Thanks for taking the effort to post that review Mr Mrs Miss Ms Scorpio.
Itâs pretty clear to me that ASADA/WADA are persecuting the players simply because they didnât take those cowardly deals.
Absolutely contemptible scum.
Here we are at the last minute and a new drug comes upâŚâPlaceboâ.
We have gone through AOD, Mexican Drugs, TB4 and now they are trying to get us on a charge of possibly taking Placebo.
Is there a doping test for Placebo?
/s
So ASADA had no or little evidence on the Cronulla boys buy managed to bully and theeaten a few of them into talking a fall on the promise of certain long sentences.
Wow, in Australia and by a federal body. How the fark do they get away with that. I would have thought that ASADA has perverted the course of justice at the very least. I wonder if they used forged documents in that heroic achievement ?
Finished the E copy of Chip's book.My suspicion has always been that Dank and his cohorts gave players placeboâs - I doubt they received substances listed on the Consent forms. Chipâs book supports my assertion.
Thatâs interesting, because Chip on the radio is happy to say âitâs possible players were given drugs without consentâ
If the book says thereâs a chance they were given placebos, I doubt it will make headline.
ChipâS book doesnât say players were given placebos. But reading about Charter,Dank,Alavi, Will court,Hooper and their ilk leads me to this conclusion.
And players should never have been charged with anti doping offences.
(Ings)
Nice line from Richard Redman regarding the evidence ASADA has in the Cronulla matters.
Thanks Scorpio! I appreciate your review.
Chris Kaias [legal twitter expert]and Tony Shaw[ 3aw dipstick] should produce the identity of Sarah to answer the mystery once and for all.Why cant phone records be traced to Eddies [put the lawyers fees in the bombers salary cap ] triple m radio station?
How would they know who she is? Kaias came on the scene after the fact. Has he made buddies from TripleM?
he is a law student who went to the public hearing and overheard chinese whispers from the rest of the public sitting in the tribunal room
he knows diddly squat, and is an absolute nobody who gained a very modest twitter following during the time he was live tweeting the hearing, and now just talks like he actually has some inside word
Chris Kaias [legal twitter expert]and Tony Shaw[ 3aw dipstick] should produce the identity of Sarah to answer the mystery once and for all.Why cant phone records be traced to Eddies [put the lawyers fees in the bombers salary cap ] triple m radio station?
How would they know who she is? Kaias came on the scene after the fact. Has he made buddies from TripleM?
They both have claimed they know Sarahs identity
Even dank answers questions âsays he gave us nothing illegalâ why not let these two name the 21 year old essendon players mother.
My take on Chips book, bit more than 140 characters. ASADA â Andruska took some time to realise ASADA was never in charge of the investigation. She realised late in the piece that ASADA and the AFL had completely different agendas. AFL kept going around her to her boss. She is a social policy expert that was headhunted to the role which says a lot about where the govt of the day saw the function of the anti doping body. She brought with her from centrelink two staff, an accountant and a lawyer so there was no one with investigations or doping experience. (even though there are a lot of investigators at Centrelink)MCDevitt didnât realise what a crap case ASADA had until the tribunal hearing had started. Like Andruska he was being advised by lawyers and not investigators.
EFC â Unbelievably Dankâs office was like a private medical clinic with staff in particular going to him with ailments, canât sleep, want to lose weight, bit tired etc, and he would inject them, or give them something to take home to inject. I am gobsmacked by that, that people are so trusting.This section is the most alarming, I can see why people said it was an uncontrolled environment, - it was. Anything could have happened. Players were so used to people coming back from holidays a sort of orange colour that they started making jokes about the oompa loompa people.
Charter - is a drug dealer happy to do anything to make money IMHO.
Dank - comes across a bit like a mad scientist, got all these theories that he wants to try out on people. Doubt he would have the discipline or patience for clinical trials. It appears that he genuinely believes in what he does and says, he just canât be trusted to abide by rules because he believes he always knows better. I think he gave us what he said he did to see what would happen.
