One approach, for athletes not competing at Olympic or international level, would be to have a system incorporating the WADA list of banned substances , nothing else ( and no CAS) - but to shift the burden of proof to contestability of the ban ( proof of the health and performance enhancing effects of a substance or method in regard to the particular sport compared to substances or methods not banned)
Sanctions would be proportionate, for example in the case of team sports, X number of matches.
If necessary, that approach could involve a compromise of accepting a national tribunal. And possibly maintenance of the whereabouts rule.
2 Likes
Good post Big A - Fairly much agree with the whole parameters of your post - You definitely don’t want an NFL system of sanctions with their silly 2 or 4 weeks penalties - Something along the lines of the system adopted by the MLB which would equate to the AFL of 12 games for a first offence, 22 games for a second offence and life for a third offence - Doubt you will ever change the whereabouts rule, seeing athletes sold their soul in agreeing to the mechanics of this rule.
1 Like
SYMPOSIUM
Sports Integrity and Athletes’ Rights
The time to speak up for rights is now
A symposium to look at Integrity and Rights in the context of the current review into Australian sport by Justice James Wood.
The Coalition of Major Professional and Participation Sports, representing the AFL, NRL, ARU, FFA, Tennis Australia, Cricket Australia and Netball Australia, has stated that its members were unlikely to opt-in to the national tribunal. Source: Chip Le Grand
Symposium panelists include:
• Introduction by Dr Kim Sawyer
• Tracey Holmes (ABC) moderator
• Brendan Schwab Executive Director World Players Association
• Professor Julian Savulescu Oxford University
• Madeleine Farrar ANU
• Stephen Peak lawyer
• Michele Verroken Founding director Sporting Integrity UK
• Kristen Worley Adviser, Human Diversity in Sport Foundation, Canada
• Bob O’Dea biochemist
• John Madigan former Senator
• Rob Bennett Essendon supporter
Some presenters from overseas are pre-recorded.
There will also be a Q&A panel discussion where panelists will be asked to give their opinions on questions submitted from the floor.
• Venue: University of Melbourne Law School, Theatre G08, 185 Pelham Sreet, Carlton, 3053.
• Time: 6-9pm • Date: Tuesday 21 November 2017
Tickets are STRICTLY limited. Donations gratefully accepted.
Presented by Justice For The 34
Dr Kim Sawyer: [email protected]
13 Likes
Latest correspondence from the Jackson Taylor case:
https://www.scribd.com/document/363793296/Letter-to-K-L-Gates-8-November-2017
10 Likes
Basically telling them to stop the crap and get on with it.
3 Likes
That’s what it sounded like to me with my limited legal understanding.
But ■■■■ me, I couldn’t be a solicitor and write all that crap. I’d want @westozziebomber drafting up my letters!
2 Likes
More WADA power creep. A Perth Doctor ges dereistered for endangering patients lives with certain practices. Someone else gets jailed for supplying illegal steroids. In both cases the substances involved were on the WADA banned list, but the Australian penalties imposed were not for supplying athletes covered by the WADA Code. ASADA puffs itself up by requesting WADA to place them both on the prohibited association list, meaning they cannot be involved with WADA covered athletes for lengthy periods. ASADA does not have to prosecute.
1 Like
If anyone can’t make it to the Symposium, but want to contribute, access donations section in ‘buy tickets’.
All panelists and organisers are giving their time for free. Ticket sales and donations go to the costs of the venue hire, equipment, and filming.
6 Likes
This is shades of the 2008 case where a retired cyclist was found guilty by ASADA after they got access to medicare records - It stinks to high heaven. Will give the name of the cyclist tonight.
Jackson Taylor says he might start tweeting abut the case. Those of you on twitter might want to follow him.
Jackson Taylor
@Jack_Latour
11 Likes
That would be the Mark Roland 2008 case, who was found guilty by association for being treated by a dodgy doctor. Shades of Essendon.Roland did not fight the case as he was by then retired.
According to a 3 February 2013 report in Cycling News, ASADA was trying to access Medicare records, but got overruled by the Privacy Commissioner and the then Minister for Sport / (Ellis) was not pleased at Ings for trying that tactic.
The funny thing is that the Doctor was treating patients without prescriptions so the Medicare records would not have helped.
3 Likes
You are 100% correct - Strange thing was the case never proved Roland took a prohibited substance, but was proven that the Doctor discussed a prohibited substance with Roland - And somehow the Australian Cycling Federation mistakenly also had his brother as a banned athlete when this was not the case
1 Like
Revisions to the WADA prohibited associations rules in 2015 imposed an additional obligation on athletes, prohibiting them from associating in a professional or sport capacity with sport supports people who have been placed on the WADA prohibited association list by the relevant national anti-doping agencies. The listing extends to support persons who have been convicted or professionally disciplined in relation to WADA banned substances or methods. The burden of proof is on the athlete .
This may be what Sharpe is hinting at, to avoid ASADA having to prosecute sport support staff and to warn athletes from using their services. Only two Australians are on the latest WADA list ( no Dank)
4 Likes
So, what is the athlete supposed to do, go to the WADA site and become familiar with all people who have been banned or are under investigation? Or ask athletes are they taking illegal drugs or substances?
FGS, now WADA are becoming cocky.
1 Like
It could be suggested that ASADA and their new CEO are lobbying for changes to the ASADA Act to provide them with more power and an increased budget. Remember, the ASADA Act has not been reviewed for over 11 years despite similar reviews being carried out in the U.S. and the U.K. recently.
