The pertinent wrong thing the WADA person said was that the support staff were in the wrong because they cajoled the players into breaking the law. This is pure excrement because they were found NOT GUILTY. So how could his assertion be true? The legal people should be jumping on this to show bias. The rest of what was quoted in the Limited News article is just padding out the story to get the word count up.
The pertinent wrong thing the WADA person said was that the support staff were in the wrong because they cajoled the players into breaking the law. This is pure excrement because they were found NOT GUILTY. So how could his assertion be true? The legal people should be jumping on this to show bias. The rest of what was quoted in the Limited News article is just padding out the story to get the word count up.
How is it showing bias? WADA are the prosecutor, not the judge.
How often do you hear cops saying "the murderer" or "the rapist" while a trial is happening or about to start? You don't.The pertinent wrong thing the WADA person said was that the support staff were in the wrong because they cajoled the players into breaking the law. This is pure excrement because they were found NOT GUILTY. So how could his assertion be true? The legal people should be jumping on this to show bias. The rest of what was quoted in the Limited News article is just padding out the story to get the word count up.How is it showing bias? WADA are the prosecutor, not the judge.
Because theyâve failed to prove anything at that point, and thereâs a jury and/or judge who can be prejudiced.
On the AOD article, and having no idea why it wasnât prosecuted on is a cop out. The reason is that is was grey area there was no clear answer as to whether it was band or not. This brings us to the very core of this whole saga. Whats legal to take and what is not legal is not clear cut. There are to many grey areas. I think WADA and ASADA deliberately do this so that they can exist.
That's exactly the point, they are the prosecutors not the judge. Even making an allegation needs to be backed up by argument. In this case (the quote from the article) he states a supposed fact. He was wrong to do so and LeGrand was a typical Australian journalist in that he just repeats what he is told and lacks analysis.The pertinent wrong thing the WADA person said was that the support staff were in the wrong because they cajoled the players into breaking the law. This is pure excrement because they were found NOT GUILTY. So how could his assertion be true? The legal people should be jumping on this to show bias. The rest of what was quoted in the Limited News article is just padding out the story to get the word count up.How is it showing bias? WADA are the prosecutor, not the judge.
What was WADA's criticism of CAS?
Something like they donât follow the 3 guiding principles of their charter. 1. Quick processing for athletes. 2. Cost effective 2. Something.or other.
Itâs like WADA are saying CAS have been holding this whole thing up all along.
Then some other stuff about WADA are going to investigate why AOD was not considered by ASADA. Well, I thought it was WADA that made the rules, and if they canât figure out what ASADA is saying about legality of âdrugsâ Iâm not sure how a player or even someone inwmnting a program could.
Whatevs
It's interesting how the latest batch off articles on the saga are more about WADA questions decisions by and about support staff, the AFL & ASADA and not about the players.How? Simple because Hird was blamed, thatâs why?How Dean Robinson can get off scott free with a 1M payout, despite being the person directly responsible for the supplements program at Essendon in 2012, remains a great mystery.
A pyrrhic victory is upon us. It is already beginning to feel as though the saga is in our past. New coach, back in the draft, different focus. We can see the future now.This could be a WADA ASADA screw up in communication over OAD-9604 and became an AFL/ASADA, screw up with the EFC players and staff??? Once "allegedly" found guilty of one supplement. It certainly creates a mind set of guilt in the seeker's perception. So, the investigators were looking @ proof of guilt, this changes how any evidence is seen and overlooked.For me, the pain of the missed opportunity of the last three years and even the sad downfall of Hird is beginning to recede into a past that can and must be reconciled
Reincarnated put this in the wrong thread:By SAMANTHA LANE
The World Anti-Doping Agencyâs boss has admitted he does not know why use of AOD-9604 â prohibited since 2011, according to the global authority â was not pursued in the ongoing cases against AFL players.
Though powerless to intervene in terms of prosecution, director general of WADA David Howman has told Fairfax Media the vexed matter of AOD-9604 in the biggest drugs scandal in Australian sports history will be thoroughly reviewed.