Alavi â seems to be collateral damage.
NRL - as an organisation come across a lot more professional than the AFL. Understood completely the boundaries between club, league and ASADA. They let ASADA get on with their investigation, didnât try to make deals, but also looked after their player rights to not incriminate themselves. There is a big lesson there for the AFL (which I know they wouldnât dream of learning)
AFL â Should be condemned in the strongest terms. They do not look good IMHO. They seriously thought they could control and manipulate a federal government department to the extent that the department would abrogate their responsibilities under legislation. Astonishing, their arrogance knows no bounds.
They come across as sneaky, manipulative, indecisive, punitive, and concerned with their own self-image and aggrandisement. For me the ultimate irony is that Evans and the AFL supposedly wanted to protect the payers and the game/brand but in acting as they did they could well be singled handledly responsible for players being banned. If it were not for the players being so open at their interviews ASADA would have even less than what they have now. And if the players do get banned, doubtful IMHO, blood may well be on the hands of Evans and the AFL.
The organisation definitely needs a root and branch reform and it should be driven from the clubs. The AFL needs to go back to working for the clubs, not the clubs acceding to them.
Did we take banned drugs? I donât know, but there is nothing in Chips book that makes me change my view that there is every chance we didnât and no proof that we did.
If we did I think it will have been because Dank disagrees with the WADA code on the properties of a certain peptide and believes it not banned.
It was a good read.
see i just donât get this. Had these lawyers ever read a single CAS decision where there were no positive tests.
Couldnât have. The whole Investigator/lawyer bit is just a dogs breakfast. Chip doesnât talk much about them in the book, but what he does say is about statements. I worked at social security for years and we always took signed statements as soon as anyone said anything. The fact that experienced (ex police) investigators are told not to take statements reeks of inexperience on the part of the lawyers IMHO.
one could suggest asada, during initial interviews, didnât bother because they didnât think they had enough anyway and it wouldnât be proceeding. alternatively it may have been they were told by those up the line not to bother because the plan and expectation was always that players would role over for a lettuce leaf suspension. That they havenât proceeded against the nrl players might bee seen to support this.
Maybe it was just that Charters has all the cunning of a rat just flat out refused to sign anything at the time and it all got too hard and was forgotten about until McD game and started firing bullets without a full appreciation of where they stood in regards to key pieces of evidence . Iâd love to know what McD say about the strength/weakness of the case in private and whether any of his decision would be different in hindsight.
in any event it is just another in a long list of baffling decisions made by the powers that be at asada. How it didnât jump up and smack AA in the face that the AFL was conflicted just floors me. i suspect she was given a gentle push by the government to enter into the JI and was seduced by the prospect of being able to truncate the investigation by using the AFLâs compulsive powers.
this whole thing has been an utter catastrophe for everyone involved most especially the players.
Iâd wonder how much Mr Code,himself advised the decision
EFC â Unbelievably Dankâs office was like a private medical clinic with staff in particular going to him with ailments, canât sleep, want to lose weight, bit tired etc, and he would inject them, or give them something to take home to inject. I am gobsmacked by that, that people are so trusting.This section is the most alarming, I can see why people said it was an uncontrolled environment, - it was. Anything could have happened. Players were so used to people coming back from holidays a sort of orange colour that they started making jokes about the oompa loompa people.
So as much as people want to say the âpharmaceutically experimental environmentâ was an overstatement by someone who wasnât qualified to make that statement â itâs correct?
Not sure about the experimental, but on the basis of Chips book I would certainly say uncontrolled.
Chris Kaias QC
Kaias & Lane Lawyers
Chris Kaias [legal twitter expert]and Tony Shaw[ 3aw dipstick] should produce the identity of Sarah to answer the mystery once and for all.Why cant phone records be traced to Eddies [put the lawyers fees in the bombers salary cap ] triple m radio station?
How would they know who she is? Kaias came on the scene after the fact. Has he made buddies from TripleM?
