Can anyone remember the figures around injection numbers in program? I know the MSM said it was thousands but I think that found to incorrectSomething like seven hundred and was that including the vitamins?
Re Dermott's references to GHRP6. I have a mate who worked at SEN at the time the scandal broke. I texted him, and he said the rumour was that we'd been using something called GHRP6. I reckon Dermott heard it at the outset and adopted the view that we were guilty of that, so any punishment for anything is therefore justified. It's really just a lynch mob mentality.
Am I right in recalling that this was a rumour even before the whole thing broke - some guy on BF, and also a poster here (sorry canât recall his name)?
Re Dermott's references to GHRP6. I have a mate who worked at SEN at the time the scandal broke. I texted him, and he said the rumour was that we'd been using something called GHRP6. I reckon Dermott heard it at the outset and adopted the view that we were guilty of that, so any punishment for anything is therefore justified. It's really just a lynch mob mentality.Am I right in recalling that this was a rumour even before the whole thing broke - some guy on BF, and also a poster here (sorry canât recall his name)?
I donât read BF so cant say one way or the other sorry. If there was a rumour doing the rounds, then the footy world was primed with the guillotine set well before the âpress conferenceâ. Due process never stands a chance when half wits draw conclusions from rumour and inference.
But then again, where thereâs smokeâŚ
My personal view has tempered over the past few years. Iâm comfortable that itâs possible (but maintain itâs not probable) that Dank did wrong. He had form in the NRL after all. Iâm not comfortable that it is proven to the right standard through the right process though, so as a result, the presumption of innocence should have prevailed. Iâm also not comfortable that GC and Melbourne escaped unscathed. Or potentially any other club that Dank consulted to for that matter.
Gerard Healy started it did he not?
#melkshamsarms
Gerard Healy started it did he not?#melkshamsarms
Basically, the AFL put every suppplement being used across the AFL at Essendonâs door at the startâŚand the word went out through the media.
AOD 9064 & TB-4 were never really in the frame at the start.
When the investigation didnât initially uncover all those illegal things we were meant to have taken, the AFL was faced with a dilemna.
For you see, the AFL assumed we were âon the gearâ like all other clubs - especially as we had Dank on our books at the time - and thought making an example of us was a no-brainer. Problem was the investigation turned up zilch initially.
Instead of honourably closing the investigation the AFL - and Demetriou in particular - went harder still and kept the investigation alive:
- Firstly by putting AOD-9064 in the public arena as possibly illegal although they knew as early as Feb 2013 it wasnât
- Demonising Hird. via the infamous Sara MMM call, when AFL 360 conclusively showed AOD 9064 was legal the night before
- Then pushing the TB-4 line as the next substance maybe, possibly, hopefully (!!!) EC players took.
As Iâve stated before, the AFL went from looking at multiple clubs in 2013 to only wanting to investigate the EFC by 31-Jan/1-Feb.
Why?
My opinion, and itâs opinion only, is that multiple clubs were known to be âon the gearâ and the AFL had been cutting deals with ASADA for months/years to keep these players/clubs out of the spotlight. And those clubs included premiers and perhaps an a new AFL franchise club the AFL were running.
The AFL needed a patsy and we were the perfect patsy (no premierships and only a decade of mediocrity) to sacrifice to ASADA to give them a trophy and save the rest of the competition from a wider scandal and shame.
Re Dermott's references to GHRP6. I have a mate who worked at SEN at the time the scandal broke. I texted him, and he said the rumour was that we'd been using something called GHRP6. I reckon Dermott heard it at the outset and adopted the view that we were guilty of that, so any punishment for anything is therefore justified. It's really just a lynch mob mentality.Am I right in recalling that this was a rumour even before the whole thing broke - some guy on BF, and also a poster here (sorry canât recall his name)?
I donât read BF so cant say one way or the other sorry. If there was a rumour doing the rounds, then the footy world was primed with the guillotine set well before the âpress conferenceâ. Due process never stands a chance when half wits draw conclusions from rumour and inference.
But then again, where thereâs smokeâŚ
My personal view has tempered over the past few years. Iâm comfortable that itâs possible (but maintain itâs not probable) that Dank did wrong. He had form in the NRL after all. Iâm not comfortable that it is proven to the right standard through the right process though, so as a result, the presumption of innocence should have prevailed. Iâm also not comfortable that GC and Melbourne escaped unscathed. Or potentially any other club that Dank consulted to for that matter.
