Anyone know whether the AFL Anti Doping Tribunal Appeal Board would have been presided over by members who didn't sit on the Tribunal?An AFL Appeal Tribunal was constituted for Dank., different people, consistent with appeals system just about anywhere.
i can't speak for the J34 or anyone else for that matter, but the outcome I want is an authoritative public acknowledgment that the players, Hird, Bomber and Corcoran were stitched up by corruption within ASADA ( from Andruska through MCD); corruption in its relations with the corrupt AFL and corruption in its relations with another corrupt body in WADA; leading to a corrupted CAS outcome. Take no prisoners! To me it is not about overturning past decisions , but I want the inquiry to lead to reform and in particular for the AFL to be exposed for what it did and what it will continue to do with its corporate cowboy mates absent reform. And I want the Australian Givernment to rethink its policies, including playing an active role in reform of WADA.
I honestly donât think ASADA under Andruska were corrupt, I think they were completely and utterly inept. The AFL on the other handâŚ
Well done Bruce!
Great stuff.
- It is incomprehensible that you(SWMNBN)would be so stupid to raise the issue of leaks. It is my understanding that because you received more leaks than the urinals at the G on a hot Boxing Day Test between Australia and England that you had to revert to wearing gum boots.
Haha classic Bruce
1. It is incomprehensible that you(SWMNBN)would be so stupid to raise the issue of leaks. It is my understanding that because you received more leaks than the urinals at the G on a hot Boxing Day Test between Australia and England that you had to revert to wearing gum boots.Haha classic Bruce
Yep and this one too.
â I understand the AFL had a colonoscopy last week and they found your head.â
For those that doubt Bruce and his intentionsâŚdonât
He slapped dat bitchh
Thank you Bruce for one of the most cathartic pieces Iâve read. He gave The Witch both barrels. So satisfying to see someone else put my thoughts into words.
This is all about control. McLaughlin said he was âtotallyâ comfortable with the AFLâs actions throughout the elongated saga.Well, lets just consider the possibilities if it was not a joint investigation with the AFL. The players may have enjoyed:
- The presumption of innocence.
- The right to remain silent - would not make much difference as the players/club fully co-operated and ASADA disregarded any contrary testimony anyway
- The right to privacy and confidentiality.
- The right to be dealt with promptly and not subject to unnecessary delays, so ASADA would not be sidetracked writing Interim Reports, no Fed Court challenge and appeal on the AFL involvement etc
As many before have indicated, the lack of any proper evidence should have resulted in the investigation being dropped without any fanfare. Unfortunately, animalistic media coverage (again stirred and shaken up by the AFL) ensured ASADA was not able to drop the investigation without serious reputational damage.
Two final points on the desired Senate Inquiry needed to sort this mess out:
If the US and UK can have inquiries, so should Australia, particularly because we have had the worst possible anti doping case of all.
The issue of joint inquiries with the governing body of the sport needs to be addressed, as does the issue of team sports which are non-Olympic.
If ASADA had to report to a Standing Committee of the Parliament, not a Minister, would this have ever happended?
OK, Three points.
Stabby I am surprised that you overlooked the importance of remaining silent - The right to silence under the ASADA act is the âgame changerâ because ASADA charged the 34 players who attended interviews and admitted to using needles - This was the key strand that gave ASADA the ability to lay charges - Donât forget two players never attended interviews ( so no charge ) and two players denied using needles ( no charge ) So in affect the AFL allowing a joint investigation which gave ASADA the right to use the AFLâs contractual powers to make players talk at their ASADA interviews .
Finally the UK and the USA inquiries involve Olympic Sports that are directly funded by taxpayers - There is a difference between our situation which involves the AFL and the NRL which are non Olympic Sports.
The AFL was forced under threat of penalty by the Howard Government to join up to and be bound by the WADA Code. Hence WADA rules and the entire weight of the Olympic Movement Anti-doping System was brought to bear. The change to WADA Act in 2015 allowed WADA with âencouragementâ from ASADA to appeal the AFL ADT decision to the CAS and take the matter outside Australian jurisdiction. The notion of WADA rules not being applicable to an indigenous, team game was publically dismissed by Reedie, Pound, Fahey and Harmon as they travelled the world seeking extra funding from all countries, and using money already made available to them from these same countries. And where do you think that money comes from. I think it is called taxes.