âIt will form part of the debrief that weâll have to go through, at the end of the day. It is regarded as a prohibited substance by WADA and weâve said so,â said Howman during a flying visit to Australia in which he met the federal Sports Minister, the Australian Sports Anti-Doping Authority and AFL bosses.
WADAâs appeal of a verdict that effectively cleared 34 current, retired and relocated Essendon players of doping violations is set to commence in the Court of Arbitration for Sport on November 16.
With compelling evidence that AOD-9604 was injected in the ill-fated program devised by Stephen Dank at Essendon â and at the very least offered in cream form to former Melbourne captain Jack Trengove â ASADA stated in June last year that it had dropped the line of investigation.
The major development was announced by ASADA with a caveat: that no cases of AOD-9604 use before April 22, 2013 would be pursued.
The formal statement was made 13 months after a lead investigator for the national sport anti-doping regulator, Paul Simonsson, told an assembly of Essendon players and officials that AOD-9604 âshouldnât have been on the WADA listâ and âshouldnât have been listed as a prohibited drugâ.
In the same briefing, held on May 6, 2013 and recorded by lawyer Tony Hargreaves who was acting for Essendon at the time, Simonsson also endorsed the conduct of James Hird. And remarkably, given what transpired in ensuing months, Simonsson also suggested in the briefing that Dank â presently banned from sport for life â had not broken any anti-doping rules.
In Melbourne this week to be keynote speaker at a major sports law conference, Howman said WADA was effectively helpless in terms of prosecuting any use of AOD-9604 unearthed in the Australian football scandal, despite being adamant it was banned at the time it was allegedly administered to footballers.
Asked why he believed the anti-obesity drug was dropped from ASADAâs line of inquiry, WADAâs boss said: "I donât know why. At the end of the day we were not prosecuting the case. Prosecuting the case was left to the people here who had that authority [ASADA], and I canât second-guess anything, I actually donât know the full details about all that.
âI assume they considered everything before they went forward with that as they did ⌠and they would take advice from whoever was doing the legal work. I donât know any of that and I donât think it would be right of me to comment.â
ASADA was unable to provide responses before the time of publication to a series of questions, including its view on Howman proposing a review of the Essendon case; though only once it is resolved.
Howman, who also told Fairfax he had no idea how much it would cost WADA to appeal the Essendon verdict in the CAS, has suggested the AFL should also be involved in the review.
âI want us to be open to scrutiny from others,â he said. âWe want to be transparent ⌠and I think the AFL should be involved in a debrief as well. I think it has got to be something that is spoken about openly.â
theage.com.au
Interesting comments.
For info, Simonsson was a former New Zealand rugby union and rugby league player. He was a police detective in New South Wales, having first joined the New Zealand Police in 1987. He was later a tax investigator for the Australian Taxation Office and worked at the Australian Department of Climate Change. He is currently the head of intelligence at the Australian Sports Anti-Doping Authority.
ASADA is full of plodders.
It would be fascinating to read retired Federal Court judge Garry Downes response to ASADA case. IMO, I believe he said ASADA have no evidence and therefore no case however he may have thought it would be a good idea to go one step further and appeal for players to fess up for lesser penalties just to see if anyone comes forward. Just after that, McDivot went on Grandstand and said he will do deals for players who come forward.
That type of âfull on bluffâ approach would appeal to flat footed policemen who donât have a case.
Chipâs book suggests Downes recommended proceeding but that he was briefed directly by the asada lawyers who skewed the brief so that the case appeared in its most favorable light
WADA - PR is what it is all about - could not care less about destroying lives as long as they maintain their sinecures - make FIFA loo k clean -
In an extraordinary retaliation in the countdown to a Court of Arbitration in Sport panel judging the most high-profile drugs case in Australian sports history, the secretary general of CAS has described the worldâs foremost anti-doping body as being ânervousâ.
Mattieu Reeb was responding to criticism of its functioning, tabled this week by World Anti-Doping Agency boss David Howman, saying his public critiques were unfounded and âunacceptableâ.
Reeb also speculated that WADA could be nervous about the case involving the AFL and Essendon, due to be heard by CAS on November 16, and that Howmanâs comments suggested anxiety about losing that case.