No, I donât read BF either, but it was mentioned here. There were rumblings over that summer I recall re. HGH being used. Anyway.
Gerard Healy started it did he not?#melkshamsarms
Basically, the AFL put every suppplement being used across the AFL at Essendonâs door at the startâŚand the word went out through the media.
AOD 9064 & TB-4 were never really in the from at the start.
When the investigation didnât initially uncover all those illegal things we were meant to have taken, the AFL was faced with a dilemna.
For you see, the AFL assumed we were âon the gearâ like all other clubs - especially as we had Dank on our books at the time - and thought making an example of us was a no-brainer. Problem was the investigation turned up zilch initially.
Instead of honourably closing the investigation the AFL - and Demetriou in particular - went harder still and kept the investigation alive:
- Firstly by putting AOD-9064 in the public arena as possibly illegal although they knew as early as Feb 2013 it wasnât
- Demonising Hird. via the infamous Sara MMM call, when AFL 360 conclusively showed AOD 9064 was illegal the night before
- Then pushing the TB-4 line as the next substance maybe, possibly, hopefully (!!!) EC players took.
As Iâve stated before, the AFL went from looking at multiple clubs in 2013 to only wanting to investigate the EFC by 31-Jan/1-Feb.
Why?
My opinion, and itâs opinion only, is that multiple clubs were known to be âon the gearâ and the AFL had been cutting deals with ASADA for months/years to keep these players/clubs out of the spotlight. And those clubs included premiers and perhaps an a new AFL franchise club the AFL were running.
The AFL needed a patsy and we were the perfect patsy (no premierships and only a decade of mediocrity) to sacrifice to ASADA to give them a trophy and save the rest of the competition from a wider scandal and shame.
The last paragraph is the saga in a nutshell⌠a very unfortunate nutshell
Dermot tried to con on to my daughter a few years ago, at a nitghtclub, she is not a massive football follower but knew of him, she told him to go away you dirty old perve.
Gerard Healy started it did he not?#melkshamsarms
Basically, the AFL put every suppplement being used across the AFL at Essendonâs door at the startâŚand the word went out through the media.
AOD 9064 & TB-4 were never really in the frame at the start.
When the investigation didnât initially uncover all those illegal things we were meant to have taken, the AFL was faced with a dilemna.
For you see, the AFL assumed we were âon the gearâ like all other clubs - especially as we had Dank on our books at the time - and thought making an example of us was a no-brainer. Problem was the investigation turned up zilch initially.
Instead of honourably closing the investigation the AFL - and Demetriou in particular - went harder still and kept the investigation alive:
- Firstly by putting AOD-9064 in the public arena as possibly illegal although they knew as early as Feb 2013 it wasnât
- Demonising Hird. via the infamous Sara MMM call, when AFL 360 conclusively showed AOD 9064 was legal the night before
- Then pushing the TB-4 line as the next substance maybe, possibly, hopefully (!!!) EC players took.
As Iâve stated before, the AFL went from looking at multiple clubs in 2013 to only wanting to investigate the EFC by 31-Jan/1-Feb.
Why?
My opinion, and itâs opinion only, is that multiple clubs were known to be âon the gearâ and the AFL had been cutting deals with ASADA for months/years to keep these players/clubs out of the spotlight. And those clubs included premiers and perhaps an a new AFL franchise club the AFL were running.
The AFL needed a patsy and we were the perfect patsy (no premierships and only a decade of mediocrity) to sacrifice to ASADA to give them a trophy and save the rest of the competition from a wider scandal and shame.
Exactly
Gerard Healy started it did he not?#melkshamsarms
Basically, the AFL put every suppplement being used across the AFL at Essendonâs door at the startâŚand the word went out through the media.
AOD 9064 & TB-4 were never really in the frame at the start.
When the investigation didnât initially uncover all those illegal things we were meant to have taken, the AFL was faced with a dilemna.
For you see, the AFL assumed we were âon the gearâ like all other clubs - especially as we had Dank on our books at the time - and thought making an example of us was a no-brainer. Problem was the investigation turned up zilch initially.
