Sorry Saga - “It’s actually quite funny people thinking they know more than they actually do”

No no - the ‘Bear’ is Russia.
China is the ‘Dragon’.

1 Like

Thanks for posting NimbusWeb. It’s great to read a clear-eyed technical analysis of the subject. If only one of the players would pursue the path described in the article under the provisions of the International Arbitration Act. It’s a shame NLM isn’t fabulously wealthy.

1 Like

Or, Nat-Rat had wealthy friends who support Essendon and are interested in Justice.

8 Likes

Yes.
I have been heard some very positive information regarding the Taylor/AFL matter. Court dates appear to have been set, so this would confirm the matter seems to be progressing.

Watch this space.

34 Likes

That’s interesting to know Stabby. Whatever happens from here, J34, Bruce and a few others have done a fantastic job in fighting for the good cause. As others have said, sometimes the truth eventually surfaces.

Without wanting to come over as a depressed nutter, I now find it impossible to engage with any real interest in any discussion on the Hangar, as it seems so insignificant compared to the issues discussed on here over the past 4 years. There has actually been some really well researched, well reasoned analysis on here; so it’s difficult to return to the latest over reaction to a loss or misinformed criticism of a coach or players.

I think I need to limit my Bomberblitz time to keeping watch for something new to drop on this thread, as the reality for me is this issue is hard to let go of, whereas discussions re Hooker forward or back are not.

20 Likes

Thanks Stabby. Great to hear the push for the truth and justice is continuing.

9 Likes

Good post. My feelings too. Most of the rest of Blitz is trivial. The Saga will stain our club forever if it is not countered. This is the big picture.

Unfortunately many others deride us for taking the big view, the principled view, and for not “moving on” to enjoy the “clean air”.

25 Likes

WADA. Egg. Face.

Wada, IOC have scored an own goal


When the IOC and Wada dismiss all these positive samples because the concentration of the drug is low, they are making both a procedural and a scientific error.

Procedural, because their own policies instruct them NOT to treat clenbuterol differently if the concentration is low.

“Non-threshold” means that, no matter how small the amount, they have to open a case.

So they have turned their own anti-doping policy into an arbitrary guideline, and chosen not to follow it.

Scientifically, they’re flawed because concentration does not mean a small amount was ingested accidentally - it could mean an athlete took the drug, in large amounts, a long time ago. The amount you measure says nothing about the amount you took, unless you also know when you took it!

So, on two counts, their decision-making is questionable. There’s no doubt that, in this case, contaminated meat is a real possibility, so the IOC and Wada may well have acted correctly - but for the wrong reasons.

In a world where authorities have credibility, probably not. But this is not that world - sport has repeatedly been found vulnerable to ulterior motives and corruption. There have been so many cover-ups this set of decisions looks, rightly or wrongly, like an attempt to keep the lid on a potentially damaging scandal.

9 Likes
5 Likes

The wheels of the Justice Department keep moving ever so slowly if you blink you’d miss it.

1 Like

“I think the behaviour by the IOC is a complete scandal. And they didn’t deal with my case in a way that was important for me. So my lawyer and I will definitely now try to fight for my rights. I want to prove that I’m completely clean. And if we win, if the court ruling proves that I’m right, we will definitely look at the options for getting compensation, for getting some kind of financial redress for me.”

Hope it goes well for him.

11 Likes

I’d expect Serocynski to win his case for damages - Clenbuterol and China and Mexico is always a suspisious mix.

Yeah me too. I can’t believe those other idiots talking football stuff on a football forum. We are so superior and righteous in this thread.

I was going to wait until the players stopped playing and talking about football to focus solely on the saga issues again before I stopped engaging in footy chat, but this thread has convinced me otherwise.

1 Like

Sweet of you to provide such an excellent example of AT’s last par.
In the meantime, there’s a little blue dot next to the scroll bar where you can remove the thread from your updated posts.
Then you won’t have to be bothered by it anymore.

5 Likes

Irony is ok when well done and relevant, but…

4 Likes

Statement posted today from Justice for the 34 Group:

For nearly a year, Justice for the 34 has been calling for a Senate inquiry into sports anti-doping. Justice for the 34’s call for an inquiry emerged from the injustice of the Essendon supplements saga; but the issue has wider generality. There are international concerns with the evidentiary standards and consistency of the anti-doping framework. Both the US Congress and UK Parliament have initiated inquiries into anti-doping; yet despite having had one of the most significant anti-doping problems in world sport Australia has had no parliamentary inquiry. An inquiry is in the interest of future generations of athletes. An inquiry can lay the foundation for a transparent and accountable anti-doping regulatory framework.
Three recent events have shown why a parliamentary inquiry is needed.

