people on a double jeopardy case when this is not part of our law. That their trade is allowed to be so restricted that they cant earn a living or had to be stood down from jobs just because they were associated with AFL …how is this right? how can anyone advocate to care about the players and just say forget the last 4 years let it go and get over it!!! is this the sort of ideals you want your kids to grow up with that if you fight for your rights, if you believe you are innocent & wont take a deal saying you are guilty that you are a treated as a criminal? That you have no right to redress the issues in a court in your own land??? Well stuff that!!
To be absolutely honest, I’m concerned one of the players affected might go and jump off a bridge.
I’m all for justice. But, if there are players who are at the end of their rope and don’t think they’ve got the strength to deal with an inquiry (or the media and political circus that will inevitably accompany it) then, in my opinion, no quest for justice is worth a dead footballer.
I just want to hear from the players affected. And so far, I haven’t heard even one player give their opinion of the inquiry (for or against). That bothers me.
I understand that the issues raised are ‘bigger’ than the players. As I said, ATM, I support the inquiry (and have been publicly promoting it). But, I’d feel a lot more comfortable knowing the players affected support the inquiry, or at the very least, they’re mentally healthy enough to deal with the political and media onslaught that THEY (not us!) will have to contend with.
Players are more likely to suffer if they have to live with the stain of the fabricated CAS verdict than knowing people are trying to get some answers …they are probably not allowed to give their real opinions & they probably don’t want to be asked because better to give nothing than be accused by the afl of inciting the crowds (us). I’d think the players are a lot more mentally strong now than they were a year ago when the double jeopardy thing hit them…having been found not guilty and then being told tough we don’t like the verdict we’re going to trial you all over again & having them make stuff up to suit their guilty agenda would be more damaging than know people were after an enquiry to bring out what really happened. But I see where you are coming from I would be way more depressed if I thought no one cared about righting the wrongs & you know it isn’t the words you say it’s you do that counts. Saying you support someone isn’t actually support it’s just words.
“It was public disquiet with the sentence – and the fact that many, though they thought Lindy guilty, felt the Crown had not proved it so – that caused them to examine the case further. Through the efforts of a handful of determined people it grew to a mighty swell, and ultimately meant the establishment of a Royal Commission, which once again confirmed the truth stated by the first coroner – the Chamberlains were not guilty for the death of their beloved daughter.”
We are assuming that the “innocent” people referred to by McMegalomaniac are players and/or support staff…
Given that man’s very kaleidoscopic/hallucinatory world view, he most likely meant the real innocents like Brett Clothier, Peter Harcourt, Vlad, Caro, or (Heaven forbid) himself…! I mean, were the truth to come out about the lies and corruption involved with those people, things could go bang! Careers and livelihoods could be ruined forever…!
On the issue of players’ feelings about a Senate enquiry, I can only put myself in their position, as best I can, and speculate about what I would think.
Firstly, the desire to put it behind them and move on, stems from the fact that it has been a millstone around their necks for 4 long years.
The ultimate penalty was eventually imposed, and is now being served, and will be over, effectively, in September.
The players have received an even bigger playing penalty than any reasonable person (ie foamers excluded) ever imagined, and now have the added burden of a guilty verdict staining their careers and reputations.
Throughout the saga, the players were the ultimate targets, the ultimate people at risk at the end of the process. That hung over them like a sword of Damocles, and every twist and every delay reinforced that.
Now, for the players, there is no more threat. No more harm that can be done to them.
There is nothing more to fear from a Senate enquiry.
They are not in the firing line of, and there can be no consequences of, a Senate enquiry.
From the players’ point of view, it would not prolong their pain, but might offer the possibility of vindicating them to some degree, even if it did not remove the conviction and the penalty.
Whether the players were guilty and deserved only a token penalty, or whether they were innocent and deserved no penalty, the players’ reputations can only benefit from an examination of the roles and actions of ASADA and the AFL, and the fairness and appropriateness of the process and rules they were subjected to.
On the issue of players' feelings about a Senate enquiry, I can only put myself in their position, as best I can, and speculate about what I would think.
Firstly, the desire to put it behind them and move on, stems from the fact that it has been a millstone around their necks for 4 long years.
The ultimate penalty was eventually imposed, and is now being served, and will be over, effectively, in September.
The players have received an even bigger playing penalty than any reasonable person (ie foamers excluded) ever imagined, and now have the added burden of a guilty verdict staining their careers and reputations.
Throughout the saga, the players were the ultimate targets, the ultimate people at risk at the end of the process. That hung over them like a sword of Damocles, and every twist and every delay reinforced that.
Now, for the players, there is no more threat. No more harm that can be done to them.
There is nothing more to fear from a Senate enquiry.
They are not in the firing line of, and there can be no consequences of, a Senate enquiry.
From the players' point of view, it would not prolong their pain, but might offer the possibility of vindicating them to some degree, even if it did not remove the conviction and the penalty.