Kaias believes himself to be one of the more astute legal minds in the history of mankind.
If you ask him, he will tell you.
Chris Kaias [legal twitter expert]and Tony Shaw[ 3aw dipstick] should produce the identity of Sarah to answer the mystery once and for all.Why cant phone records be traced to Eddies [put the lawyers fees in the bombers salary cap ] triple m radio station?
How would they know who she is? Kaias came on the scene after the fact. Has he made buddies from TripleM?
Chris Kaias [legal twitter expert]and Tony Shaw[ 3aw dipstick] should produce the identity of Sarah to answer the mystery once and for all.Why cant phone records be traced to Eddies [put the lawyers fees in the bombers salary cap ] triple m radio station?
Expert is overused in this post. Dipstick is underused
My take on Chips book, bit more than 140 characters. ASADA â Andruska took some time to realise ASADA was never in charge of the investigation. She realised late in the piece that ASADA and the AFL had completely different agendas. AFL kept going around her to her boss. She is a social policy expert that was headhunted to the role which says a lot about where the govt of the day saw the function of the anti doping body. She brought with her from centrelink two staff, an accountant and a lawyer so there was no one with investigations or doping experience. (even though there are a lot of investigators at Centrelink)MCDevitt didnât realise what a crap case ASADA had until the tribunal hearing had started. Like Andruska he was being advised by lawyers and not investigators.
EFC â Unbelievably Dankâs office was like a private medical clinic with staff in particular going to him with ailments, canât sleep, want to lose weight, bit tired etc, and he would inject them, or give them something to take home to inject. I am gobsmacked by that, that people are so trusting.This section is the most alarming, I can see why people said it was an uncontrolled environment, - it was. Anything could have happened. Players were so used to people coming back from holidays a sort of orange colour that they started making jokes about the oompa loompa people.
Charter - is a drug dealer happy to do anything to make money IMHO.
Dank - comes across a bit like a mad scientist, got all these theories that he wants to try out on people. Doubt he would have the discipline or patience for clinical trials. It appears that he genuinely believes in what he does and says, he just canât be trusted to abide by rules because he believes he always knows better. I think he gave us what he said he did to see what would happen.
Alavi â seems to be collateral damage.
NRL - as an organisation come across a lot more professional than the AFL. Understood completely the boundaries between club, league and ASADA. They let ASADA get on with their investigation, didnât try to make deals, but also looked after their player rights to not incriminate themselves. There is a big lesson there for the AFL (which I know they wouldnât dream of learning)
AFL â Should be condemned in the strongest terms. They do not look good IMHO. They seriously thought they could control and manipulate a federal government department to the extent that the department would abrogate their responsibilities under legislation. Astonishing, their arrogance knows no bounds.
They come across as sneaky, manipulative, indecisive, punitive, and concerned with their own self-image and aggrandisement. For me the ultimate irony is that Evans and the AFL supposedly wanted to protect the payers and the game/brand but in acting as they did they could well be singled handledly responsible for players being banned. If it were not for the players being so open at their interviews ASADA would have even less than what they have now. And if the players do get banned, doubtful IMHO, blood may well be on the hands of Evans and the AFL.
The organisation definitely needs a root and branch reform and it should be driven from the clubs. The AFL needs to go back to working for the clubs, not the clubs acceding to them.
Did we take banned drugs? I donât know, but there is nothing in Chips book that makes me change my view that there is every chance we didnât and no proof that we did.
If we did I think it will have been because Dank disagrees with the WADA code on the properties of a certain peptide and believes it not banned.
It was a good read.
see i just donât get this. Had these lawyers ever read a single CAS decision where there were no positive tests.
Couldnât have. The whole Investigator/lawyer bit is just a dogs breakfast. Chip doesnât talk much about them in the book, but what he does say is about statements. I worked at social security for years and we always took signed statements as soon as anyone said anything. The fact that experienced (ex police) investigators are told not to take statements reeks of inexperience on the part of the lawyers IMHO.
one could suggest asada, during initial interviews, didnât bother because they didnât think they had enough anyway and it wouldnât be proceeding. alternatively it may have been they were told by those up the line not to bother because the plan and expectation was always that players would role over for a lettuce leaf suspension. That they havenât proceeded against the nrl players might bee seen to support this.
