I couldn't help but notice the complete lack of comment from Barret about the outcome. It filled my heart with joy. He came off as a beaten shell of a man.Please do.Hes a farkin twerp.
Twerp. There’s a word you dont hear often these days. But it sums him up.
He’s also a swine. And a git.
I could go on…
nice video thats me and jen in the pic at 2.25
Top work Scooter.
Quoted PostQuoted PostQuoted PostSorry but watching Barrett on Thursday night deciphering that an 8 ball is "about 60 lines" and talking about Gold Coast Suns is just showing how pathetic this has all becomeThere is too much journalism and opinion of people who are simply not relevant
If a financial expert or political expert took the position of Caro or Patrick Smith and it unfolded like it did they would be ridiculed or sackedSuch a joke
…
I think there’s not enough journalism, and far too much opinion.
But these journalists are pathetic…
I think they can no longer claim to be journalists There is no balanced presentation of facts, just opinion dressed up as fact.
Tracey Holmes was the one who remained most objective, essentially non judgmental, and consistently reported both sides where possible. No doubt she always expressed the view that the players might not have been guilty. She, in my opinion deserves the Walkely Award. Respect.
Does she really? To my mind, this award has been significantly devalued - rather like the Nobel Peace Prize - on the basis of recent recipients. In My Opinion, to which I am eminently entitled, she deserves better.
Thanks to GuzzLG for making me laugh out loud. And to CJohns for making me heart swell with pride. Wow, well done.
i was holding a poster u nitwit
Thanks to GuzzLG for making me laugh out loud. And to CJohns for making me heart swell with pride. Wow, well done.
Yep
nice video thats me and jen in the pic at 2.25
You and your sister are just stars! Good work
Good work CJohns!
BD take it easy, people here mean no harm.
BD take it easy, people here mean no harm.
hmmm BD take it easy brought back some weird memories of Bomberdomination (prolly before your time) now my conspiracy theory brain is thinking.
BD take it easy, people here mean no harm.
sorry I’m a bad mood I’m staying at a motel in eildon at the moment for Easter and the guy who runs the place came by to help me kill a spider
but whilst doing it he decided to tell me that James Hird was a drug cheat which ■■■■■■ me off
(he recognised my sister from today’s paper)
Quoted PostBD take it easy, people here mean no harm.sorry I’m a bad mood I’m staying at a motel in eildon at the moment for Easter and the guy who runs the place came by to help me kill a spider
but whilst doing it he decided to tell me that James Hird was a drug cheat which ■■■■■■ me off
(he recognised my sister from today’s paper)
Wow that’s exhibiting a very high level of customer service. ■■■■ off your customers. That’ll work.
i told him the tribunal found us NOT GUILTY and to get over it
Quoted PostQuoted PostQuoted PostQuoted PostQuoted PostTotally Quoted PostQuoted PostThe molecular weight evidence was the only thing we didn't know leading into the tribunal. Asada's ace in the hole. It falls well short on the required standard of evidence Imo if one accepts the mark French decision as authoritative.Yes, but I would suggest that molecular weight isn’t exactly a slam dunk for a number of reasons. Especially when the test was done 3 years after the alleged doping took place.
Lots of compounds carry similar weights, also you would need to be able to determine exactly HOW the chemist had ‘compounded’ the substance as that can have an effect on weight also.
Not to claim to be an expert but to prove a doping case they should have had a little bit more than “it could be TB4 because it weighed around the same molecular weight that is typical for TB4”
Agree. Surprised to hear test was done 3 years later. So they obtained a sample. The brown vial labeled thymosin left behind and find by wallis perhaps? . So we just left that sitting around but destroyed all the records, right? If that is the sample they got surely other testing was inconclusive, would have thought that was important evidence for the tribunal. Moreover it leads to questions about the allegedly forged certificate of analysis. hmmmmm?
The three year suggestion is incorrect
In the middle of the hearing - after Holmes had spent more than five days outlining ASADA’s painstaking narrative - evidence was presented and dissected about the molecular weight of the Alavi batch. ASADA had gained evidence from the Bio21 Institute at Melbourne University, which had measured the molecular weight of the relevant batch via a mass spectrometer. Two of Alavi’s staff had delivered the batch to Bio21, before it was sent to Dank.
Bio21, too, wouldn’t testify, but ASADA gained the results. ASADA sought expert evidence from Handelsman, who said the finding matched the parameters of the molecular weight of TB-4 - it was in the vicinity - and he added that it could not be the legal thymosin alpha or thymomodulin.
The players defence countered with mass spectrometer expert, John Vine, who had worked for the racing industry. In what was the defence’s successful game plan writ small, Vine didn’t argue about Handelsman’s assertion that the weight was in the ballpark for TB-4 and that it couldn’t be thymomodulin or thymosin alpha (also not banned) on that weight.
Vine simply stated that it was not appropriate to identify a substance based on a weight, if you wanted to be “comfortably satisfied” - the standard of proof for doping cases. For the racing man, there was no such thing as correct weight in this case.
Ahhh that makes more sense! Nice catch. Why wouldn’t Bio21 testify?
Why would they? They can’t be compelled, have nothing to gain and potentially upset several power brokers in this town not to mention the types involved in what ever it actually is that the likes of alavi, and Charters get up to
One suspects, given how they have acted upon Alavi and Charter, that ASADA wanted Bio21 to make a statement that the material they analysed was TB4. Based on the analysis they did they could not declare categorically that it’s TB4. Bio21, being part of Uni Melb, would need to get such a declaration run past Uni Melb legal and they are risk averse and I couldn’t imagine they’d allow them to make such a statement… even if they wanted to.
This sample is what Alavi got analysed. Presumably back in 2012. What about the sample in the Windy Hill fridge? Was that analysed?
This is madness.
When Alavi wanted to verify what the substance was, he sent it to Melbourne Uni to have the molecular weight assessed.
Why?
The experts tell us (in the tribunal hearing), that this can only establish that the substance could be TB4, but not definitively, nor even to the tribunal’s comfortable satisfaction, that it was TB4.
Why didn’t Alavi have it analysed somewhere where they could definitively say what it was?
Surely such a place exists?
If not, what is the point of the whole investigation - if no chemist, uni lab or anyone else can analyse one of these substances and say definitely what it is?
Or are we to believe Alavi was just playing some game I don’t understand.
The more I see of whatever Alavi says or does, the more dodgy and lacking credibility he looks.
Bio21 would have had the tools to determine exactly what it was. Just a matter of asking them to do a different type of mass spectrometry method that would have determined the exact sequence of the peptide. Which is what you need for definite proof. But this was 2012 and the analysis was just for Alavi and a molecular weight would have been a good enough for what he wanted to know. But, as proof in a court then the molecular weight alone is not good enough. It’s like “read” and “dare” having the same letters but depending on their order they are different words. Same goes for peptides - same amino acids will give you the same weight but its their order that gives the peptide its activity and identity.
And as we’ve said this still doesn’t say even if TB4 was at Essendon it went into the syringes that were injected into the Essendon players. Blood tests would tell you that and we know what they showed.
McDevitt the cop is would find a gun in someone’s car and instead of, at best, charging them with possession of a firearm, he wants them jailed for murder, despite no evidence of a body that was shot with that gun.
What an a-hole. Take the towels with you* 
I wonder if Trip Advisor covers motels in Eildon? If so, give him both barrels.
- Not really serious
Anyone heard from Jez recently? As in since the verdict.
What an a-hole. Take the towels with you* ;-)its ok he came back and apologisedI wonder if Trip Advisor covers motels in Eildon? If so, give him both barrels.
- Not really serious