I am fully aware of these changes. The fact is ASADA didnt have the power under their act to make players say anything at their interviews, hence using the AFLs powers. ASADA would have dropped the case if the Federal Court action was successful because ASADA would then need to reinterview players.
Now Rita meter maid is having her say in the Hun ( behind paywall): "AFL still has to give us some answers over Essendon supplements saga. "Has a swipe at at just about everybody - including " vicious attacks " by supporters - except ASADA (Ben cleaned up the mess) Reporting is quite confused , referring to a push for an inquiry into conduct of ASADA and AFL.
But she does seem to be following the Hun thread about AFL lack of accountability in regard to the way the Commission and executive operate,.
In her usual style, she chooses to use words such as " image obsessed" , âpenchant for secrecyâ , " stongarming" , " behaving duplicitously " , but this time she is using them against the AFL.
Rita is nothing but an oxygen thief.
Can I ask some of you people on here in the Justice for 34 group a sincere query on the Inquiry. I have stated I donât have any objection to it, I have signed the petition and like everyone I want justice on wrongs that have been committed. People who know me well know I get just as angry as anyone on this injustice so please take that into consideration.
I continue to think about the implications of an inquiry and what the positive outcomes could be.
Am I right in thinking the main outcome is likely how the AFL and ASADA proceed in future with both cases?
There is mention of players getting justice but this is where I disagreeâŚthough I would love it. As CAS finding has been challenged and failed I cannot see any possible way the players have any relief with an inquiry. I donât say that to be negative just a matter of fact as players were tried on TB4 and by a WADA/Independant body which falls outside what an inquiry will look atâŚto my humble belief anyway.
So is the inquiry really on corruption in a sense between AFL and ASADA? protecting future athletes rights from joint investigations, confidentiality etc?
There are many pages written on inquiry but just want to get some clarity myself. Again please take this as an open conversation and looking forward to heearing thoughts
Allan Hird: Focus needs to be on ASADA as wellAllan Hird, Herald Sun
18 minutes agoTHE penny has finally dropped for Rita Panahi about the AFL.
Her article reveals she now knows the AFL attempted to manipulate the process in relation to the Essendon supplements saga.
Welcome to the party Ms Panahi.
Those of us who have read Chip Le Grandâs excellent book, the Straight Dope, Michael Warnerâs reporting in the Herald Sun and the transcripts of the Federal Court case Hird vs. ASADA have known since 2013 that the AFL has never been interested in the truth.
Indeed, it has actively sought to hide the truth to protect its office bearers.
But as the saying goes better late than never.
All Ms Panahi has to do now, on her self-realisation quest, is to have the same revelation about ASADA under its soon to be departing CEO Ben McDevitt.
She runs the line that Mr McDevitt is some kind of white knight on his charger trying to clean up sport. Well the facts show he is quite different.
The facts show outgoing ASADA chief executive Ben McDevitt is anything but a white knight, says Allan Hird. Picture: Ray Strange
Let me go through some lines she uses to pump up Mr McDevittâs tyres. Ms Panahi quotes Mr McDevitt as saying: âwe know that hundreds, if not thousands, of injections were given to Essendon players during the course of 2012â.Think about that for a minute. If Mr McDevitt knew the number of injections, why didnât he give an exact figure? Itâs either hundreds or itâs thousands.
Either he knew itâs hundreds or he knew itâs thousands. It canât be both.
Perhaps Mr McDevitt is confusing the number of injections with the sweet coloured sprinkles mums and dads use to make fairy bread.
Ms Panahi relies on the decision of the Court of Arbitration for Sport that found the players had taken Thymosin Beta 4, a substance banned under the WADA code to defend Mr McDevitt.
But how did the players get to be tried by CAS? Simply because Mr McDevitt was after convictions not justice.
The CAS decision could never have been made if Australian legal principles had applied.
That is the precise reason why Mr McDevitt did not challenge the decision of the AFL Tribunal comprising two Australian Judges and an eminent barrister that found the players had no case to answer.
The tribunal used Australian legal principles and Australian rules of evidence when it cleared the players of any wrongdoing.