Instead of honourably closing the investigation the AFL - and Demetriou in particular - went harder still and kept the investigation alive:
- Firstly by putting AOD-9064 in the public arena as possibly illegal although they knew as early as Feb 2013 it wasnât
- Demonising Hird. via the infamous Sara MMM call, when AFL 360 conclusively showed AOD 9064 was legal the night before
- Then pushing the TB-4 line as the next substance maybe, possibly, hopefully (!!!) EC players took.
As Iâve stated before, the AFL went from looking at multiple clubs in 2013 to only wanting to investigate the EFC by 31-Jan/1-Feb.
Why?
My opinion, and itâs opinion only, is that multiple clubs were known to be âon the gearâ and the AFL had been cutting deals with ASADA for months/years to keep these players/clubs out of the spotlight. And those clubs included premiers and perhaps an a new AFL franchise club the AFL were running.
The AFL needed a patsy and we were the perfect patsy (no premierships and only a decade of mediocrity) to sacrifice to ASADA to give them a trophy and save the rest of the competition from a wider scandal and shame.
This is what I reckon happened and what ive been telling people for about 3 years as we had already had our blood tested in Germany before the Blackest day in sport scandal .
We were their safest option.
My opinion, and it's opinion only, is that multiple clubs were known to be "on the gear" and the AFL had been cutting deals with ASADA for months/years to keep these players/clubs out of the spotlight. And those clubs included premiers and perhaps an a new AFL franchise club the AFL were running.This has always been the unspoken inference, hasn't it?
Multiple clubs had supplement programs of various sophistication at that time. After a review the AFL admitted that anomalies had been found with many. Even though reported (very briefly) by the AFL media there was never any detail on who was involved and the nature of the transgressions. And even more curiously, despite the saga charged atmosphere at the time, no one thought it important enough to follow up.
Tracey Holmes wrote on 18 Oct 2013:
Essendon was subjected to six months or more of front page headlines, current affairs stories and emotional talk back radio following a leak that the club was running a systemic doping program. There was talk of lifetime bans for some club personnel and the possibility that Essendon would be kicked out of the competition.
Ultimately the AFL had to drop all its pumped up drug charges because there was no proof that the strict World Anti Doping Authorityâs rules had been breached. What was left was a charge of âbringing the game into disreputeâ for lack of governance.
Essendon still paid heavily though. The club suffered the biggest penalties and suspensions ever handed down by the AFL Commission, while character assassinations were conducted in the Melbourne media, mostly surrounding the clubâs appointed fall guy, coach James Hird.
MeantimeâŚâŚ a story without fanfare made its way onto the AFL website. It stated:
12 clubs conducted programs with medium or high levels of supplement use and lacked a single point of accountability.
Thatâs â12 clubsâ. Not âoneâ club. Not âEssendonâ. We are talking 66 per cent of the AFL competition. Does that sound alarming to you? It should.
This fact and others make up part of âan AFL surveyâ which was: ⌠conducted following the release of the Australian Crime Commissionâs Drugs in Sport report - which also revealed that club documentation of player supplement use was âinadequateâ.
Sounds very much like Essendonâs supplement program? How is it that 11 other clubs (assuming one of the 12 was Essendon) manage to go unreported, unquestioned and unanswerable? As far as we know, there may be absolutely no difference between Essendonâs program and the other 11 teams.
Where's the evidence that the club used GHRP2 and GHRP6 that farkstick Brereton mentions?If that existed, surely ASADA would have prosecuted on that rather than the vague and tenuous evidence of TB4
Dermott doesnât know â â â â - he is talking absolute â â â â
as alwaysâŚtries to come across as a pretentious wanker - cannot even succeed at that.
Gerard Healy started it did he not?#melkshamsarms
Basically, the AFL put every suppplement being used across the AFL at Essendonâs door at the startâŚand the word went out through the media.
AOD 9064 & TB-4 were never really in the frame at the start.
When the investigation didnât initially uncover all those illegal things we were meant to have taken, the AFL was faced with a dilemna.
For you see, the AFL assumed we were âon the gearâ like all other clubs - especially as we had Dank on our books at the time - and thought making an example of us was a no-brainer. Problem was the investigation turned up zilch initially.
Instead of honourably closing the investigation the AFL - and Demetriou in particular - went harder still and kept the investigation alive:
- Firstly by putting AOD-9064 in the public arena as possibly illegal although they knew as early as Feb 2013 it wasnât
- Demonising Hird. via the infamous Sara MMM call, when AFL 360 conclusively showed AOD 9064 was legal the night before
- Then pushing the TB-4 line as the next substance maybe, possibly, hopefully (!!!) EC players took.
