It’s simple - The ALP because of their close links to the AFL, wanted to find a way to ensure Essendon players avoided prosecution, whereas the Co-alition Government who were suspicious of the AFL and downright hostile towards Demetriou wanted to find a way to have players prosecuted - It’s not rocket science.
You can continue to write voluminous posts asking questions of the Government but the fact is no Government will willingly admit to dubious behaviour.
On top of the $100k and in kind legal aisstance to WADA to fund its case, there is also the voluntary contribution by the government during Fahey’s tenure at WADA.
It would seem that the government paid to prosecute its own people, yet a Russian voluntary contribution to WADA seemingly forestalled any WADA investigation of Russia - then WADA turns round and blames the IOC. And WADA takes no action against others, seemingly on cost grounds.
ASADA is a signatory to WADA, but just goes with the flow instead of doing something about the pressing need to reform WADA.
What other country would act in the way Australia has acted?
Where are the records of Fahey’s dealings with the government and its public servants throughout all this?
Stabby, you are totally correct.
Under the WADA code, athletes are responsible for what goes into their bodies…one of the strands that was used to hang the EFC34.
There is no provision in the code for “possible food contamination” as an out.
So, if you have a positive reading, then you need to be penalised…so says the WADA code.
But WADA, like the AFL, selectively applies its rules if and when it sees fit - excoriating some and turning a blind eye to others.
And with WADA, history has shown if you provide it funds it can be highly selective in applying its rules to suit the fund donor’s agenda.
Not a sneaky dude at all. More like a snake who throws his friends under busses to save the skin that he appears to be shedding now.
I’ve followed this whole thing pretty closely and I had no idea he was paid.
Let alone that much.
It was a huge propaganda piece and no one cared how it happened. They just wanted blood and how Hirdy was guilty.
People would also be unaware he was paid out and unaware he has a plum job. Don’t assume anyone cared about anything other that hanging Hird out to dry.
Which is why I have never watched said interview.
The AFL will meet with ASADA to investigate implementing an independent sports tribunal
THE AFL will sit down with ASADA’s incoming chief executive to investigate an independent sports tribunal to rule on drug and match-fixing breaches.
Anti-doping experts on Tuesday lauded the development as a significant breakthrough after a string of cases involving AFL players taking banned substances.
Former ASADA boss Richard Ings says a national and independent one-stop-shop for ASADA and corruption cases would remove conflict-of-interest issues.
The league is the only one of 94 Australian sports with its own anti-doping body.
AFL chief executive Gillon McLachlan confirmed this weekend the league was prepared to discuss with ASADA how the independent panel could operate.
The Herald Sun understands the league will wait until ASADA boss Ben McDevitt is replaced in May — that appointee is still unknown — until those talks commence.
oth McDevitt and William Gillard, author of the report into West Coast’s culture problems, have urged the league to set up an independent disciplinary process.
The league would have to be convinced the tribunal would speed up cases after several lengthy delays for AFL and VFL players.
But McLachlan said the league was happy to discuss a single national sports tribunal adjudicating on serious breaches.
“We want to have a look at that, we are going to pick that up. We want to have a discussion with WADA and ASADA about how we can improve and if that’s the right course we will take it,’’ he said.
“If an independent tribunal is the best model we will go to that but that’s part of the review and the conversation we will pick up with WADA and ASADA.”
The league has an AFL anti-doping panel which rules on ASADA matters and does not believe its impartiality is a reason to join a national tribunal.
But if a new tribunal was more cost-effective and could hear evidence gathered by the league’s integrity department more quickly it could warm to the idea.
Ings said independent tribunals in New Zealand and the United Kingdom had been wildly effective.
“I am a big believer of tribunals which are completely independent of the sports over which they are making a decision,’’ he said.
“Not just the AFL or rugby league but cycling and all sorts.
“They would predominantly deal with anti-doping matters but also anti-corruption and (team) selection issues.
“These bodies would be familiar with the burdens of proof, familiar with the ASADA code, the banned list, and a centralised body can do it more effectively and get rid of the conflicts of interest.
“They would have so much expertise and experience and it will all be in the one body.”
ASADA would investigate and gather evidence of doping infractions then prosecute these cases in front of the tribunal.
Currently many Australian sports use the Court of Arbitration for Sport to hear their doping cases.
As long as it is set up using Australian legal standards for evidence etc. It could be a good thing. If it is set up as a law unto itself then I would be against it.
It is a good thing that McDevious believes that the AWFUl should have an independent disciplinary process.
How about an independent investigation Ben, not so keen on those?
How can you say you closely followed the Saga and not know Robinson was paid. Paid interview screamed every headline in whatever format.
Google Robinson TV interview and it screams at you.
And i also suggest being paid was discussed at the time on BB.
Clenbuterol cases from the 2008 Olympics in China would have struggled to get a guilty verdict at CAS based on previous precedent. I am glad that athletes werent forced to spend unnecessary dollars on a frivolous case. Though some here have little concern for athletes.
I always assumed he was paid (I don’t believe in altruism) but you are absolutely re-writing history to suggest that the details of who paid & what sum were ever something that was out in the open or given the scrutiny it deserved. Sure here on blitz there was discussion about its obvious scripting & agenda but to the vast majority of people it was presented as simply poor little rodeo clown finding the courage, against all odds, to speak out against the evil James Hird.
Thanks for supporting my post.
Independent Anti doping Tribunal only works if hearings are expedited and costs are reduced.
My research indicates this is not always the case.
Is that information available under FOI? Be an interesting read.
Is this a back scratcher’s meeting or what?
I believe another more vulgar description would better describe this situation, but looks like I unfortunately have a dirty ■■■■■■■ mouth, i.e. I’ll refrain.
What could possibly go wrong? The ‘integrity’ dept providing the evidence to the ‘independent’ body.
Exactly.
Two trusted organisations run by people with undoubted integrity.
Thought Blitzers might be interested in this recent publication (out today in Journal of Law and Medicine) on EFC Saga and (denial of) natural justice
On 10 October 2016 the Essendon Football Club (EFC) performance- enhancing drugs regulatory saga concluded with the Swiss Federal Tribunal deciding not to “entertain” EFC’s appeal of the Court of Arbitration of Sport’s (CAS) guilty finding, thus supporting the World Anti-Doping Authority (WADA).The appeal is a unique decision as it is the first time a team (34 players from the one team) has been subject to CAS’s jurisdiction for allegations of doping contrary to the World Anti-Doping Code. One significant concern throughout this regulatory saga was that the team-based nature of the infraction denied individual players natural justice. Central to these concerns is the fact that the players were advised by EFC to take part in the program and that its chief architect, sports scientist Stephen Dank, never gave sworn evidence that could be tested in cross-examination.This column investigates whether there are important lessons for team-based anti-doping infractions from the EFC saga.
I dare say that not all clenbuterol detection is due to contaminated meat. It is one thing for WADA to produce a Banned List but to pick and choose how they apply it is another matter and supports the notion that anti-doping worldwide is broken.
The WADA code says nothing about what concentrations of clenbuterol are acceptable in urine and blood. Clenbuterol is banned, fullstop. To be consistent with claiming that an athlete is responsible for what goes into his body then WADA should charge these people and let them prove their innocence. I think they have done that before.
4 or 5 years ago nobody would have challenged FIFA, nobody would have poked the bear (China) and certainly nobody was going to challenge Jamaican athletes and probably the greatest sprinter in history