ASADA had the right under the WADA architecture to appeal the AFL Tribunal decision in Australia. But Mr McDevitt knew that he would lose because the case he ran before the tribunal had been thrown out because of lack of evidence.
Thatâs right, there was no evidence the players had taken TB4.
Ben McDevitt knew that he would lose because the case he ran before the tribunal had been thrown out because of lack of evidence. Picture: Ray Strange
Instead, ASADA under Mr McDevittâs watch gave WADA $US100,000, use of ASADAâs lawyers and the access to ASADAâs failed tribunal case to have the players tried again before CAS.He knew Australian legal principles and rules of evidence would not apply and he knew the case before CAS would be a fresh trial.
So here we have a highly paid Australian public servant funding the trial of 34 Australians in a foreign court knowing they would not receive Australian justice.
Furthermore, under Australian law, there is a simple but powerful principle, double jeopardy, and this means you canât be tried for the same crime twice.
But the Essendon players were, and Mr McDevitt engineered it that way.
Ms Panahi accepts Mr McDevittâs line that the players did not reveal the injections they had as an indication of their guilt. It is simply not true the players did not tell about their injections.
Rita Panahi accepts Mr McDevittâs line that the players did not reveal the injections they had as an indication of their guilt. It is simply not true.
Many did, and in any case, at the time in 2012, there was no requirement for them to do so. That statement by Mr McDevitt, besides being untrue, was an irrelevant distraction.
The players were charged with taking TB4. Yet there is absolutely no evidence whatsoever that TB4 was ever mentioned in any document or conversation to the players.
In fact, the players first heard of TB4 when they were charged with taking it. So, what is the point in Mr McDevitt trying to infer the players had something to hide?
Mr McDevitt has history in making things up to justify his case. In his testimony to senate estimates on March 3, 2016, he said the players did not do any research into the substances they were given. He said all they had to do was look up the website.
Well, many people have done so, including some of the players, and the WADA banned list for 2012 does not list TB4.
So, what would be the point of the players going to the website? The substance they were charged with taking was not listed.
All of this of course calls into question Ms Panahiâs attempt to portray Mr McDevitt as some sort of white knight trying to clean up sport. More likely his aim throughout was convictions, not justice.
My advice to Ms Panahi would be: before jumping in to champion someone, do your research. The corollary is also before trying to impugn the Essendon playersâ reputations, do your research.
Allan Hird is a former Essendon player and father of Essendon great James Hird.
Rita Panahi accepts Mr McDevittâs line that the players did not reveal the injections they had as an indication of their guilt. It is simply not true.
Is she for real? Has it ever occurred to her that maybe the players genuinely didnât know what they were injected with.
She has a peanut for a brain.
On the number of injections, I recall reading in the Federal Court transcripts that Haddad ( a former cop and AFL investigator under Clothier) expressed disappointment with the number of amino acid injections recorded by the players and that he would look to see what could be added. McD 's reference to thousands is pure conjecture.
Can I ask some of you people on here in the Justice for 34 group a sincere query on the Inquiry. I have stated I don't have any objection to it, I have signed the petition and like everyone I want justice on wrongs that have been committed. People who know me well know I get just as angry as anyone on this injustice so please take that into consideration.I continue to think about the implications of an inquiry and what the positive outcomes could be.
Am I right in thinking the main outcome is likely how the AFL and ASADA proceed in future with both cases?
There is mention of players getting justice but this is where I disagreeâŚthough I would love it. As CAS finding has been challenged and failed I cannot see any possible way the players have any relief with an inquiry. I donât say that to be negative just a matter of fact as players were tried on TB4 and by a WADA/Independant body which falls outside what an inquiry will look atâŚto my humble belief anyway.
So is the inquiry really on corruption in a sense between AFL and ASADA? protecting future athletes rights from joint investigations, confidentiality etc?
There are many pages written on inquiry but just want to get some clarity myself. Again please take this as an open conversation and looking forward to heearing thoughts
Its about âopticsâ mate. If the AFL / ASADA are exposed as the corrupt jerks that they are, the players, Hirdy, Bomber & the other support staff & us supporters can hold our heads up high and tell everyone else to GAGF.
http://www.heraldsun.com.au/news/opinion/allan-hird-rita-panahi-finally-gets-it-about-the-afl-now-she-needs-to-do-the-same-with-asada/news-story/8fa82d0d2a783099fda49fe8ad681954Allan Hird: Focus needs to be on ASADA as wellAllan Hird, Herald Sun
18 minutes agoTHE penny has finally dropped for Rita Panahi about the AFL.
