This from Warner’s article. Does anyone know which source this is referring to and the supposed timing of availability?
Wow. That’s some article.
Part of the reason ASADA buckled to the AFL’s demands so often is IIRC a huge part of the additional non-government funding ASADA receives is due to AFL choosing to have them do the testing. Something like 70%
So AFL have leverage over them simply due to money which is a ridiculous situation to be in for a supposed independent statuatory body.
Things are certainly heating up now
I think bruce would have a massice timeline on his wall somewhere…hes just looking at filling in the gaps as anyone who was involved should have…
im guessing they pinged them for not filling out the forms for instance in march when the TB4 only arrived in September…just a guess
If all this stuff comes out, when do we take Afl to court for ruining our enjoyment of the game especially paid members?
For how long is this BLATANT LIE going to be allowed to be spouted in the media?
As supporters, we can’t lose from all this sh*t.
At the very least it’s great entertainment value.
If Warner’s article referred to dates on forms compared to circumstantial evidence indicating when WADA claim Dank purchased TB4, I would understand this.
But there is no supplier of TB4 in Australia that Dank was ever linked to via a paper trail.
They might be referring to the infamous clear vials which Dank lied about taking to get tested and then said he tossed them as the thymosin was fried. But the source of that stuff was China via Shane Sharted.
So I can’t really make any sense of this Australian supplier of TB4 linked to Dank.
The joke is that extremely confidential data of some Australian athletes was hacked and made public by Fancy Bears. It came from ASADA entering the data in WADA’s ADAMS system
I’m not sure what they’re scared of. The decisions and media campaigns have ignored many of the published facts.
I mean, there are and have been really easy stories here (e.g. Vlad going on and on and on about AOD, when ASADA, the AFL and the club had agreed it was a non-issue pretty much on day one).
I don’t see this particular example as being particularly dangerous to the AFL’s narrative; so I assume they have some other reason they want to cut out ASADA.
Always will be an agenda
Probably beginning to distance themselves so when all the ■■■■ eventually goes down they will be blaming them entirely for it.
In the end AFLADT found players not guilty. It was ASADA’s flawed evidence and CAS’s corrupt judgement that banned them.
ASADA released information they weren’t meant to under the act. interim report etc
The fact that all the parasites were trying to position a potential Hird return positively spoke volumes.
Somebody at the top is definitely scared of something.
It only takes 1 person NAT RAt to have a bee in his bonnet a manager in jess who loves to stir ■■■■ up …really a nightmare for asada afl that they are ones speaking out
Its unfortunate Natrat doesnt have 33 mates who have the same opinion.
And what Fahey said about the Essendon coach in his remarks at the 11 May 2013 WADA Executive Committee.
And all the other stuff about the players that was leaked to the media.
So noble of the AFL to be seen to be looking after the players, when its very actions and media manipulation were the cause of their being vilified.
Yep. And having a joint investigation basically let the flow of information happen outside of privacy laws as the AFL weren’t bound by what ASADA was.
So they are entirely at fault for enabling and fueling the situation where the media campaigned so viciously against players, staff & the club.
But of course that will be put back on ASADA for taking part in a joint investigation in the first place simply to give them powers outside of what parliament legislated they should have, which conveniently allowed AFL control.
Just when you think Gil and his cronies can not plumb further levels of chicanery … they do!
Do you think it’s a message to the players? For instance,if you don’t object to release, we will take over the testing program, test who we like and reveal all to the media and generally blackball you.
Lovett-Murray is out of the system and I understand his indigenous mentor job around Shepparton has not re- surfaced.He has nothing to lose.
But that does not explain why the AFL wants to hide the documents, unless it serves to reveal who was not tested. I for one would be interested to learn if Hal Hunter - who admitted to receiving injections, but was never charged - was included in the tests.
Don’t “we” already pretty much know who was tested?
Admittedly it’s not as public and published as it could be, because of the insistence that the 34 be prosecuted as a job lot (which allows “the vibe” to be more important than the evidence/circumstances of any given individual).
What a shambles, this could get good
Let’s hope Nat rat stays on course and the AFL suddenly don’t buy his record label
I am certain we know that 20 players were drug tested in that period - I am struggling to see what the issue is when apparently, few if any players listed any substances on their DC forms.