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

Why don’t you consider some of the queries I have raised that emanate from the Evans weekend at Windy Hill.
By the way. there has no been no direct accusation.
That will come if he can find the courage to explain why and what he did that weekend.

Thanks for the correction. So not the ‘AFL auditors’.

that being said, it shouldn’t mean that the question of how he got the job isn’t valid.

1 Like

I think he talks to a few more people than we know about or knows people who do

There is no evidence of shredding however there is evidence of paperwork going missing which has never been found. Like there Friday gone Monday. James Hird went to find some documents and they were not where there were.

4 Likes

I don’t think anyone (other than Dave) knows what happened and whether docs were taken/shredded.

If some paperwork was removed, it wasn’t to done make EFC look guilty, i suspect it may have been done with a mindset of ‘if there is no paperwork the players can’t be proven guilty’, but little did they think that Mcidiot would do what he did. And how bad that looks.

1 Like

Then there’s a misconception in the public that the shredder went to overdrive and that’s why no-one could find evidence. Hell I even started to believe it with some of the persistence of people I know. Never bothered to ask the question till now.

O.k. I may be and I make no excuses for that. I will stand corrected and will apologise when David Evans comes clean and tells all.

1 Like

Sorry that’s who I meant. Deloitte.

Actually have to think he’s full of it on that call.

It would be beyond belief that the club would re sign a Coach the Players don’t want. Unless they didn’t want him, but for some bizarre reason forgot to tell the board about it.

Crock of crap.

People think Evans is going to come out and say he shredded documents?

Really?

I remember Madden being interviewed not long after he became a board member, and he said they knew what the players were given, just not what quantities, and I guess that lines up with the anecdotal evidence that Dank was a bit haphazard with his records/schedules.

8 Likes

Is Fiona Sarah?

ok for a time here it has been suggested that Fiona Walsh could be the voice of Sarah. I sent it off to a friend of mine who works in the audio industry to analyse the voices. Here are the results.

With regard to your request for me to analyse and compare two voice recordings, I have formed the following opinions.

Both of the voice recordings, one being Fiona’s showreel and the other being a Youtube clip of the conversation on Triple M Hot breakfast are of very low resolution and poor quality. This makes analysis difficult. Also, one of the examples is a recording of a phone conversation, making it very difficult to compare the two examples with any kind of spectral analysis software.

We can however compare the performances, the timbre of the voices and the pronunciation of words and vowels to present an opinion of whether the two recordings are in fact the same person.

The most prominent trait of Fiona’s voice is a raspy edge. Her natural speaking voice is slightly gravelly. This isn’t present in the voice of the caller.
Secondly, the voice of the caller becomes very thin when she is emotional. I cannot hear an example of this anywhere on Fiona’s reel

In comparing the pronunciation of many words and vowels, I have the opinion that it is unlikely that the two examples are the same person. Among these comparisons are the words you, used, home, knows, unknown, told, the use of “ing”, children and issues. There are significantly more words pronounced differently than those pronounced similarly.

I hope this insight helps in your research. Please note it is only an opinion and I have no evidence that can confirm either way.

In addition he said that it is more likely to be authentic than non authentic because of the level of performance, she doesn’t always keep her train of thought and her emotional cues.

Perhaps people say they don’t know who Sarah is because they were told to lock it down to protect her.

12 Likes

Interesting.

Still don’t believe it’s authentic though, could not have been scripted more with what was said.

1 Like

On first reading of the interview transcript I was convinced it was scripted from the beginning. Another explanation for the apparent scripting is that the caller read the media reports many times as it was personal to her, and became familiar with the language being used by the AFL. I think the other piece of evidence to suggest it was fake was the club immediately admitted they didn’t recognise the voice and they felt they would be able to given their contact with parents.

4 Likes

I see it this way:

The above could lead someone to think “why not be open and transparent if you have nothing to hide”?
And the reason is - when people with almost absolute power over you wish to use your club as a bludgeon over the heads of the other clubs - you don’t undo your tie and bare your throat. You kick them in the farkin balls and make a stand, because it’s your club and that’s what your role is supposed to be.

5 Likes

If they do, is a pipe dream. Won’t happen.

1 Like

if they admitted it was a mum there would have been a media witch hunt.

Harcourt has some sort of association with Melbourne Law School. Howard Opie , who was on the ADRVP for the E34, is a Professor there. Anderson is on the CAS Arbitrators List ( IIRC Opie may also be).
The issues go beyond questions of legal interpretation to wider concerns related to the imposition of obligations on athletes by private sector bodies ; adjudicated by bodies largely controlled by the organisation imposing the obligations; together with the overriding of rights under national law.
There is also the issue of a government statutory agency acting as the agent of a private body.

7 Likes

The fact that Bock has never had to face up to any doping charges related to Robinson supplying him CJC-1295 with the level of evidence against him compared to the 34, and all the kickbacks Robinson got, as you mention, and relatively little scrutiny - this should be a glaring beacon of corruption and cover up.

A “compare and contrast” of the evidence against Robinson and Bock compared to the 34, should be the starting point of an expose which uncovers why Robinson was protected and so well looked after, when he actually facilitated what went wrong at Essendon, and evidence suggests he was much less regulated and out of control at the Suns.

19 Likes