Maybe it was just that Charters has all the cunning of a rat just flat out refused to sign anything at the time and it all got too hard and was forgotten about until McD game and started firing bullets without a full appreciation of where they stood in regards to key pieces of evidence . Iâd love to know what McD say about the strength/weakness of the case in private and whether any of his decision would be different in hindsight.
in any event it is just another in a long list of baffling decisions made by the powers that be at asada. How it didnât jump up and smack AA in the face that the AFL was conflicted just floors me. i suspect she was given a gentle push by the government to enter into the JI and was seduced by the prospect of being able to truncate the investigation by using the AFLâs compulsive powers.
this whole thing has been an utter catastrophe for everyone involved most especially the players.
EFC â Unbelievably Dankâs office was like a private medical clinic with staff in particular going to him with ailments, canât sleep, want to lose weight, bit tired etc, and he would inject them, or give them something to take home to inject. I am gobsmacked by that, that people are so trusting.This section is the most alarming, I can see why people said it was an uncontrolled environment, - it was. Anything could have happened. Players were so used to people coming back from holidays a sort of orange colour that they started making jokes about the oompa loompa people.
So as much as people want to say the âpharmaceutically experimental environmentâ was an overstatement by someone who wasnât qualified to make that statement â itâs correct?
My take on Chips book, bit more than 140 characters. ASADA â Andruska took some time to realise ASADA was never in charge of the investigation. She realised late in the piece that ASADA and the AFL had completely different agendas. AFL kept going around her to her boss. She is a social policy expert that was headhunted to the role which says a lot about where the govt of the day saw the function of the anti doping body. She brought with her from centrelink two staff, an accountant and a lawyer so there was no one with investigations or doping experience. (even though there are a lot of investigators at Centrelink)MCDevitt didnât realise what a crap case ASADA had until the tribunal hearing had started. Like Andruska he was being advised by lawyers and not investigators.
EFC â Unbelievably Dankâs office was like a private medical clinic with staff in particular going to him with ailments, canât sleep, want to lose weight, bit tired etc, and he would inject them, or give them something to take home to inject. I am gobsmacked by that, that people are so trusting.This section is the most alarming, I can see why people said it was an uncontrolled environment, - it was. Anything could have happened. Players were so used to people coming back from holidays a sort of orange colour that they started making jokes about the oompa loompa people.
Charter - is a drug dealer happy to do anything to make money IMHO.
Dank - comes across a bit like a mad scientist, got all these theories that he wants to try out on people. Doubt he would have the discipline or patience for clinical trials. It appears that he genuinely believes in what he does and says, he just canât be trusted to abide by rules because he believes he always knows better. I think he gave us what he said he did to see what would happen.
Alavi â seems to be collateral damage.
NRL - as an organisation come across a lot more professional than the AFL. Understood completely the boundaries between club, league and ASADA. They let ASADA get on with their investigation, didnât try to make deals, but also looked after their player rights to not incriminate themselves. There is a big lesson there for the AFL (which I know they wouldnât dream of learning)
AFL â Should be condemned in the strongest terms. They do not look good IMHO. They seriously thought they could control and manipulate a federal government department to the extent that the department would abrogate their responsibilities under legislation. Astonishing, their arrogance knows no bounds.
They come across as sneaky, manipulative, indecisive, punitive, and concerned with their own self-image and aggrandisement. For me the ultimate irony is that Evans and the AFL supposedly wanted to protect the payers and the game/brand but in acting as they did they could well be singled handledly responsible for players being banned. If it were not for the players being so open at their interviews ASADA would have even less than what they have now. And if the players do get banned, doubtful IMHO, blood may well be on the hands of Evans and the AFL.
