f*** off..c***

Talk about everything Essendon. Past, Present and Future if it's about the Bombers this is the place to be.
User avatar
boncer34
Champion of Essendon
Posts: 9207
Joined: Thu Aug 31, 2006 12:14 pm

Re: f*** off..c***

Post by boncer34 » Thu Mar 05, 2015 3:47 pm

McVeigh and Prismal got SC's and Winderlich wasn't part of the program.
Essendon Football Club- We arent arrogant, just better.

User avatar
Royza
Club Captain
Posts: 2797
Joined: Thu Aug 31, 2006 12:58 pm

Re: f*** off..c***

Post by Royza » Thu Mar 05, 2015 3:52 pm

Cheers Bonce!

Bruce Francis
On the Rookie List
Posts: 440
Joined: Wed Dec 24, 2014 8:27 am

Re: f*** off..c***

Post by Bruce Francis » Thu Mar 05, 2015 4:08 pm

Ancient Tiger wrote:
misterm wrote:AFL integrity manager Brett Clothier told ASADA that the AFL needed evidence “assembled in a way that paints a picture’’

“We need all the detail to get through that. Problematic if not full report. Get outcome we need. Take bits out that might compromise what we need,’’ Gillon McLachlan.

ASADA documents show that when AFL investigator Abraham Haddad prepared a table projec-ting how many injections were administered at the club, he was disappointed the number was not higher. “Not really what we are looking for,’’ he told ASADA investiagtor John Nolan on July 15. “14 out of 58 persons at EFC remember injections being referred to as Amino Acids. If we add the Multi-vitamin aspect then it is a little more convincing.’’

Omission and changing of evidence means nothing in the end though because it can just be thrown out at the tribunal with the defence giving sworn statements that state the contrary. This is assuming that such a thing ever happened. I haven't seen any official statement from the EFC or ASADA that this ever happened. Has anyone? I can understand ASADA not saying anything, but I would have thought that the EFC would have come out publicly and condemned any such action. Why haven't they? Maybe they were waiting for the tribunal to condemn it.

As for Charters and Alavi, how can anyone believe anything they say whether it is for or against the players? Much of the evidence gathered about the involvement of these two has actually come from third parties and business associates rather than from their direct confessions. Paper trails substantiating the events have been valued much more than anything they actually have said. This is why I bang on about the apparent lack of paper trail emanating from the 34 players. Maybe they have a paper trail for TA1 or thymomodulin I do not know about of course. You would have thought Large Fries or Slobbo would have had it front page of their respective papers though, if they had. The bottom line is that the case against the players would be thrown out quickly if the players have such evidence.
Surprise, surprise. I disagree with Ancient Tiger's statement "Omission and changing of evidence means nothing in the end though because it can just be thrown out at the tribunal with the defence giving sworn statements that state the contrary." I identified changed evidence because I had spoken to the person about it. However, there is a lot of evidence that was lodged that the individuals were not given a chance to check. The average interview lasted one hour and 36 minutes. Hird's transcript ran to over 300 pages. A number were in that vicinity. The players were not given an opportunity to check it. Dr Reid acquired his transcript before his court case and that helped the AFL to throw in the towel. Some of Dr Reid's testimony had been omitted. Last Friday, I spoke to a very important person and he said his transcript of evidence did not reflect what he said and he wasn't given the opportunity to correct it. AT has claimed the interim report meant nothing. He is wrong. The interim report was built on the basis of player interviews. No player testified at the hearing. Consequently, the tribunal members will be relying on the transcripts of the player interviews.

User avatar
BenDoolan
Essendon Legend
Posts: 25910
Joined: Tue Sep 12, 2006 9:10 pm

Re: f*** off..c***

Post by BenDoolan » Thu Mar 05, 2015 4:43 pm

Bruce Francis wrote:
Ancient Tiger wrote:
misterm wrote:AFL integrity manager Brett Clothier told ASADA that the AFL needed evidence “assembled in a way that paints a picture’’

“We need all the detail to get through that. Problematic if not full report. Get outcome we need. Take bits out that might compromise what we need,’’ Gillon McLachlan.