First, in 2014 the AFL foreshadowed an internal review of the Essendon saga. More than two years later the review was tabled. The review was only eight pages long; no authors were cited, no sources given and no evidence presented. The AFL exonerated itself without referencing the sacrifice of the athletes who lost their right to protection against self-incrimination, their right of appeal and their right to a fair trial. The AFL protected its image while sacrificing the rights of others.

Secondly in March, a report by a retired Supreme Court judge into drug use by the West Coast Eagles was leaked to the media. The Gillard report was another internal AFL review; but in contrast to the Essendon review this one was 83-pages long; there were named sources and there was evidence of poor culture and governance; yet the AFL suppressed it for ten years and there were no governance penalties. The AFL chose to protect its image rather than to penalise wrongdoing. In two internal reviews ten years apart, the AFL has shown how they conduct anti-doping investigations. The AFL has protected its reputation at the expense of the rights and wrongs of athletes.

More recently, as the Herald Sun (April 4) has reported, the AFL has decided to sit down with ASADA to investigate establishing an independent sports tribunal to rule on anti-doping matters. The emphasis of this proposal is independence; independence from the AFL and from ASADA. Currently the AFL is the only one of Australia’s 94 sports with its own anti-doping body. The proposal highlights the abject failure of the Australian anti-doping regulatory framework. The two bodies that were responsible for the flawed investigation and prosecution of the Essendon case, the two bodies that subordinated athletes’ rights to protect their own reputations, are the bodies now proposing a separate independent agency. They are recognising their failure without taking responsibility for that failure.

The investigation of the 2012 Essendon supplements program by ASADA was one of the most significant anti-doping cases in world sport with more anomalies than any other case. It impacted on Australia’s leading sporting code for four years; there were breaches of confidentiality, breaches of athletes’ rights, breaches of regulatory standards, and serious questions as to the quasi-judicial process. ASADA did not appear to apply a consistent set of regulatory standards which would have allowed athletes to prove their innocence.

The ASADA Act of 2006 and the administration of that Act needs review not by ASADA or WADA, not jointly with the AFL and not by the Department of Health; the ASADA Act and its administration needs to be reviewed by the Parliament that enabled it. When the ASADA Act was passed, the Parliament could not have anticipated a problem such as the Essendon matter. The ASADA Act was designed for individual athletes competing internationally, not athletes competing in indigenous team sports. In the Essendon case, the players were penalised as a group, regardless of their level of participation in the supplements program; or the individual evidence against them. There is a need to examine the ASADA Act and its implications for team sports. There is also a need for the ASADA Act to be reviewed to consider the rights of the athletes of all 94 sporting codes. And there is a need to review the ASADA Act to examine the accountability of ASADA.

In no other country has anti-doping been discussed so often by so many. The case for a wide ranging and forward looking anti-doping inquiry is more compelling in Australia than in any other country. Justice for the 34 renews its call for a Senate Inquiry into Anti-Doping with wide terms of reference which allows all sporting bodies, all athletes and all interested parties to make representations. It is in the national interest.

Justice for the 34

Kindly support a Senate Inquiry into this whole sordid affair by adding your name/details this petition, and then ask others to support it.

If you have already supported the petition, take positive action by sending an email to the decision makers. It takes just one click or you can create your own email - go here to take postive action:

Social media sharing tips:
Use the main links (on the RHS of webpage) to share the original petition.

Use the links below this update to share this update.

For further information, contact Justice of the 34 via their Facebook page.

Thank you for your support and patience.

19 Likes

If you can afford to please donate to keep their good work coming. I donated today with gratitude and thanks to the Justice 34 Group.

1 Like

Thanks - I did not know they needed donations. Would be happy to contribute if needed. Where are the details?

It is part of latest Change Org by Justice 34 for a Government Enquiry into ASADA’s practices. I suppose if will come up under that if Googled.

2 Likes

I’ve just spoken to Stabby about this and he has no knowledge of it. BEWARE! From what he says, J34 has NOT asked for donations. It will be properly checked out tomorrow so don’t rush to donate. Nice that you want to support J34 though. I will too if it’s legit.

4 Likes