The organisation definitely needs a root and branch reform and it should be driven from the clubs. The AFL needs to go back to working for the clubs, not the clubs acceding to them.
Did we take banned drugs? I donât know, but there is nothing in Chips book that makes me change my view that there is every chance we didnât and no proof that we did.
If we did I think it will have been because Dank disagrees with the WADA code on the properties of a certain peptide and believes it not banned.
It was a good read.
see i just donât get this. Had these lawyers ever read a single CAS decision where there were no positive tests.
Couldnât have. The whole Investigator/lawyer bit is just a dogs breakfast. Chip doesnât talk much about them in the book, but what he does say is about statements. I worked at social security for years and we always took signed statements as soon as anyone said anything. The fact that experienced (ex police) investigators are told not to take statements reeks of inexperience on the part of the lawyers IMHO.
My take on Chips book, bit more than 140 characters. ASADA â Andruska took some time to realise ASADA was never in charge of the investigation. She realised late in the piece that ASADA and the AFL had completely different agendas. AFL kept going around her to her boss. She is a social policy expert that was headhunted to the role which says a lot about where the govt of the day saw the function of the anti doping body. She brought with her from centrelink two staff, an accountant and a lawyer so there was no one with investigations or doping experience. (even though there are a lot of investigators at Centrelink)MCDevitt didnât realise what a crap case ASADA had until the tribunal hearing had started. Like Andruska he was being advised by lawyers and not investigators.
EFC â Unbelievably Dankâs office was like a private medical clinic with staff in particular going to him with ailments, canât sleep, want to lose weight, bit tired etc, and he would inject them, or give them something to take home to inject. I am gobsmacked by that, that people are so trusting.This section is the most alarming, I can see why people said it was an uncontrolled environment, - it was. Anything could have happened. Players were so used to people coming back from holidays a sort of orange colour that they started making jokes about the oompa loompa people.
Charter - is a drug dealer happy to do anything to make money IMHO.
Dank - comes across a bit like a mad scientist, got all these theories that he wants to try out on people. Doubt he would have the discipline or patience for clinical trials. It appears that he genuinely believes in what he does and says, he just canât be trusted to abide by rules because he believes he always knows better. I think he gave us what he said he did to see what would happen.
Alavi â seems to be collateral damage.
NRL - as an organisation come across a lot more professional than the AFL. Understood completely the boundaries between club, league and ASADA. They let ASADA get on with their investigation, didnât try to make deals, but also looked after their player rights to not incriminate themselves. There is a big lesson there for the AFL (which I know they wouldnât dream of learning)
AFL â Should be condemned in the strongest terms. They do not look good IMHO. They seriously thought they could control and manipulate a federal government department to the extent that the department would abrogate their responsibilities under legislation. Astonishing, their arrogance knows no bounds.
They come across as sneaky, manipulative, indecisive, punitive, and concerned with their own self-image and aggrandisement. For me the ultimate irony is that Evans and the AFL supposedly wanted to protect the payers and the game/brand but in acting as they did they could well be singled handledly responsible for players being banned. If it were not for the players being so open at their interviews ASADA would have even less than what they have now. And if the players do get banned, doubtful IMHO, blood may well be on the hands of Evans and the AFL.
The organisation definitely needs a root and branch reform and it should be driven from the clubs. The AFL needs to go back to working for the clubs, not the clubs acceding to them.
Did we take banned drugs? I donât know, but there is nothing in Chips book that makes me change my view that there is every chance we didnât and no proof that we did.
If we did I think it will have been because Dank disagrees with the WADA code on the properties of a certain peptide and believes it not banned.
It was a good read.
see i just donât get this. Had these lawyers ever read a single CAS decision where there were no positive tests.
Chris Kaias [legal twitter expert]and Tony Shaw[ 3aw dipstick] should produce the identity of Sarah to answer the mystery once and for all.
Why cant phone records be traced to Eddies [put the lawyers fees in the bombers salary cap ] triple m radio station?