Independent Observer Group eh? A bit like Integrity Unit, the sort of body you convene when you know you’re dodgy and need to profess that you’re doing the right thing.
How convenient for Mr McDevitt that he gets this nice posting.
At a glance it underscores why each player should have pushed to have there own hearing
no… once the CAS have made a ruling there are no more appeal avenues open to athletes
exactly he is not independent as he has a vested interest in the anti doping movement & he clearly can’t or only wants to observe things that match his agenda
Jesus H Christ! And people think Luke Ball’s job title/description is nebulous and fluffy…
What the hell is an independent observer group anyway? I would have thought it’s just spectators who don’t support any particular teams or athletes
Edit: as an example… AFLW…Essendon supporters are an independent observer group. I nominate @DJR to be our chair
It’s a job you get when they need to keep you in the fold. Trust issues can come to the fore outside the fold.
While I am sure DJR would be a great chair, he is not corrupt, so not a relevant nomination for this example.
I see chip was just on KB’s show - no idea what he said? Anyone hear?
On Thursday 1 February,2018,in the Administrative Appeals Tribunal, Warwick Hadfield from RN Radio reported the application brought by Bruce Francis,Political Analyst,to obtain an FOI Request for the 100 Text Messages referred to by Mr MCDevitt,former CEO of ASADA,in the CAS Appeal case involving the Essendon Football Club and its players.
Mr McDevitt had told the Senate Estimates Hearing last year that these Text Messages written by Essendon officials stated they were giving the players TB-4,a banned substance.
Mr Francis wished to see these Text Messages,and lodged an FOI Request.
Mr Francis never received the documents,and then lodged an Application at AAT.
The Lawyers for ASADA who attended the AAT Hearing allegedly informed the AAT “these text messages do not exist”.
Mr Warwick Hadfield reported this on the Fran Kelly show that day.
I am mystified as to how this case has escaped your attention,and not been examined by your reporters.
In the event the position is as directed by the ASADA Lawyers,surely the Federal Police must investigate Mr McDevitt for misleading the Senate,and misleading Court of Arbitration for Sport ?
Furthermore,what does this say for the whole process that saw 34 Essendon players guilty of taking a banned substance ?
Why is newscorp silent on this case and issue ?
STEPHEN J PEAK,
STEPHEN J PEAK & CO,
Its all so very sad that nobody is willing yet alone wanting to investigate, It still upsets me today what went on!
We need a class action and compensation for pain and suffering.
I just find it strange that no aspiring journo would take it on as it could that type of story that makes a career not forgetting the 34 whos careers lives were changed forever!
It could also depend on the choice of arbitrators and how the panel defined its mandate. The last paragraph of the CAS statement is relevant. Spigelman got outvoted by the other two on the “all or some” ruling.
Coates has now stated that he will review CAS processes, on the basis that there needs to be confidence in judicial processes. Tell that to the E34!
Meanwhile, following the IOC’s “independent Inquiry” the IOC will not invite the CAS cleared athletes to the Winter Olympics.
Now, there’s a precedent for the AFL to undo the CAS findings. If it is good enough for the IOC …
Meanwhile, no comment by those on the CAS arbitrators list - cowards
No It wouldn’t.
No news editor would run with such a story. The public are sick of hearing about the Essendon Saga.
Even if a journo had a handful of witnesses and experts or even McDevitt himself confessing wrong doing it wouldn’t matter because in the eyes of the public the players are guilty and have always been guilty.
The public wont care if the process to find the players guilty was corrupt because in their eyes they were guilty regardless.
The public won’t give a ■■■■ about the story. That’s why no journo would bother running with it.
Sadly, I think this is correct
I will agree and disagree with Fairybread’s post - A journalist needs to tread warily with this story and would need full support from the editor and the owner - But if you had rock solid evidence you would run with the story.