wonder why that was??
Don’t worry. Dank will clear the players. Sit tight. Be constipated.
I am sure that the AFL could not oppose Hird for the job as they would be liable under trade practices laws as a restraint of trade.
They could fight dirty in other ways. It could be that Lyon’s “ courtesy call” was to establish that there would be no repercussions. AFL and its stooges such as flog Barrett have been at pains to state that it was not necessary to get AFL clearance. And my punt is that the AFL leaked it and lined up people like Clarkson to put a gloss on it. Clarkson is the golden boy of the AFL, having dumped all over Jim in the early days. And now he is being mooted to be on Hocking’s AFL super panel which will oversee all matters AFL .
Yeah, I saw those. Thought it was interesting in the same trove that they were looking at a list of potential CAS arbitrators before having decided to appeal.
I got the nado ad-hoc committee meeting outcomes doc from UKAD after realising most foi laws aren’t restricted to requests from citizens of that country.
Does that mean the afl tribunals initial finding didn’t vindicate their hard line stance?
the AFL leaked Twatley the full ADT report on the proviso that he would very clearly slag off at the club and reinforce that the club was not cleared.
ps I am surmising this (no evidence) but I believe it to be true based on media actions and one of many processes I think the AFL use to manipulate the media.
You know that the AFL always look after their silent loyalists, rewarded sooner or later.
Of all the side-injustices that went on during that time, this one is the one that sticks in my craw and makes me want to hit something very hard.
didn’t seem to bother them when they made him stand down for optics
Trouble was it was not the AFL but, for optics, it was EFC who made him stand down. Of course the AFL strong-armed EFC to do so. But the Rsoles at AFL HQ know their target well: EFC is always compliant, and never has objected to VFL/AFL strong arm tactics. No wonder we were chosen as scapegoats
If you had asked ASADA, you would probably have got a refusal. The INADO site used to make meeting and other documents freely available, but subsequently restricted access to members only.
There has been an ongoing government process run by PM&C on Open Australia. The FOI part is absolute rubbish.
I agree with you, except for one thing. When the club was in the VFL under Ron Evans, it did indeed do what the crooks running the VFL wanted. However, under Jim’s grandfather and Greg Sewell it stood up for itself and was not pushed around. Moreover, in the 1970s Essendon stopped Richmond led by Caroline Wilson’s father bankrupting the VFL.
Thanks, I was not aware of that. I will henceforth say “rarely” instead of “never”.
What short memories the people in the AFL who have grabbed the reigns of power have.
As they say, eventually every dog has its day.
Culbert has gone quiet and probably a bit conflicted with the criticism of Coe in the UK inquiry. The Nitro Ganes venture, in which he was involved with the IAAF, has fallen flat. But he is advertising Jump Media’s contract with the government under Australia’s aid program with the South Pacific. What is Julie Bishop thinking, employing a flog like him.
Senator Farrell is one of the so-called “Faceless Men” who deposed Kevin Rudd from the prime ministership in 2010. He was a key backer of Ms Gillard and is a strong ally of Mr Shorten.
“Don Farrell is absolutely a passionate Bill Shorten supporter and has been for a long period of time,” said Senator Conroy in a recent Sky News report.
Senator Farrell is an extremely influential figure in South Australian Labor and known for backing candidates for preselection, including sitting MPs Amanda Rishworth, Nick Champion and Kate Ellis.
It was Senator Farrell who set up McDevitt to ramble on and confirm he was given a letter from the Privileges Committee confirming he had NOT mislead parliament.
My guess is he trying to cover his sleazy tracks since then, and is still doing so now.
Here is the link if you want to watch Senator Farrell allow McDevitt to smugly claim he has a ‘get out of goal’ free letter. Use the controls to jump across until McDevitt is talking…then again…perhaps don’t bother as you will only get mad all over again.
Or every flog has its day.
It was a huge insult to all dogs. Flogs is much more appropriate.
And so it begins…
AFL threatens ASADA split if key documents in Essendon drugs saga are made public
12 minutes ago
THE AFL has threatened to cut ties with ASADA if key documents in the Essendon supplements saga are made public.
The move, which could jeopardise millions of dollars in federal government funding for the league, was signalled in an affidavit filed by AFL integrity unit chief Tony Keane in the Administrative Appeals Tribunal on Friday.
The AFL has joined ASADA in fighting a Freedom of Information request made by a member of the public seeking access to doping control forms signed by Bombers players between August 2011 and September 2012.
“If the application is successful … I anticipate that the AFL would give serious consideration to engaging an alternative supplier for the conduct of the testing required in connection with the AFL’s anti-doping program,” Keane told the tribunal, citing ASADA’s strict confidentiality obligations.
But the Herald Sun can reveal banned Bomber Nathan Lovett-Murray has joined the stoush to have the doping control forms released.
Lovett-Murray’s agent, Peter Jess, said the forms were being protected to cover up “serious flaws” in the Court of Arbitration for Sport’s findings that the Essendon players had colluded by failing to disclose the use of substances administered by sports scientist Stephen Dank.
“It is Nathan’s understanding that the dates of the doping control tests are crucial because most of the players’ tests were conducted before Thymosin beta-4 was available from a known source in Australia,” Jess said.
“Nathan considers it in the public interest that all relevant details surrounding the dates of his doping test be made available.”
The AFL was forced into a humiliating backdown 12 years ago when it threatened to walk away from the World Anti-Doping Agency drug code over a dispute about penalties imposed for the use of illicit substances like cannabis.
While the AFL could remain WADA-compliant if samples collected by an independent agency were processed at a WADA-endorsed lab, the move would be certain to test relations with Canberra.
“The AFL is not obliged to retain ASADA for the purpose of conducting doping control tests but elects to do so,” Keane said in the affidavit.
“The AFL values highly the relationship that it has with ASADA … that said, I am aware that there are private companies in Australia that offer the types of services that the AFL requires in connection with its conduct of the anti-doping (program).
“I anticipate that such private companies would not be an ‘agency’ for the purpose of the FOI Act (or other freedom of information legislation) and as such they would not be subject to a request of the nature of the underlying application.”
The FOI request is restricted to the names and dates of the urine and blood tests conducted by ASADA officers on Essendon players, with all other information redacted.
But Keane told the tribunal the AFL was concerned their release could “compromise the efficacy” of the anti-doping program.
The AFL integrity boss said they could also “subject a player to stigmatism and-or ridicule” because they were “obliged to list all prescription and non-prescription medications taken by them in the previous seven days”.
“Which, for example, may relate to the player’s undisclosed physical and/or mental illness, sexual dysfunction, medication for which a player has a Therapeutic Use Exemption etc,” Keane said.
Jess said the release of the forms would demonstrate that players including Jobe Watson, Dyson Heppell, Mark McVeigh, Brent Prismall and Lovett-Murray had nothing to declare at the time they were drug tested.
“The alleged collusion simply did not take place,” Jess said.
In finding the players guilty of doping in January 2016, the CAS panel declared: “The complete failure of the vast majority of players who had to fill in a doping control form during the season to reveal the receipt of injections does not encourage confidence in their statements as to the limited or sporadic nature of what they were injected with”.
A separate Supreme Court hearing into the five-year drugs saga will be held on the eve of the Richmond-Carlton season-opener on March 21.
Human rights lawyer Julian Burnside, QC, is leading a case brought against AFL chief executive Gillon McLachlan and former commission chairman Mike Fitzpatrick alleging misleading and deceptive conduct.