Sorry Saga - “It’s actually quite funny people thinking they know more than they actually do”


I just want to see Demitriou, Fitzptrick and Dill in a courtroom under oath.

Get Dank’s lawyer to ask all the questions we want to know the answers too.

Love to hear Jobe’s side of things as well.

The players never tested positive - AFL cleared the players. So interested to see why Dank was banned.


People in an uproar over Dank, he has a right to take them to court. He knew it was a conspiracy out to get him from the start. Nothing he could have said or done would have cleared the players, nothing!!! He could have had every receipt, all the records in the world and it would not have made one scap of difference. WADA just made up fairy tales. If you leave out bits that contradict a story its pretty easy to turn nothing into something. Ie Jobe was not a credible witness. Good luck to him.


I’m not ■■■■■■ at dank for doing it. As usual it’s the fkn timing. He is an idiot. Unless it’s all a ploy to win then they can have a massive class action for being suspended for no reason.


And I think it’s the other way around. It’s not that you cannot supply banned substances to the public while working with a WADA controlled sport - it’s that you cannot work in the sport if you deal in WADA banned substances. The subtle difference is how jurisdiction comes into it.


If that is the distinction, how does a Dr who prescribes and administers WADA restricted and/or prohibited substances, work at a club?


I don’t know. I’d guess and say that the club doctor is outside this restraint.


Rule designed for coaches in reality but twisted to get Dank


Whats the problem here?
Everybody gets what they really want.

Dank in court under cross examination.


pandora box will open


Someone correct me if I’m wrong, Dank wasn’t banned for anything to do with TB4, so his appeal is nothing to do with the players? What’s all the hoo ha about?


Thank for this ref Scooter:

Scooter‏ @ScooterMcNeice 13h13 hours ago
Reminder of Dank charges he will fight. Traffic charges.Notice last two lines on why 34 players may not be involved.


Can you appeal to a higher court if you didn’t bother to turn up and argue your case in the lower court?


Doctors are not covered due to Therapeutic Use Exemptions. Also I changed my post above as Dank was charged successfully by the AFL under 11.7 and 11.8 of their Anti-doping code. The charges brought against Dank under 11.6 all failed.

11.7 Trafficking or Attempted Trafficking in any Prohibited Substance or Prohibited

11.7 is not just trafficking to players but is interpreted to include providing WADA banned substances to support staff. Dank will argue that selling supplements to support staff through his clinic is his livelihood and is not trafficking.

I think support staff are allowed to consume (but not traffic) WADA banned supplements as long as their possession of the substance is not connected to a player. Can anyone confirm this?

In Scooter’s notes - Essendon “athletes” reads like “players” but dank was not charged with trafficking substances to our players - all of these charges were thrown out by the AFL Anti-doping Tribunal.


My understanding is that this was changed during the upheaval to include support staff.


WADA rules were extended as from 2014 to cover use and possession of WADA banned substances by support staff without valid justification. The trafficking and complicity provisions existed before then.


I suspect that Dank’s beef is with the Weapon never being charged by ASADA for an ADRV and being allowed back to work in the NRL under its strict accreditation rules intoduced after the Cronulla rulings.


This action by Dank was set in motion before weapon was somehow welcomed back into the NRL so while I’m sure that its probably a sore point, this isn’t a dummy spit.


Hird gets hung, drawn and quartered but Goodwin just carries on without anyone ever saying a word despite being Dank’s number 1 customer.


Hird gets hung, drawn and quartered but Goodwin just carries on without anyone ever saying a word despite being Dank’s number 1 customer.

It’s all about the optics


Yes. Wada code said support persons can’t handle banned substances at all. Except medical I believe. Can’t remember when it came in.
Afl have to follow code if they want to play with the big kids.