Sharpe’s recent statements in the media suggest he looking to be part of the discussion about importation of PEDs and other supplements and banning of other substances on safety grounds. These are policy initiatives and are clearly in the domain of the TGA, the Health Department and even the Attorney General, NOT ASADA.
The Wood/Harmon Integrity Review setup by Hunt is a farce and is not supported by the major team sports in Australia. The Essendon case has shown that anti-doping in Australia and internationally is broken. Athletes rights are being trampled on by a “star chamber” of boffins residing in a castle in Lausanne, Switzerland and our government supports this injustice. Hopefully this band of team based sports organisations can force a better outcome.
I have no doubt that Australia was forced into signing up to WADA regulations under threat by the OIC (probably facilitated by Coates). Who would want to be the Prime Minister of Australia who oversaw the banning of their country from the Olympics when Australia was one of only four countries who have attended every Olympics Games of the modern era. Howard capitulated and signed off on the adoption of WADA regulations FOR ALL SPORTS.
To their credit (and it is hard for me to say that) the AFL did resist but when funding came into the discussion they folded.
I encourage all Blitzers to attend the J34 Symposium on the 21st November at the Melbourne University Law School. The theme will not be Essendon-centric but I have no doubt the Essendon case will be mentioned. The theme is Sports Integrity and Athlete’s Rights and for those who have followed the saga I promise an interesting evening. Details are shown in an earlier post.
9 Likes
Seemingly, when WADA loses a case, it changes the rules, rubber stamped by governments. After an Estonian athlete successfully challenged the scientific validity of some tests in 2013, in 2015 WADA reversed the burden of proof to the athlete, by establishing a presumption that the WADA test decisions and testing limits are scientifically valid
3 Likes
Never ever forget these people. Bruce doesn’t.
Dear Mr Goyder
According to the Herald Sun, on 2 November, you told the National Press Club attendees that: “To have someone of real authority sit on information, and even sit on it from the prime minister, and not deal with it [dual citizenship], I do think that has real impact. I think people will be scratching their heads thinking what’s going on there”.
I am comfortably satisfied that two recent events indicate that you are a hypocrite and that people in glass houses shouldn’t throw stones:
The Lethlean and Simkiss matters:
As I understand it:
The Herald Sun broke the story on Monday 10 July 2017
AFL CEO Gillon McLachlan announced their resignations on Friday 14 July
McLachlan told the ABC on 15 July that “I had some visibility over some information but not everything”. As an aside, I trust English is the first language of the next AFL’s CEO.
Melbourne’s top AFL football journalist Michael Warner told his readers on 8 November that Channel Nine’s Danny Weidler had the full story in March and had contacted the AFL’s Patrick Keane on 10 and 11 March for verification.
Warner’s story means McLachlan found out more about the saga between 10 July and 13 July than he did between 10 March and 10 July.
Presumably, Keane would have told his boss Liz Lukin about the phone calls within 24 hours. If he didn’t he should be sacked.
Presumably, Lukin would have told McLachlan within 48 hours. If she didn’t she should be sacked.
Presumably, McLachlan would have ordered an investigation and then informed you about the situation within a month of Weidler’s phone calls on 10 and 11 March. If McLachlan hadn’t informed you by mid-April he should be sacked.
Which begs the questions:
When were you told?
What were you told?
Did you sit on the information hoping Weidler would give up, which he did, and no one else would run with the story?
Do you accept McLachlan was telling the truth on 15 July when he said he only had “bits and pieces of information” on Monday 10 July? If you accept that he was telling the truth, you may wish to buy my 90% share of the Sydney Opera House for $10 million.
The Page 13 Herald Sun stories of 14 and 20 October 2017:
The paper alleged that “ a footy figure is embroiled in allegations that he had an affair with the partner of a close professional colleague”. I am comfortably satisfied that the footy figure must be associated with the AFL because the AFL has no jurisdiction over an ex-player or ex-coach.
Mr Goyder, a married AFL figure having a relationship with a woman is of no interest to anyone. However, if the affair is with a commercial partner’s girlfriend it is unacceptable because it could have compromised the AFL’s interests. Consequently, you should have investigated the matter rather than, as it appears, be sitting on the matter.
The author of the two articles, Alice Coster, indicated that she has seen texts that identifies the name of the football figure. She has also indicated that she knows the address of the person who knows the full story.
To save whatever credibility you have left after your appalling actions during the Essendon saga; and the apparent attempted cover-up by you or your CEO in the Lethlean saga, I suggest you should stop sitting on your hands doing nothing and contact Alice Coster and then investigate the matter.
If you need more than one source I can show you a text I was sent on 23 July 2017 which reveals the name of the scumbag.
I am hoping to make a fortune out of my book and would like to minimise my taxes. As a number of newspapers have indicated that you have been mentioned in the Paradise Papers, I was hoping that you may be able to tell me how to send my money off-shore.
Yours sincerely
Bruce Francis
21 Likes
The rift between governments and the IOC may be deepening. According to the inado site, the Association of National Olympic Committees reprimanded that organisation for daring to have a view on Russia, describing the national anti-doping agencies as services bodies. They disagreed.
All they have to do now is stand up to the IOC at WADA and rewrite the Code.
inado.org
2 Likes
hahahahahahahahaha
that’s gold, right there.
7 Likes