âThe latest opinion of the WADA director general about CAS demonstrates once again that WADA is getting nervous when an important CAS hearing is approaching,â Reeb said.
Advertisement
"A similar situation happened in 2012. Like this time, it was totally unexpected and absolutely unfounded. In 2012, WADAâs public campaign against CAS was weeks prior to the hearing of the [Alberto] Contador case. This year, it is just a month prior to the Essendon hearing. This cannot be a coincidence.
"By doing this, WADA is trying to discharge it in advance of any negative outcome. This method is unacceptable, especially from an institution like this.
âThe question is why these unfounded criticisms are raised so close to an important hearing âŚWADA erroneously believes that complaining publicly against CAS now can help explain any potential negative outcome in the Essendon case later.â
You should quote the entire article & source for context & clarity blob âŚ
WADA said to be ânervousâ about Essendon case
October 18, 2015 - 12:44PM Samantha Lane
Read more: http://www.theage.com.au/afl/afl-news/wada-said-to-be-nervous-about-essendon-case-20151017-gkbj8l.html#ixzz3oseiaGPm
Follow us: @theage on Twitter | theageAustralia on Facebook
In an extraordinary retaliation in the countdown to a Court of Arbitration in Sport panel judging the most high-profile drugs case in Australian sports history, the secretary general of CAS has described the worldâs foremost anti-doping body as being ânervousâ.
Mattieu Reeb was responding to criticism of its functioning, tabled this week by World Anti-Doping Agency boss David Howman, saying his public critiques were unfounded and âunacceptableâ.
Reeb also speculated that WADA could be nervous about the case involving the AFL and Essendon, due to be heard by CAS on November 16, and that Howmanâs comments suggested anxiety about losing that case.
âThe latest opinion of the WADA director general about CAS demonstrates once again that WADA is getting nervous when an important CAS hearing is approaching,â Reeb said.
"A similar situation happened in 2012. Like this time, it was totally unexpected and absolutely unfounded. In 2012, WADAâs public campaign against CAS was weeks prior to the hearing of the [Alberto] Contador case. This year, it is just a month prior to the Essendon hearing. This cannot be a coincidence.
"By doing this, WADA is trying to discharge it in advance of any negative outcome. This method is unacceptable, especially from an institution like this.
âThe question is why these unfounded criticisms are raised so close to an important hearing âŚWADA erroneously believes that complaining publicly against CAS now can help explain any potential negative outcome in the Essendon case later.â
In Melbourne last week to make the keynote presentation at the 25th annual Australian New Zealand Sports Law Association conference, Howman made a point of highlighting what he saw as fundamental problems with CAS operations.
He said ânoneâ of CASâs foundation principles were being followed and highlighted high costs, difficulties with athlete access to the international sport arbitrator and problems with achieving âtimelyâ justice.
Howman later told Fairfax Media heâd raised these concerns about inefficiencies with Australian Olympic Committee chief John Coates, who is also president of CAS. Howman said Coates was âdoing his best to gradually go through [the problems] and, I would say, remedy themâ.
CASâs scathing response, however, has been to question openly Howmanâs motivations.
CAS is also claiming that, in one pending arbitration case, WADA is partly responsible for stalling proceedings.
âThe three principles David Howman mentioned, easy access, non-expensive, timely justice, are important but are not the only ones already governing CAS,â Reeb said. "Independence and expertise are also major ones.
"In doping matters, it is sufficient to recall that athletes may appeal decisions rendered by international federations at CAS without paying any arbitration costs. Even more, if an athlete does not have enough financial resources, he/she may request legal aid to CAS, which includes the assistance of a pro bono counsel and payment of some expenses.
"WADA currently has a dozen pending cases at CAS. With the exception of one case, blocked before the Swiss Federal Tribunal, they are not older then 10 months. Such duration could even be shorter if the parties involved, including WADA, would not have requested extensions of time to file submissions.