ASADA documents show that when AFL investigator Abraham Haddad prepared a table projec-ting how many injections were administered at the club, he was disappointed the number was not higher. “Not really what we are looking for,’’ he told ASADA investiagtor John Nolan on July 15. “14 out of 58 persons at EFC remember injections being referred to as Amino Acids. If we add the Multi-vitamin aspect then it is a little more convincing.’’

Omission and changing of evidence means nothing in the end though because it can just be thrown out at the tribunal with the defence giving sworn statements that state the contrary. This is assuming that such a thing ever happened. I haven't seen any official statement from the EFC or ASADA that this ever happened. Has anyone? I can understand ASADA not saying anything, but I would have thought that the EFC would have come out publicly and condemned any such action. Why haven't they? Maybe they were waiting for the tribunal to condemn it.

As for Charters and Alavi, how can anyone believe anything they say whether it is for or against the players? Much of the evidence gathered about the involvement of these two has actually come from third parties and business associates rather than from their direct confessions. Paper trails substantiating the events have been valued much more than anything they actually have said. This is why I bang on about the apparent lack of paper trail emanating from the 34 players. Maybe they have a paper trail for TA1 or thymomodulin I do not know about of course. You would have thought Large Fries or Slobbo would have had it front page of their respective papers though, if they had. The bottom line is that the case against the players would be thrown out quickly if the players have such evidence.
Surprise, surprise. I disagree with Ancient Tiger's statement "Omission and changing of evidence means nothing in the end though because it can just be thrown out at the tribunal with the defence giving sworn statements that state the contrary." I identified changed evidence because I had spoken to the person about it. However, there is a lot of evidence that was lodged that the individuals were not given a chance to check. The average interview lasted one hour and 36 minutes. Hird's transcript ran to over 300 pages. A number were in that vicinity. The players were not given an opportunity to check it. Dr Reid acquired his transcript before his court case and that helped the AFL to throw in the towel. Some of Dr Reid's testimony had been omitted. Last Friday, I spoke to a very important person and he said his transcript of evidence did not reflect what he said and he wasn't given the opportunity to correct it. AT has claimed the interim report meant nothing. He is wrong. The interim report was built on the basis of player interviews. No player testified at the hearing. Consequently, the tribunal members will be relying on the transcripts of the player interviews.
This is an absolute disgrace. And the conduct of ASADA on this point, is utterly disgusting.
Unfortunately, you can't drown a witch!

User avatar
tonysoprano
Club Captain
Posts: 4426
Joined: Thu Aug 31, 2006 6:31 pm
Location: Perth

Re: f*** off..c***

Post by tonysoprano » Thu Mar 05, 2015 4:59 pm

Bruce,

I realise you don't think its possible, but if players found guilty - what do you think will happen next? (Apart from our obvious outrage).

Of the following, what is most likely?
- the club will just bite the collective tongue and sit out "minimal" suspensions?
- the club and players seek to have the verdict and penalties set aside by a court of law?
- the club and players appeal decision to CAS?
- or some other possibility I haven't though of?

I still fear a political decision of sorts - guilty, but small suspension to keep ASADA and general public "happy".

I fear Jobe's Brownlow will be stripped, and among many injustices, that might be the one that broke the camel's back for me.

Ancient Tiger
On the Rookie List
Posts: 460
Joined: Fri Feb 06, 2015 12:53 pm

Re: f*** off..c***

Post by Ancient Tiger » Thu Mar 05, 2015 5:22 pm

Bruce Francis wrote:
Ancient Tiger wrote:
misterm wrote:AFL integrity manager Brett Clothier told ASADA that the AFL needed evidence “assembled in a way that paints a picture’’

“We need all the detail to get through that. Problematic if not full report. Get outcome we need. Take bits out that might compromise what we need,’’ Gillon McLachlan.

ASADA documents show that when AFL investigator Abraham Haddad prepared a table projec-ting how many injections were administered at the club, he was disappointed the number was not higher. “Not really what we are looking for,’’ he told ASADA investiagtor John Nolan on July 15. “14 out of 58 persons at EFC remember injections being referred to as Amino Acids. If we add the Multi-vitamin aspect then it is a little more convincing.’’