As Iâve stated before, the AFL went from looking at multiple clubs in 2013 to only wanting to investigate the EFC by 31-Jan/1-Feb.
Why?
My opinion, and itâs opinion only, is that multiple clubs were known to be âon the gearâ and the AFL had been cutting deals with ASADA for months/years to keep these players/clubs out of the spotlight. And those clubs included premiers and perhaps an a new AFL franchise club the AFL were running.
The AFL needed a patsy and we were the perfect patsy (no premierships and only a decade of mediocrity) to sacrifice to ASADA to give them a trophy and save the rest of the competition from a wider scandal and shame.
Whilst I agree with your opinion - I have never been able to find a credible reason why ASADA would ever contemplate such a deal/arrangement. If that ever got out into the public (and maybe that is the reason FOI has been blocked) it would make the saga look like a ripple. A govt anti-doping agency cutting deals with sporting codes to look the other way. Gee youâd think we were Russia.
I share some of the sentiments of the nasty sub humans on this blog about BF, who think he is mad. But my reasons for the diagnosis are very different from the nasties that post here.
Bruce is a Swans supporter and has never met James Hird or a single player but he has devoted over 10,000 hours to the cause despite being constantly denigrated on this blog. He has to be mad to put up with the crap dished out to him. If he had any brains he should tell every Essendon supporter who has done less than him to shove it. He wonât because James, Bomber, Dr Reid and Danny Corcoran appreciate his work. Bomber appreciated his work so much he made a special trip to Queensland to thank him. One playerâs mother also made a special trip to Queensland to see him. And then she spent two hours on a bus to meet him. She has exchanged over 100 emails and has provided much valuable inside information.
Greg Hunt has emailed Bruce on six occasions including responding five minutes later to an email Bruce sent Hunt on a Saturday afternoon.Bruce is not dealing with staff. He is dealing direct with Hunt.
Every time Bruce distributes an article he runs the risk of being sued by the AFL, Asada, Wada or the former chief Justice of the New South Wales Supreme Court Justice Spigelman. How many of us have risked anything for the cause? And we havenât the guts to use our own names.
No one can comprehend the support he has in the marketplace. The following is a quote from an AFL Hall of Famer.
Bruce,
I admire your courage. Not everyone will agree with you, and indeed, as I have said to you several times, I think you are being too harsh on Gillon McLachlan.
But your work is profound and extensive. Donât be discouraged if Jeff doesnât see it your way.
A lot more people are much better informed and you have many supporters now that your work has been more widely distributed.
My other concern is if these people bring law suits against you to try to silence you. It can be a very expensive process, even if you are right.
Anyway, keep up the good work,
Little did the Hall of Famer know that it is the dregs on this blog who have silenced him.
Bruce has exchanged hundreds of emails with Sydney radio broadcaster Alan Jones. Even Jonesâ harshest critics accept that he is very bright. The following are a few quotes from Alan Jones that Bruce has shared with those who email him regularly for information.
⢠November 1, 2016: âYou can use any of the quotes from me to you, Bruce. These people are in a professional cover-up. ⌠It is Australia, Bruce. This is the way they carry on.â
⢠September 27, 2016: âAn absolutely brilliant piece. Absolutely brilliant. Very proud of you.â
⢠September 12, 2016: âWhere the hell is this going to go? Iâm reading it all and I am in awe at your forensics skills.â
⢠September 9, 2016: âMy God, you have them [McDevitt and ASADA] on toast.