Her article reveals she now knows the AFL attempted to manipulate the process in relation to the Essendon supplements saga.
Welcome to the party Ms Panahi.
Those of us who have read Chip Le Grandâs excellent book, the Straight Dope, Michael Warnerâs reporting in the Herald Sun and the transcripts of the Federal Court case Hird vs. ASADA have known since 2013 that the AFL has never been interested in the truth.
Indeed, it has actively sought to hide the truth to protect its office bearers.
But as the saying goes better late than never.
All Ms Panahi has to do now, on her self-realisation quest, is to have the same revelation about ASADA under its soon to be departing CEO Ben McDevitt.
She runs the line that Mr McDevitt is some kind of white knight on his charger trying to clean up sport. Well the facts show he is quite different.
The facts show outgoing ASADA chief executive Ben McDevitt is anything but a white knight, says Allan Hird. Picture: Ray Strange
Let me go through some lines she uses to pump up Mr McDevittâs tyres. Ms Panahi quotes Mr McDevitt as saying: âwe know that hundreds, if not thousands, of injections were given to Essendon players during the course of 2012â.Think about that for a minute. If Mr McDevitt knew the number of injections, why didnât he give an exact figure? Itâs either hundreds or itâs thousands.
Either he knew itâs hundreds or he knew itâs thousands. It canât be both.
Perhaps Mr McDevitt is confusing the number of injections with the sweet coloured sprinkles mums and dads use to make fairy bread.
Ms Panahi relies on the decision of the Court of Arbitration for Sport that found the players had taken Thymosin Beta 4, a substance banned under the WADA code to defend Mr McDevitt.
But how did the players get to be tried by CAS? Simply because Mr McDevitt was after convictions not justice.
The CAS decision could never have been made if Australian legal principles had applied.
That is the precise reason why Mr McDevitt did not challenge the decision of the AFL Tribunal comprising two Australian Judges and an eminent barrister that found the players had no case to answer.
The tribunal used Australian legal principles and Australian rules of evidence when it cleared the players of any wrongdoing.
ASADA had the right under the WADA architecture to appeal the AFL Tribunal decision in Australia. But Mr McDevitt knew that he would lose because the case he ran before the tribunal had been thrown out because of lack of evidence.
Thatâs right, there was no evidence the players had taken TB4.
Ben McDevitt knew that he would lose because the case he ran before the tribunal had been thrown out because of lack of evidence. Picture: Ray Strange
Instead, ASADA under Mr McDevittâs watch gave WADA $US100,000, use of ASADAâs lawyers and the access to ASADAâs failed tribunal case to have the players tried again before CAS.He knew Australian legal principles and rules of evidence would not apply and he knew the case before CAS would be a fresh trial.
So here we have a highly paid Australian public servant funding the trial of 34 Australians in a foreign court knowing they would not receive Australian justice.
Furthermore, under Australian law, there is a simple but powerful principle, double jeopardy, and this means you canât be tried for the same crime twice.
But the Essendon players were, and Mr McDevitt engineered it that way.
Ms Panahi accepts Mr McDevittâs line that the players did not reveal the injections they had as an indication of their guilt. It is simply not true the players did not tell about their injections.
Rita Panahi accepts Mr McDevittâs line that the players did not reveal the injections they had as an indication of their guilt. It is simply not true.
Many did, and in any case, at the time in 2012, there was no requirement for them to do so. That statement by Mr McDevitt, besides being untrue, was an irrelevant distraction.
The players were charged with taking TB4. Yet there is absolutely no evidence whatsoever that TB4 was ever mentioned in any document or conversation to the players.
In fact, the players first heard of TB4 when they were charged with taking it. So, what is the point in Mr McDevitt trying to infer the players had something to hide?
Mr McDevitt has history in making things up to justify his case. In his testimony to senate estimates on March 3, 2016, he said the players did not do any research into the substances they were given. He said all they had to do was look up the website.
Well, many people have done so, including some of the players, and the WADA banned list for 2012 does not list TB4.
