I’m more amazed that gordon could talk while having the sacks of the AFL head honcho’s in his gob. Fair effort that
If, Gordon, acting as an AFL lawyer, were to be called as a witness - in relation to his former capacity as spokesperson for AFL Presidents during the Saga - to advise when he knew of the AFL plan to exclude Essendon from the Finals…
Also, as quoted by Warner in his article, Gordon is on the record in regard to concerns about the improper communication of confidential information( on which he considers the AFL should act)
Conflict of interest, in fact if not in law.
Because the final was played in 2015 and the “bitter stoush” over it occurred in 2016?
Yes, good point. Just the way that it was written was ambiguous.
This bloke speak WITH FORKED TONGUE. Plays the game of the law from both sides of the fence. Cracked!
Gordon Legal - hilarious.
That’s basically the equivalent of Trump hiring Giuliani, although it does mean Gordon can’t be compelled to give evidence.
Bet K & L Gates are thrilled with their new colleagues.
Jeff Gleeson might be just as thrilled if the deal with Gordon Legal involves Patrick Gordon fronting as a barrister in the case ( as happened when he was foisted on Crameri and Prismall , for which the AFPA refused to fund).
Gordon Legal advertises as putting people first and business second. In this instance, the people are the business.
Many of us felt he was a part of the “boys club.” However no matter how hard he tried he simply couldn’t convince Crameri and Prismal to “dob in their mates.” And; now he’s jumped the fence.
Cannot be trusted.
A similar but different article in today’s HS (hardcopy, haven’t looked online) contains the following quote from Gordon -
“Mike and Gill are not prepared to sit by and have their reputations trashed through the courts”.
Presumably this was part of a fuller quote which refers to their preference for trashing reputations through selected journalists whom they control. Clearly the courts are not to be trusted to toe the AFL line and poor Mike and Gill would be vulnerable to that nasty thing called the truth.
MR HALLOWES [for 2 players]: Professor Handelsman… are you aware of the consent forms that were signed by the players in relation to the recommended dose [of ‘Thymosin’], that that be given?
DR HANDELSMAN: The one I recall said 0.5 mils of 3,000 milligrams per millilitre, which would be an almost impossible dose.
HALLOWES: As I recollect, whether it was your evidence or the evidence generally given before the AFL Tribunal, it was in essence that 3,000 milligrams per millilitre in effect would be sludge, to use a layman’s term; does that accord with what you’d say.
DR HANDELSMAN: It wouldn’t be soluble, I think that’s probably right.
You can draw a few conclusions from this.
The guys that drew the consent forms had no idea what they were doing our talking about; or
It was a typo;
It wasn’t tb4 being administered
A combination of any of the above
A short but damning critique of CAS on the latest Ticket, by Helen Lenskyj (an Australian retired academic based in Toronto). This is the system which the Australian Government supports as an alternative to athlete rights under Australian law.
The hypocrisy of WADA continues - nothing being done of course about a Russian international soccer player whose own father said he was injected with growth hormones before the world cup.
Easier to make an example of the E34 in a game no one plays anywhere else in the world other than a curiosity.
Of course the Russians are saying it was legal, platelet-rich substance…given that TB-4 exists in platelets (released by platelets after activation: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22944663) that seems to be the get of jail card of choice.
Russia’s new World Cup hero, Denis Cheryshev, was forced to deny taking banned substances on Saturday after his own father was reported as saying he was injected with “growth hormone” before the tournament.
The Russian Sport Magazine said Dmitri Cheryshev, a manager who was a former international, made the potentially-damaging remarks in an interview while his son was sidelined during the build-up to Russia 2018.
Use of growth hormone without a medical exemption is a doping offence punishable with a ban of up to four years and Cheryshev was asked about quotes that appeared in Sport Weekend almost a year earlier.
The 27-year-old, who will carry the hopes of 144 million Russians today against Spain, said: “I don’t know where the journalist got this from. Maybe they didn’t understand my father. I have never used any prohibited substances.”
That was after the deputy director general of of the Russian Anti-Doping Agency, Margarita Pakhnotskaya, told The Sunday Telegraph the organisation would “study carefully” the quotes attributed to his father.
Cheryshev has been the star of his country’s shock start, his three goals key to recording the best opening two results of any host nation.
Cheryshev had been a surprise call-up and only got his chance when Alan Dzagoev was forced off in the first half against Saudi Arabia.
Injuries meant he had not played for his country for almost two years when his father was quoted as saying: “He received an injury and, because of the miscommunication of doctors, they began to inject him with growth hormone.” He added: “It was done so that Denis recovered more quickly.”
Cheryshev snr hung up when telephoned by The Sunday Telegraph on Friday and asked to comment, failing to respond to further attempts to make contact.
The Russian Football Union issued a statement confirming Cheryshev had been given an injection, but not for growth hormone. It said the treatment had been a legal platelet-rich plasma injection, accusing the journalist who interviewed his father of having “incorrectly interpreted his words” and adding: “This is confirmed by the recording of the interview.”
Sport Weekend also issued a statement acknowledging that although Cheryshev snr had used the words “growth hormone”, it was never intended or understood to mean actual growth hormone.
The Sunday Telegraph, London
mainly because there was nothing to dob in !!!
This Russian case will correctly go nowhere because the evidence is hearsay. RUSADA will need hard evidence.
They were offered a deal if they separated themselves from the rest of the efc players and refused it.
Gordon did his best to get them to turncoat.
And if Fitzpatrick and McLaughlin are using him to represent them then he is not to be trusted. He is nothing but a fire ant -toxic.
LOL That magazine will be shut down within a week and the reporter will mysteriously vanish.
In its announcement clearing Froome, the UCI stated:
“ [Be ause of] WADA’s unparalleled access to information and authorship of the salbutamol regime , the UCI has decided, based on WADA’s position, to close the proceedings.”
That statement would seem to preclude any WADA appeal.
WADA scientists set the standard for the concentration of salbutamol to raise a presumption of doping.
So, does this imply that WADA’s science might be dodgy and that WADA would not want it tested before CAS?
Also goes to show that if you a big international star, there might be an element of preferential treatment.
Initially, the UCI declared that it could not reach a decision prior to the start of the TDF because of the complexity of the case. However, just one day after the TDF organisers announced a refusal to accept Froome’s participation, the UCI abruptly announces its decision.
Once again, have seen plenty of kids using puffers ‘legally’ before major junior championships, specially girls.
Disgusting behaviour from their parents, coaches and doctors and is as far as I am concerned cheating, in so much as it gives them an advantage over kids not using it. IMO ban it outright, if you get asthma…tough ■■■■■■■.
to get the amount of salbutamol in his test results equated to 34 puffs in 1 minute or an injection which is prohibited They reasoned that you couldnt have that level in your blood without having an injection