Does anyone know any of the players who was banned?
I really like to know what they thought they were given. Has anyone ever asked them?
I know Jone said the “good Thymosin” but I’d be interested in what Stanton or Hocking or one of those guys think they took.
Banjo is to the Mclachlans as Harpo is to the Marxs
Hamish, Gillon and Banjo. Say them out loud.
Fark me, does it get any more entitled, silver-spooned and private schoolboy than that?..
Hamish could easily be the name of a poor Scottish farm boy.
Has a magic overcoat?
Wears a wig?
Chases skirt?
Never vocalises?
Pluck my strings. For some reason I am always reminded of the movie deliverance.
Thought some blitzers who have been involved in FOI requests might be interested in this free workshop on Monday evening in Melbourne. Unfortunately I’m away that night as it looks quite good.
Yes it could.
In Scotland.
If you were Scottish.
Maybe, but no true Scotsman would be named Banjo.
This will twist your guts
Check out @TraceyLeeHolmes’s Tweet: https://twitter.com/TraceyLeeHolmes/status/989102654532960256?s=09
I have only read the CAS report on Legkov v IOC ( CAS 2017/A/5379) . While there is undoubtedly a political power element, I read it as more in the approach of the arbitrators in the two cases .In the Essendon case, the report gives all the appearance of delivering whatever WADA wanted. In the Legkov case, the arbitrators approach was legally rigorous and adopted a methodological order of analysis, detailed legal reasoning and an approach to evidence - that assertions must be founded in fact - which is common in most international legal systems and an approach which Australian judges would follow
in sum, the Legkov arbitrators ( two Germans one French) appeared conscious to avoid Russia tearing apart any of its decisions on the basis of bias and as acting as the servant of WADA and the IOC, particularly given that the bulk of the IOC evidence came from a non-independent flawed report and was heavily reliant on information from Rodchenko ( who has his own reasons to rely on the IOC to save his life) .
The Legkov arbitrators made it clear that their mandate was not to rule on an institutional doping scheme, but on the issue of the athlete’s ADRVP.
They were certainly not attracted to complicity by association in the absence of factual evidence. They did not appear to consider the IOC plaint about the precedence of the E34 case ( para 197 of the report). Suck on that Howman and WADA!
The report is very detailed but the conclusions ( pp 151-154) give a good summary.
Now, I am waiting for Jack Anderson, Sports Law Professor at Melbourne University, to do a comparative legal analysis of the E34 and Legkov cases. His tweets seem to dismiss it a pure politics - simplistic of you Jack.
And, while I am on a rant, to those who assert that it was a failure of the E34 in progressing their case as a whole, it should be pointed out that the ASADA and WADA prosecutions were conducted as a job lot. Rather, it was a failure of the CAS panel to address each of the 34 individually instead of basing it on conspiracy without factual evidence. It was also a failure of the ASADA ADRV panel to treat each case separately ( over to you Howard Opie)
In the Russian cases, each athlete was afforded the opportunity to seek individual hearings and reports as appellants ( the E34 were defendants) . As noted by the Legkov arbitrators in its costs award ( in the conclusions) the individual Russian cases were conducted by the same counsel on the same basis.
Also, to note that the IOC pulled the same stunt as WADA at the E34 CAS case in introducing new evidence at a late stage of the proceedings ( for E34, the Cox evidence on TB4) . The Russian raised a red procedural flag on the basis that it was inconsistent with the general principles of international law , Swiss procedural law and European Convention on Human Rights.
The arbitrators did not dismiss it out of hand but exercised judicial economy in not making a ruling on that point. It seems that the Russian’s counsel did not seek a preliminary ruling on that point.
It is not known whether the E34 counsel raised those matters at CAS or the Swiss Federal Tribunal, but the Cox evidence should have been ruled as inadmissible evidence.
Anzac Day (4.00pm) tweet from Marjoleine Viret (sports law attorney)
“This - from the Legkov CAS award - is so important. Individual assessment of evidence to establish liability…”
A screenshot of section of CAS award (para 727) follows - part of it reads “The panel does not consider it possible to conclude that the existence of a general doping and cover-up scheme automatically and inexorably leads to a conclusion that the Athlete committed the ADRVs alleged by the IOC…”
Anzac Day (5.15pm) tweet from Jack Anderson in reply to Marjoleine Viret.
“As I write Essendon fans are a bit busy (bit of a game on) but later tonight a lot of them will be interested in this section of recent CAS Russian doping award highlighted by Marjoleine Viret - one for Tracey Holmes”
Anzac Day (9.23pm) Tracey Holmes replied to Jack Anderson.
“No consistency: a game of power. Russia has more power than WADA it would seem; WADA has more power than AFL & Essendon it would seem.”
All those respected sports law experts remained silent on the ASADA/WADA / CAS stitch up of the E34.
If the E34 case had come after the Russian cases, the players would not have been found guilty and Jobe would have kept his Brownlow. Is the AFLPA following this? How does Minister Hunt feel about this travesty of justice? How does the government feel in according legitimacy to WADA?
And, if a comparable approach to that of the CAS arbitrators in the Russian cases had been followed by the AFL in the charges against Hird, Bomba , Corcoran and Reid, all would have been fully cleared. Reid, with AMA backing was able to call off the AFL dogs, the others were not so fortunate and were beaten into submission - with the support of the club.
so why did they find the 34 guilty then??? surely the same standards apply
Holy ■■■■, how is this still alive. I can’t even keep a relationship going this long.
Welcome back.
You’ve picked a good week for it.
none of this makes any sense ? how is the government quiet on this & why did the afl act as prosecutor as well as asada? if no one sees a stinking conspiracy here they just don’t want to look
Yesterday was so terrible I don’t even think I can bring myself to troll! Sad times.