Sorry Saga - New Blitz Edition


And Auroras note pad of meetings, since she so poor at recalling things in her own head.

ASADA however would not have been wanting to be seen to doing deals outside of their charter however so thats another kettle of fish.


Given the amount of hush money involved, and EFC not wanting to expose people like Evans or former employees and others just loyal to EFC not wanting to be on the outer…

I wonder if the case will be directed at the right people on behalf of the most relevant people with the right charges and arguments.

I remember Middleton implying Hird might have had a case if he had directed his case at the AFL and the legitimacy of their player contracts and mandatory disclosure clauses compromising the players’ rights and circumventing the ASADA act.

I don’t know anything really, but we know the AFL is very good at protecting themselve by manipulating others.

Hoping that is about to change.


You’d need a whale vat and a telegraph pole - and it still might not handle the slimy pr1ck


And WHEN did they start selling finals tickets again?


On 1 July 2013 Mark Evans of AFL floated Finals suspension as an option if the players were found guilty
On 27 August 2013, Fitzpatrick announced the Finals suspension decision ( concurrent with the Hird/Thompson/ Corcoran news).


And it seems that that sleaze Farrell was in on the action. Reportedly, he met with the AFL in his capacity as Sports Minister in early July 2013 ( reported by Sam Lane on 5 July 2013, referring to AFL urgency to get the matter sorted before the Finals)


I think the critical factor that needs to be proved is not that the PM or the AFL wanted to get the case over quickly, but whether there was a direction from the Government that (Essendon) heads would have to roll because guilt was already known (code for they overegged the blackest day in sport omelette) or that the AFL decided guilt prior to the ASADA investigation being completed. We know the latter is true, but can we prove it with AA’s notes? Think we’ll need some witnesses at these meetings to confirm her notes.


Guilty of “governance” failures at that point, wasn’t it?


There are two ironies in the UK Select Committee.

First the politicians aided and abetted this behaviour by cycling and athletics in their quest for olympic medals. Surely the politicians have failed in their oversight of these programs.

The second irony is this is only big news in the UK. its gained little traction in continental Europe


It was only a couple of months earlier when either Gil or Demetriou explicitly stated that no one would be banned from playing finals.


Below I provide Gil’s legal defense (accepting that I know nothing about the law) and I’m hoping you guys shoot it down with powerful legal arguments that will be very provable in court. Let’s assume we find a witness to support Amnesia Andruska’s note scribbles that Gil said all that stuff about ducks being lined up, take points off, players off, Essendon staff to be punished, we still have to deal with Hird etc prior to the ASADA investigation being completed and prior to the AFL Commission meeting in August, 2013.

Gil says - some of those statements whilst not completely accurate as presented here were discussed. We certainly were planning for the possibility of Essendon management being held accountable for their actions. We had seen a large amount of evidence that suggested the players may have been given banned substances. That’s what the ASADA/AFL investigation was looking at. We didn’t preempt the decision of guilt or otherwise, rather we just planned for this possibility.
As it turned out the Club and 3 Essendon senior staff all accepted the sanctions at the AFL Commission hearing which showed the club, it’s management and the AFL were all in agreement on this issue. It wasn’t until that agreement was reached that it was confirmed that Essendon would be removed from the finals, therefore we were not able to make any announcements on this.
As we know the independent CAS tribunal found that the players were also guilty therefore the AFL’s hard line stance on doping in sport is more than vindicated.


One senior staff member (Dr Reid) didn’t accept the sanctions. The other 3 were bullied into it.
“Accept these sanctions or else…”
No duress there.


On that premise I would expect Thompson, Hird, Corcoran and the doc to take the stand. I think the AFL would gladly pay for Thompson to stay os. Hird will get the Freo job, doc is still in the AFL system. Just leaves Corcoran to be convinced to stay quiet.


If the AFL were to assert that it had seen a large amount of evidence to suggest that the players had taken banned substances, it would need to provide the source of that evidence. That could open up a can of worms, as it would be a criminal offence to be given access to the unredacted ACC report. It could also be a breach of privacy.
As I understand it, at that time, the only source of evidence was from the ACC inquiry. Any ACC evidence in regard to the Essendon players was privileged and by law should not have been provided to the AFL. ASADA had access but was prevented from using it in its investigations or divulging it . ASADA testing of Essendon players drew a blank. ASADA investigations had not commenced .
It is known that the AFL met with the ACC prior to public release. Reportedly, the AFL asked the ACC if it was Essendon and there were nods to that effect.
In regard to other possibility assertions, if employment of Dank was the basis for such presumption, why not also presume that GCS, his previous employer was also under a cloud?
It could come down to protecting AFL commercial interests ( it owns GCS and appoints its officials).


Being in the AFL system didn’t keep Reid tame last time.


Reid had AMA backing, including its insurance fund. Also, he had income as a doctor outside of his EFC work.
Bomber seems to be financially independent.
Somehow, I could not see the Freo part time job as an AFL inducement to Hird.
Danny may have been the hardest hit in terms of future income- earning employment. Apparently, he is now flogging wine on the Peninsula.


Thanks - I have now read the heavily redacted documents on the FOI disclosure log of the ASADA site. Seems ASADA got a bit testy with Mick Warner’s reporting.


Can Dr. Bruce Reid be called to testify in the Jackson Taylor case to give evidence?


How will they silence Tania Hird???


it would also presumably have to provide that evidence & explain why it wasn’t used in the independent AFL tribunal case against the players ???