Whether the players were guilty and deserved only a token penalty, or whether they were innocent and deserved no penalty, the players' reputations can only benefit from an examination of the roles and actions of ASADA and the AFL, and the fairness and appropriateness of the process and rules they were subjected to.
I know one player that has not been asked- the conversation has not even started. Who would ask? Who would collate the answers? Think about this- it is just pure fabrication, a red herring on McDevitt’s behalf. Although the boys are now a disparate group, they still behave as first directed, to keep quiet, stay with the group narrative. Most would not even know what to think about a Senate enquiry.
On the issue of players' feelings about a Senate enquiry, I can only put myself in their position, as best I can, and speculate about what I would think.
Firstly, the desire to put it behind them and move on, stems from the fact that it has been a millstone around their necks for 4 long years.
The ultimate penalty was eventually imposed, and is now being served, and will be over, effectively, in September.
The players have received an even bigger playing penalty than any reasonable person (ie foamers excluded) ever imagined, and now have the added burden of a guilty verdict staining their careers and reputations.
Throughout the saga, the players were the ultimate targets, the ultimate people at risk at the end of the process. That hung over them like a sword of Damocles, and every twist and every delay reinforced that.
Now, for the players, there is no more threat. No more harm that can be done to them.
There is nothing more to fear from a Senate enquiry.
They are not in the firing line of, and there can be no consequences of, a Senate enquiry.
From the players' point of view, it would not prolong their pain, but might offer the possibility of vindicating them to some degree, even if it did not remove the conviction and the penalty.
Whether the players were guilty and deserved only a token penalty, or whether they were innocent and deserved no penalty, the players' reputations can only benefit from an examination of the roles and actions of ASADA and the AFL, and the fairness and appropriateness of the process and rules they were subjected to.
I know one player that has not been asked- the conversation has not even started. Who would ask? Who would collate the answers? Think about this- it is just pure fabrication, a red herring on McDevitt’s behalf. Although the boys are now a disparate group, they still behave as first directed, to keep quiet, stay with the group narrative. Most would not even know what to think about a Senate enquiry.
Thanks, Arcadian. You touched on a number of issues I’ve been concerned about (i.e. what the players think about an inquiry and why they haven’t commented.) I appreciate the clarification.
Senate Hansard proof of 6 May Budget Estimates is now up on Senate site.
Nash (pp 68-70 of Hansard proof) gave three reasons, all as long as a piece of string and going beyond the ASADA Act , but to note that the reasons are all based on preliminary advice. It can still be pursued by Senators, whether or not Senate is sitting. And (the heavily qualified) AGS advice can be contested - it’s not a legal ruling.
The three reasons, related to “considerable uncertainty around a number of matters including under the ASADA Act”:
(1) there is doubt as to whether the Minster for Sport- including under the ASADA Act- can direct ASDA's CEO to produce documents in ASADA's possession;
(2) under the ASADA Act there is doubt whether ASADA can voluntarily provide the documents to the Minister;
(3) and there may be grounds for which public interest immunity claims should be considered.
She went on to expand the public interest immunity issue:
(a) potential to prejudice ongoing law enforcement issues
(b) impartial adjudication of cases and disclosure of confidential sources of information in relation to the enforcement or administration of the law
(c) risk of compromising the rights of athletes participating in anti-doping matters
So, she's widened justification beyond the ASADA Act, but has not satisfactorily explained why redaction could not overcome most of the hurdles, which could eliminate a lot of the public interest immunity claims. Also, the relevance of law enforcement issues is a bit of a mystery. ASADA has no powers in that regard. As to "impartial adjudication of cases" I haven't seen any sign of that so far by ASADA and AFL.
Arcadian:
AFL CEO has reportedly bought into the issue, saying that he is lobbying to have the AFL Tribunal Report released. Lobbying just who? Isn’t there already enough pressure on the players without this and his Brownlow comments?
Arcadian:
AFL CEO has reportedly bought into the issue, saying that he is lobbying to have the AFL Tribunal Report released. Lobbying just who? Isn't there already enough pressure on the players without this and his Brownlow comments?
I don’t understand this post. some are angry that ASADA won’t release the requested documents as per Madigans request. Yet you post there is enough pressure on players. it’s one or the other
Arcadian:
AFL CEO has reportedly bought into the issue, saying that he is lobbying to have the AFL Tribunal Report released. Lobbying just who? Isn't there already enough pressure on the players without this and his Brownlow comments?
I don’t understand this post. some are angry that ASADA won’t release the requested documents as per Madigans request. Yet you post there is enough pressure on players. it’s one or the other
There is enough pressure on the players without CEO lobbying, in public, for his preferred viewpoint. I agree BTW. I also think his Brownlow comments were completely inappropriate.
Gil should let the political manoevrings play out. It really is none of his businesses. And he and his organisation have done enough damage over the past four years with their interference. It really is time they gave it a rest. Stopped being the AFL’s business after the CAS verdict. All they have to do is ensure the decision is implemented.