Omission and changing of evidence means nothing in the end though because it can just be thrown out at the tribunal with the defence giving sworn statements that state the contrary. This is assuming that such a thing ever happened. I haven't seen any official statement from the EFC or ASADA that this ever happened. Has anyone? I can understand ASADA not saying anything, but I would have thought that the EFC would have come out publicly and condemned any such action. Why haven't they? Maybe they were waiting for the tribunal to condemn it.

As for Charters and Alavi, how can anyone believe anything they say whether it is for or against the players? Much of the evidence gathered about the involvement of these two has actually come from third parties and business associates rather than from their direct confessions. Paper trails substantiating the events have been valued much more than anything they actually have said. This is why I bang on about the apparent lack of paper trail emanating from the 34 players. Maybe they have a paper trail for TA1 or thymomodulin I do not know about of course. You would have thought Large Fries or Slobbo would have had it front page of their respective papers though, if they had. The bottom line is that the case against the players would be thrown out quickly if the players have such evidence.
Surprise, surprise. I disagree with Ancient Tiger's statement "Omission and changing of evidence means nothing in the end though because it can just be thrown out at the tribunal with the defence giving sworn statements that state the contrary." I identified changed evidence because I had spoken to the person about it. However, there is a lot of evidence that was lodged that the individuals were not given a chance to check. The average interview lasted one hour and 36 minutes. Hird's transcript ran to over 300 pages. A number were in that vicinity. The players were not given an opportunity to check it. Dr Reid acquired his transcript before his court case and that helped the AFL to throw in the towel. Some of Dr Reid's testimony had been omitted. Last Friday, I spoke to a very important person and he said his transcript of evidence did not reflect what he said and he wasn't given the opportunity to correct it. AT has claimed the interim report meant nothing. He is wrong. The interim report was built on the basis of player interviews. No player testified at the hearing. Consequently, the tribunal members will be relying on the transcripts of the player interviews.
Fair enough. Why didn't players who felt their testimony was altered respond to the SCNs? I know I probably would have said this is my statement of events. "This is why I think I should not be charged. My statement to the investigators was *********, but they interpreted it as *******. Thus I should not be charged."

User avatar
BenDoolan
Essendon Legend
Posts: 25910
Joined: Tue Sep 12, 2006 9:10 pm

Re: f*** off..c***

Post by BenDoolan » Thu Mar 05, 2015 5:30 pm

Ancient Tiger wrote:
Bruce Francis wrote:
Ancient Tiger wrote:
misterm wrote:AFL integrity manager Brett Clothier told ASADA that the AFL needed evidence “assembled in a way that paints a picture’’

“We need all the detail to get through that. Problematic if not full report. Get outcome we need. Take bits out that might compromise what we need,’’ Gillon McLachlan.

ASADA documents show that when AFL investigator Abraham Haddad prepared a table projec-ting how many injections were administered at the club, he was disappointed the number was not higher. “Not really what we are looking for,’’ he told ASADA investiagtor John Nolan on July 15. “14 out of 58 persons at EFC remember injections being referred to as Amino Acids. If we add the Multi-vitamin aspect then it is a little more convincing.’’

Omission and changing of evidence means nothing in the end though because it can just be thrown out at the tribunal with the defence giving sworn statements that state the contrary. This is assuming that such a thing ever happened. I haven't seen any official statement from the EFC or ASADA that this ever happened. Has anyone? I can understand ASADA not saying anything, but I would have thought that the EFC would have come out publicly and condemned any such action. Why haven't they? Maybe they were waiting for the tribunal to condemn it.