⢠September 7, 2016: âHoly godfather. The conclusions are extraordinary. When should we talk on air? Something has to give here.â
⢠May 4, 2016: âThis McDevitt seems quite a REDACTED.â
⢠March 22, 2016: âThis is a book. You are unbelievable. You say you canât afford to make a mistake. Youâre kidding me. I donât think you have made too many, Bruce. Itâs an absolutely brilliant volume of work.â
⢠March 16, 2016: â⌠These people lie and get away with it. Youâre doing a brilliant job, Bruce.â
⢠March 4, 2016: âA brilliant letter to [Australian Olympic Committee president] John Coates⌠How could anyone turn their back on an injustice to an athlete, no matter what sport? I am with you. He [Coates] should be obsessed with catching and punishing corrupt policemen. I honestly donât understand why these people seek to cover up. Youâre doing a brilliant job, Bruce.â
⢠August 4, 2015: âThank you for the latest statement about ASADA misleading. Youâre very charitable. I think itâs called telling lies.â
⢠June 29, 2015: â⌠Whether the AFL conspired with the Gillard government and ASADA to find Essendon and Hird guilty of governance failures is as plain as the nose on your face.â
⢠June 9, 2015: âYouâve done phenomenal work, Bruce. And the great virtue of your work is that it youâre doing it for nothing other than the pursuit of justice.â
⢠June 4, 2015: âThis mob are out of their depth. Leave it with me, Bruce. Itâs driving me insane.â
⢠May 20, 2015: âI wanted to say that the piece you did on REDACTED is absolutely brilliant. Some of the finest writing I have ever read. (my emphasis). Congratulations.
⢠April 22, 2015: âYou are unbelievable ⌠It is completely astonishing, Bruce. But brilliant stuff. My God, youâre a mile ahead of all these people.
⢠April 9, 2015: âPlease find attached my letter to [Victorian Premier] Daniel Andrews and his response⌠âMy Dear Premier, as you aware Bruce Francis copied me on his email to you. Francis has in fact sent me upward of 150,000 words on the saga. I have never seen better forensic work and research than Francis has produced during this unfortunate episode. If Essendon had been smart enough to employ Francis from day one, the matter would have been resolved in 2013.â
⢠April 7, 2015: âAnd this REDACTED McDevitt did say they were treated like âpincushionsâ and then proceeded to say he didnât know what the injections were. As I said on air, I had some injections the other day. They have been injecting people with all sorts of things since time immemorial. Players have been having supplements. That has nothing to do with it. The question is whether they are illegal or whether they induced cheating. The key point about the McDevitt comment was that he didnât know what was in them, so he just assumes that theyâre guilty⌠We have to keep going on these people, Bruce. They are absolutely disgraceful.â
Interesting that Dermott didnât front up to the actual investigation with all his specialist knowledge.
It would have increased their witness list to, you know, one.
Interesting that Dermott didn't front up to the actual investigation with all his specialist knowledge. It would have increased their witness list to, you know, one.One. A number that represents to sum total of Dermott's brain cells and even then it may be an overestimation.
Gerard Healy started it did he not?#melkshamsarms
Basically, the AFL put every suppplement being used across the AFL at Essendonâs door at the startâŚand the word went out through the media.
AOD 9064 & TB-4 were never really in the frame at the start.
When the investigation didnât initially uncover all those illegal things we were meant to have taken, the AFL was faced with a dilemna.
For you see, the AFL assumed we were âon the gearâ like all other clubs - especially as we had Dank on our books at the time - and thought making an example of us was a no-brainer. Problem was the investigation turned up zilch initially.
Instead of honourably closing the investigation the AFL - and Demetriou in particular - went harder still and kept the investigation alive:
- Firstly by putting AOD-9064 in the public arena as possibly illegal although they knew as early as Feb 2013 it wasnât
- Demonising Hird. via the infamous Sara MMM call, when AFL 360 conclusively showed AOD 9064 was legal the night before
- Then pushing the TB-4 line as the next substance maybe, possibly, hopefully (!!!) EC players took.
As Iâve stated before, the AFL went from looking at multiple clubs in 2013 to only wanting to investigate the EFC by 31-Jan/1-Feb.
Why?
My opinion, and itâs opinion only, is that multiple clubs were known to be âon the gearâ and the AFL had been cutting deals with ASADA for months/years to keep these players/clubs out of the spotlight. And those clubs included premiers and perhaps an a new AFL franchise club the AFL were running.
The AFL needed a patsy and we were the perfect patsy (no premierships and only a decade of mediocrity) to sacrifice to ASADA to give them a trophy and save the rest of the competition from a wider scandal and shame.
Whilst I agree with your opinion - I have never been able to find a credible reason why ASADA would ever contemplate such a deal/arrangement. If that ever got out into the public (and maybe that is the reason FOI has been blocked) it would make the saga look like a ripple. A govt anti-doping agency cutting deals with sporting codes to look the other way. Gee youâd think we were Russia.
Why havenât they gone after Bock if they are such crusaders against doping?
Yes, how convenient that the Bock case gone quietâŚ