In response to FOI requests, UKAD advised that it spent close to £600k on legal costs in its cases against Tyson and Freddy Fury, before reaching a settlement with them, as an alternative to incurring higher legal costs which could have brought it close to bankruptcy.
badlefthook.com
From the UKAD statements, it is apparent that pursuit of cases is cost driven.
If the Australian Government had not stepped in to bail out ASADA?
if the Australian Government had not bought Fahey’s tenure as WADA el supremo?
Go, Stabby, Go!
That post was worth a bazillion likes - even more if it bears fruit.
I noticed from another FOI request - on the righttoknow site in regard to Andruska’s tenure and resignation - that ASADA delayed a response because it had to consult with a third party. The third party being no other than Aurora.
She is not a third party. The request is limited to the time she was a public servant.
It may also be worth trying to find out a bit more about the WADA appeal consultancy provided by Prof Hendelsman, worth either $12,500 or $25,000 depending on if the two results at the link below are a duplicate or not.
https://www.tenders.gov.au/?event=public.advancedsearch.keyword&keyword=WADA
The dates of the contract period don’t match the Essendon case but I couldn’t see what else WADA appealed in that period and I wouldn’t trust them not to tinker with dates and numbers.
If it was for his discredited testimony in the E34 case did it come under the $100,000 that asada gave to WADA or was it in addition to that?
I still want to see it
sometimes I feel a bit like Aria from GOT …reciting the names of those who must pay!!!
I’ve gone through 4 years of never reading any of these saga threads. I think I’ve saved myself some headaches.
they shouldn’t be allowed to prosecute on a nano amount of something it will not give the benefit that a large amount would give there should be a limit to the amount of something in your system before they can prosecute …every one needs supplements we haven’t been able to rely on getting adequate amounts of vitamins & minerals from our food for decades & there is scientific evidence to support that …yes peer reviewed & all just google it … athletes especially need therapeutic amounts of vitamins & minerals because when they exercise they end up with a lot of free radical damage that no diet can help them with because they would have to eat such large amounts of food to get the required nutrition …Wada set the limits to zero because that allows them to prosecute anyone anytime it is hardly in the interests of clean sport more like job justification
why are you here now then??
I like to keep myself guessing.
And you only benefit if you can train more often or harder cause your ‘ injury’ has healed faster…like taking legal pain killers … hang on …
I’m still waiting for them to crack down on beetroot juice. Won’t somebody think of the children?!?
No its pickle juice!
Always been a bit suspicious of apple cider vinegar. Used it on a flat wart on my forehead and it disappeared after 2 weeks. But where did it go? Surely this needs to be on the banned list.
CAS appears to have done Coates bidding in refusing to rule against the IOC decision not to invite the CAS-cleared Russian athletes to the Winter Games. The rationale is that the IOC had banned the ROC , the athletes had not challenged that decision and that the non-invite to the world’s premier winter event - occurring every 4 years- is not a sanction.
As much as the lawyers will finessethis, in reality it is a 4 year Olympic sanction and the law is an ■■■ ( of the donkey species)
Then why are footy clubs allowed to have supplement suppliers as sponsors?
That’s precisely what the AFL SHOULD have done. Tell WADA to GAGF.
I have read Chip’s book. And followed a lot of the Saga stuff.
Am I right in thinking that the banned players and or officials players admitted use if thymosin but couldn’t comfotably prove it wasn’t thymosin beta 4 as alleged by ASADA.
And as a result the ban occurred in the absence of records to prove otherwise.
But isn’t the only thing that could exonerate the players now, the records of the substances used.
Happy to stand corrected.
The AFL Tribunal found the players innocent of any wrong doing and at the same time, they did some kind of agreement with Dean Robinson.
The Essendon 34 decided to fight the case against them by WADA, not ASADA, why didn’t the AFL run its own case against WADA to defend its players whom they had found to be innocent? What was the real deal between WADA and the AFL???