For all the grand standing the IOC make about human rights. They have refused one of its greatest priorities for its athletes. “Innocent until proven guilty”.
WADA have ignored this priority for the rights of humanity, and have blanketed all Athletes as guilty. As such, must prove themselves innocent.
IOC and all its sub-groups are as corrupt as sports can get.
keeping sport clean indeed !!!
Sporting clubs in the US have been cutting ties with Wada and who can blame them why would you want to follow a code that deems you “guilty until proven innocent”
They’re not even trying to hide it. They have told athletes, ‘we are waiting for you to slip up’.
Like our boys, if you can’t prove you are innocent… you are guilty. There is a chance between 1-5 of our players might have gotten injections that were PED, 30 odd players got suspended by association. In fact most of them proved their innocence.
WADA presented that the players that were ‘most likely’ recipients of Dank’s Illegal supliments, as a whole of club program. While 34 players got suspended. Some of them didn’t even receive injections.
and Dank never got suspended for anything he did at Essendon so go figure
Didn’t he got a life ban from practising altogether?
Got a life ban for practicing in sports but he can still run his own clinic and selling products to the public.
Not completely sure if Dank has become a WADA prohibited person or whether the AFL tribunal determination crosses into all sports or just WADA sports or it’s a bit of bluff.
NRL also banned Dank. He can’t work in AFL or NRL, Other sports adopting the WADA Code may have provisions barring anyone who is banned for WADA violations .
Dank is not listed on the WADA prohibited associations list which came into force in 2015 and which imposes
the obligation on WADA covered athletes ( not support staff).
https://twitter.com/jack_latour/status/929970724462145536
https://www.scribd.com/document/364272496/Litigation-Update-in-Taylor-v-McLachlan-Ors
Delay, delay, delay, obvious tactics as the Gil and Co. don’t want to be put on the stand. Courts allowing it makes it very obvious how corrupt the system is. Given that the if the can of worms ever opens that government level corruption would be exposed. This I believe is the very reason for the delays and why the AFL have nothing to worry about. It farking sucks.
And; yet, the Weapon can work in all of them. Pays to have friends in high places.
That is the name of the game. Wait them out and send them broke waiting. Money talks all languages.
I don’t think they’re friends. He complained at being broke and unemployable so did he threaten to squeal like a pig? Keep your friends close and your enemies closer.
yes he did but none of the charges had anything to do with his work at Essendon!!
Interesting that isn’t it? Its almost like for him, the part he played at Essendon just all disappeared.
A team of Swiss lawyers is undertaking a project of examining interpretations of the 2015 WADA Code ( mostly CAS) with a view to guiding sports lawyers . Judging by recent analyses, they are not having much success as their work has exposed inconsistencies in CAS approaches to evidence, the strict liability attached to athletes and differences in sanctions. . Perhaps they could look at the Essendon case, guided by the true facts, given that part of the 2015 Code was applied retrospectively.
A member of the team Marjolaine Viret ( who is in touch with a Tracey Holmes) who has written on the intersection of science and anti-doping law, will be appearing at an ANZSLA seminar in Brisbane on 27 November.
wadc-commentary.com
J34 would very much like to meet Marjolaine Viret when she is in Australia to discuss the intersection of science and anti doping law.
“The intersection of science, anti doping law and optics” could be a good title for their research paper.
In a media release of 14 November, ASADA reported that it had entered a memorandum of understanding with the Australian Health Practitioner Regulation Agency to share information on possible inappropriate prescribing of PEDs to athletes. ASADA claimed that the arrangement would not diminish privacy and confidentiality obligations . No doubt the lawyers have run their eyes over it, but ASADA has not released the MOU and has not advised whether sporting bodies or athlete representatives were consulted on this course of action( which was agreed in September)