âThe Essendon case was filed on 12 May, 2015. The hearing will commence on 16 November, 2015, after all parties have agreed to a specific procedural calendar. We cannot predict yet when the final decision will be rendered but probably a few weeks after the conclusion of the hearing. All in all, it will be a matter of months, not years, as incorrectly stated by David Howman.â
In his address to key sports administrators and legal experts in Melbourne, including representatives of the Australian and New Zealand Olympic committees, the Australian Sports Anti-Doping Authority, Football Federation Australia, the AFL, NRL and Olympic sports governing bodies including Swimming Australia and Hockey Australia, Howmanâs assessment of the CAS was pointed.
âWhen sport decided they should have a sport-based tribunal, the Court of Arbitration for Sport, it was based on three clear principles: easy access for the athletes, non-expensive access for the athletes ⌠and timely justice,â he said.
"Now weâre involved in hearings before CAS which might take a couple of years, and none of the three principles are being followed. Itâs costing more.
âWe need to look at how we can change things and, I think, looking at the current climate that I confronted when I got off the plane here in Melbourne, this is probably the place where it might start.â
Read more: http://www.theage.com.au/afl/afl-news/wada-said-to-be-nervous-about-essendon-case-20151017-gkbj8l.html#ixzz3oseN07Zc
Follow us: @theage on Twitter | theageAustralia on Facebook
I think WADA were â â â â â â â â because CAS didnât think âcomfortable satisfactionâ means âI read it on an internet post somewhereâ or âI read it on a toilet wall (like The Age)â
Reincarnated put this in the wrong thread:By SAMANTHA LANE
The World Anti-Doping Agencyâs boss has admitted he does not know why use of AOD-9604 â prohibited since 2011, according to the global authority â was not pursued in the ongoing cases against AFL players.
Though powerless to intervene in terms of prosecution, director general of WADA David Howman has told Fairfax Media the vexed matter of AOD-9604 in the biggest drugs scandal in Australian sports history will be thoroughly reviewed.
âIt will form part of the debrief that weâll have to go through, at the end of the day. It is regarded as a prohibited substance by WADA and weâve said so,â said Howman during a flying visit to Australia in which he met the federal Sports Minister, the Australian Sports Anti-Doping Authority and AFL bosses.
WADAâs appeal of a verdict that effectively cleared 34 current, retired and relocated Essendon players of doping violations is set to commence in the Court of Arbitration for Sport on November 16.
With compelling evidence that AOD-9604 was injected in the ill-fated program devised by Stephen Dank at Essendon â and at the very least offered in cream form to former Melbourne captain Jack Trengove â ASADA stated in June last year that it had dropped the line of investigation.
The major development was announced by ASADA with a caveat: that no cases of AOD-9604 use before April 22, 2013 would be pursued.
The formal statement was made 13 months after a lead investigator for the national sport anti-doping regulator, Paul Simonsson, told an assembly of Essendon players and officials that AOD-9604 âshouldnât have been on the WADA listâ and âshouldnât have been listed as a prohibited drugâ.
In the same briefing, held on May 6, 2013 and recorded by lawyer Tony Hargreaves who was acting for Essendon at the time, Simonsson also endorsed the conduct of James Hird. And remarkably, given what transpired in ensuing months, Simonsson also suggested in the briefing that Dank â presently banned from sport for life â had not broken any anti-doping rules.
In Melbourne this week to be keynote speaker at a major sports law conference, Howman said WADA was effectively helpless in terms of prosecuting any use of AOD-9604 unearthed in the Australian football scandal, despite being adamant it was banned at the time it was allegedly administered to footballers.
Asked why he believed the anti-obesity drug was dropped from ASADAâs line of inquiry, WADAâs boss said: "I donât know why. At the end of the day we were not prosecuting the case. Prosecuting the case was left to the people here who had that authority [ASADA], and I canât second-guess anything, I actually donât know the full details about all that.
âI assume they considered everything before they went forward with that as they did ⌠and they would take advice from whoever was doing the legal work. I donât know any of that and I donât think it would be right of me to comment.â
ASADA was unable to provide responses before the time of publication to a series of questions, including its view on Howman proposing a review of the Essendon case; though only once it is resolved.
Howman, who also told Fairfax he had no idea how much it would cost WADA to appeal the Essendon verdict in the CAS, has suggested the AFL should also be involved in the review.