So, what would be the point of the players going to the website? The substance they were charged with taking was not listed.
All of this of course calls into question Ms Panahiâs attempt to portray Mr McDevitt as some sort of white knight trying to clean up sport. More likely his aim throughout was convictions, not justice.
My advice to Ms Panahi would be: before jumping in to champion someone, do your research. The corollary is also before trying to impugn the Essendon playersâ reputations, do your research.
Allan Hird is a former Essendon player and father of Essendon great James Hird.
Rita Panahi accepts Mr McDevittâs line that the players did not reveal the injections they had as an indication of their guilt. It is simply not true.
Is she for real? Has it ever occurred to her that maybe the players genuinely didnât know what they were injected with.
She has a peanut for a brain.
I am so pleased A.Hird has stepped in. He writes very clearly and succinctly. He is a great figurehead for this.
Can I ask some of you people on here in the Justice for 34 group a sincere query on the Inquiry. I have stated I don't have any objection to it, I have signed the petition and like everyone I want justice on wrongs that have been committed. People who know me well know I get just as angry as anyone on this injustice so please take that into consideration.I continue to think about the implications of an inquiry and what the positive outcomes could be.
Am I right in thinking the main outcome is likely how the AFL and ASADA proceed in future with both cases?
There is mention of players getting justice but this is where I disagreeâŚthough I would love it. As CAS finding has been challenged and failed I cannot see any possible way the players have any relief with an inquiry. I donât say that to be negative just a matter of fact as players were tried on TB4 and by a WADA/Independant body which falls outside what an inquiry will look atâŚto my humble belief anyway.
So is the inquiry really on corruption in a sense between AFL and ASADA? protecting future athletes rights from joint investigations, confidentiality etc?
There are many pages written on inquiry but just want to get some clarity myself. Again please take this as an open conversation and looking forward to heearing thoughts
It may appear trite, but isnât - that statement is incorrect.
The CAS âfindingâ was not challenged, because it couldnât be, under the current system. What was challenged, was the right of CAS to have the hearing in the first place. Now that failed. Of course.
It would be fantastic to actually be able to challenge, legally, the CAS finding.
On the number of injections, I recall reading in the Federal Court transcripts that Haddad ( a former cop and AFL investigator under Clothier) expressed disappointment with the number of amino acid injections recorded by the players and that he would look to see what could be added. McD 's reference to thousands is pure conjecture.
I think it was Clothier who expressed disappointment with an ASADA report (perhaps the initial draft of the interim report) as it showed how few âsupplementâ injections there actually were. He told ASADA to include all other injections as well to boost the numbers. ASADA, naturally, complied.
I just â â â â â â me off that their pants donât actually catch on fire, so I edited it to at least make it look like they did.
i canât speak for the J34 or anyone else for that matter, but the outcome I want is an authoritative public acknowledgment that the players, Hird, Bomber and Corcoran were stitched up by corruption within ASADA ( from Andruska through MCD); corruption in its relations with the corrupt AFL and corruption in its relations with another corrupt body in WADA; leading to a corrupted CAS outcome. Take no prisoners!
To me it is not about overturning past decisions , but I want the inquiry to lead to reform and in particular for the AFL to be exposed for what it did and what it will continue to do with its corporate cowboy mates absent reform. And I want the Australian Givernment to rethink its policies, including playing an active role in reform of WADA.
i can't speak for the J34 or anyone else for that matter, but the outcome I want is an authoritative public acknowledgment that the players, Hird, Bomber and Corcoran were stitched up by corruption within ASADA ( from Andruska through MCD); corruption in its relations with the corrupt AFL and corruption in its relations with another corrupt body in WADA; leading to a corrupted CAS outcome. Take no prisoners! To me it is not about overturning past decisions , but I want the inquiry to lead to reform and in particular for the AFL to be exposed for what it did and what it will continue to do with its corporate cowboy mates absent reform. And I want the Australian Givernment to rethink its policies, including playing an active role in reform of WADA.
Exactly what I think. There may be no formal âclearingâ, but if the whole circus is exposed as a sham kangaroo court itâll be as close as possible to just as good. Players wonât get back the lost years either way, but the moral victory would be well worth it and a worthy outcome.