I think this is already known to be the case.
WADA/CAS relied on evidence of weight as per the mass spectrometer and concluded they can’t be sure what it is, but the weight is not consistent with thymosin alpha, but is consistent with TB4 so it must be TB4.
The idea that players can be banned on such a superficial connection is not ‘reasonable’ but CAS don’t need to be reasonable (it seems).
lol
has the AwFUL ever looked good in this case or for anything actually!
and aurora andruska who couldn’t recall anything when it mattered.
Ms Andruska also revealed Essendon was one of several clubs across a number of codes being investigated for performance-enhancing drugs as far back as 2011.
CAS applied a novel burden of proof and allowed evidence to be admitted at a late stage of the proceedings, as well as permitting WADA to switch the basis of its claims during the proceedings ( from links in a chain to strands in a cable)
In any other system, those actions would have been successfully challenged on due process grounds, as would the acceptance that the players should have been aware that TB4 was a banned substance .
It is curious that ASADA was unsuccessful in securing a ruling through NRL processes that Sandor Earl had taken TB4 and that ASADA did not appeal to CAS, or that WADA discontinued CAS action against Dank for TB4 - evidence too flimsy and no guarantees that the next CAS panel would be a shoe in
The ex post facto actions via TGA ( prescription only and controls on imports)and WADA ( specifically listing TB4) further illustrates the shonkiness of the WADA and CAS processes.
Honestly, that’s neither here nor there when it comes to evidence even at a circumstantial level. That’s poor governance, but it still shouldn’t result in a leap from just “Thymosin” to TB4. The CAS judgement was always not going to favour us for the “optics” given WADA had bigger fish to fry (eg Russia). I just think that ASADA getting it to that point based on the available evidence was suspicious.
We’ll probably never know what happened, but these documents seem to contain very relevant information given that the AFL and the Sports Integrity Australia don’t want it released. Why are they spending so much money on lawyers to contest an FOI request of a single guy not being represented by anyone?
That could also be a reason that the AFL opposes the FOI request.
Much easier to move on from an unsuccessful and financially stable Essendon side than a very successful Geelong side…
or there own gold coast suns side!
You mean Kate Lundy.
She and Jason Clare were the promoters of the “balckest day in sport”, for totally political reasons and they both should be have a red hot poker inserted.
Would have been a suitable action before a Federal ICAC - many inconvenient truths exposed, including Lundy lining up with Demetriou for a position with Gemba’s rival.
In the interests of national security.
I’m an Essendon supporter.
I don’t believe that any of our players or officials should have been found guilty of intentionally taking prohibited drugs.
Stephen Dank is as dodgy as Fark though.
I’m not confident that our players were not injected with something prohibited without their knowledge.
Has the ADRVP ever NOT signed off on charges?
I thought the standard was the mere possibility of a violation.
Seems like a fkn pointless waste of time.
yep, and this is probably the entirety of the prosecution case.
Other explanations for Dank’s non-cooperation are financial misappropriation, lack of quality oversight along the supplement supply chain and testing (Alavi seemed to get pisssed about something), dodgy suppliers etc.
The AFL was happy for Dank and the Weapon ( equally shady) to work with a number of clubs, including GCS and to give the Weapon a get out of jail card.
BOCK.
has the hearing been postponed again yet?