âI want us to be open to scrutiny from others,â he said. âWe want to be transparent ⌠and I think the AFL should be involved in a debrief as well. I think it has got to be something that is spoken about openly.â
theage.com.au
Interesting comments.
For info, Simonsson was a former New Zealand rugby union and rugby league player. He was a police detective in New South Wales, having first joined the New Zealand Police in 1987. He was later a tax investigator for the Australian Taxation Office and worked at the Australian Department of Climate Change. He is currently the head of intelligence at the Australian Sports Anti-Doping Authority.
ASADA is full of plodders.
It would be fascinating to read retired Federal Court judge Garry Downes response to ASADA case. IMO, I believe he said ASADA have no evidence and therefore no case however he may have thought it would be a good idea to go one step further and appeal for players to fess up for lesser penalties just to see if anyone comes forward. Just after that, McDivot went on Grandstand and said he will do deals for players who come forward.
That type of âfull on bluffâ approach would appeal to flat footed policemen who donât have a case.
Chipâs book suggests dishes recommended proceeding but that he was briefed directly by the asada lawyers who skewed the brief so that the case appeared in its most favorable light
Ivan, thank you.
ASADA are a disgraceful organisation. 2.5 years after the blackest day in sport, the Anti-Doping Rule Violation Panel concluding that sufficient evidence existed against the players. This charade goes on for another 12 months.
There are some very ordinary people in ASADA and the AFL who have been hiding the dead bodies for a while now. Will an independent review of this saga ever occur?
PS: I havenât read Chips book yet.
personally I am hoping that ASADA & WADA get caned so badly for what they have put everyone through for the past 2 years (the first year is down to the club & afl ASADA only did their job even if they shouldnât have had a âJointâ investigation). Once they realised that it was a bust they should have said so. âThat after a thorough investigation they found we had no case to answerâ. But of course egos and agendas got in the way of that and this is where I blame ASADA & then WADA for allowing themselves to be influenced and jumping at shadows. Drugs in sport may be a big problem but malicious prosecutions do nothing to assist their message and only make them look petty, not efficient.
Seriously in about 2 months from now when this is all over the mods need to lift the swear filters just for a day or an hour because we should be allowed to let loose at wada/asada/afl/media without restrictions on language, vitriol or hypothetical payback scenarios.
Seriously in about 2 months from now when this is all over the mods need to lift the swear filters just for a day or an hour because we should be allowed to let loose at wada/asada/afl/media without restrictions on language, vitriol or hypothetical payback scenarios.
Might be OK for a vent but really what else can be said about what has happened over the past three years that hasnât already been said. If the CAS result goes our way there may be a small smattering of comments from the media about âwhat has the past three years been all aboutâ but I doubt it. The AFL control the media, we all know that, so the journos will again be too scared to come out against the AFL for fear of retribution.
ASADA and WADA may cop a whack on the way through for their incompetence and dishonesty but all the guilty participants in this saga will be left untouched and the âgood guysâ destroyed.
I donât care what the outcome is for ASADA and WADA. However my ambivalence towards them is matched by my desire to see that AFL boyâs club torn down, smashed up and buried. They will continue to get away with being bully boys until they are challenged legally about their corruption, poor governance, elitism, arrogance etc.
And I have noticed a significant mood swing against the AFL from non Essendon supporters. This is a good sign.
Agree on both counts. I pity ASADA & WADA because theyâre pathetic but I donât lose any sleep plotting revenge against them. However we really do need to go full Taliban at the afl gang of 4.
Agree on both counts. I pity ASADA & WADA because they're pathetic but I don't lose any sleep plotting revenge against them. However we really do need to go full Taliban at the afl gang of 4.
Reckon theres more than 4. Can you name them Stir Fried so none of them slip thru the net
Gang of 4 is mike, andy, gil & brett,
but now I feel inadequate because I left finnis off the list.
I only use their 1st names as practice for when I approach them dirty harry style.
#makemyfarkindayfatboy
Gang of 4 is mike, andy, gil & brett, but now I feel inadequate because I left finnis off the list. I only use their 1st names as practice for when I approach them dirty harry style. #makemyfarkindayfatboyI simplify it by calling them all by their first name "c**t"