As for Charters and Alavi, how can anyone believe anything they say whether it is for or against the players? Much of the evidence gathered about the involvement of these two has actually come from third parties and business associates rather than from their direct confessions. Paper trails substantiating the events have been valued much more than anything they actually have said. This is why I bang on about the apparent lack of paper trail emanating from the 34 players. Maybe they have a paper trail for TA1 or thymomodulin I do not know about of course. You would have thought Large Fries or Slobbo would have had it front page of their respective papers though, if they had. The bottom line is that the case against the players would be thrown out quickly if the players have such evidence.
Surprise, surprise. I disagree with Ancient Tiger's statement "Omission and changing of evidence means nothing in the end though because it can just be thrown out at the tribunal with the defence giving sworn statements that state the contrary." I identified changed evidence because I had spoken to the person about it. However, there is a lot of evidence that was lodged that the individuals were not given a chance to check. The average interview lasted one hour and 36 minutes. Hird's transcript ran to over 300 pages. A number were in that vicinity. The players were not given an opportunity to check it. Dr Reid acquired his transcript before his court case and that helped the AFL to throw in the towel. Some of Dr Reid's testimony had been omitted. Last Friday, I spoke to a very important person and he said his transcript of evidence did not reflect what he said and he wasn't given the opportunity to correct it. AT has claimed the interim report meant nothing. He is wrong. The interim report was built on the basis of player interviews. No player testified at the hearing. Consequently, the tribunal members will be relying on the transcripts of the player interviews.
Fair enough. Why didn't players who felt their testimony was altered respond to the SCNs? I
Because none of the SCN's came with any evidence. Which is strange considering you have said "ASADA must have gathered more compelling evidence since the interim report". If so, why wasn't any of it attached to the SCN's?

I look forward to your response on this...
Unfortunately, you can't drown a witch!

grassy1
Champion of Essendon
Posts: 8571
Joined: Wed Jul 25, 2007 8:48 pm

Re: f*** off..c***

Post by grassy1 » Fri Mar 06, 2015 2:33 am

Not at all!

With or without this episode in footy,there's plenty more material to provide us with a need to say,...

f*** Off C**nts!

The AFL Executive is bound to give everyone excuses to tell 'em to,......

  • f*** Off C**nts!


I don't recall putting this thread here?!

Ancient Tiger
On the Rookie List
Posts: 460
Joined: Fri Feb 06, 2015 12:53 pm

Re: f*** off..c***

Post by Ancient Tiger » Fri Mar 06, 2015 5:35 pm

BenDoolan wrote:
Ancient Tiger wrote:
Bruce Francis wrote:
Ancient Tiger wrote:
misterm wrote:AFL integrity manager Brett Clothier told ASADA that the AFL needed evidence “assembled in a way that paints a picture’’

“We need all the detail to get through that. Problematic if not full report. Get outcome we need. Take bits out that might compromise what we need,’’ Gillon McLachlan.

ASADA documents show that when AFL investigator Abraham Haddad prepared a table projec-ting how many injections were administered at the club, he was disappointed the number was not higher. “Not really what we are looking for,’’ he told ASADA investiagtor John Nolan on July 15. “14 out of 58 persons at EFC remember injections being referred to as Amino Acids. If we add the Multi-vitamin aspect then it is a little more convincing.’’

Omission and changing of evidence means nothing in the end though because it can just be thrown out at the tribunal with the defence giving sworn statements that state the contrary. This is assuming that such a thing ever happened. I haven't seen any official statement from the EFC or ASADA that this ever happened. Has anyone? I can understand ASADA not saying anything, but I would have thought that the EFC would have come out publicly and condemned any such action. Why haven't they? Maybe they were waiting for the tribunal to condemn it.

As for Charters and Alavi, how can anyone believe anything they say whether it is for or against the players? Much of the evidence gathered about the involvement of these two has actually come from third parties and business associates rather than from their direct confessions. Paper trails substantiating the events have been valued much more than anything they actually have said. This is why I bang on about the apparent lack of paper trail emanating from the 34 players. Maybe they have a paper trail for TA1 or thymomodulin I do not know about of course. You would have thought Large Fries or Slobbo would have had it front page of their respective papers though, if they had. The bottom line is that the case against the players would be thrown out quickly if the players have such evidence.
Surprise, surprise. I disagree with Ancient Tiger's statement "Omission and changing of evidence means nothing in the end though because it can just be thrown out at the tribunal with the defence giving sworn statements that state the contrary." I identified changed evidence because I had spoken to the person about it. However, there is a lot of evidence that was lodged that the individuals were not given a chance to check. The average interview lasted one hour and 36 minutes. Hird's transcript ran to over 300 pages. A number were in that vicinity. The players were not given an opportunity to check it. Dr Reid acquired his transcript before his court case and that helped the AFL to throw in the towel. Some of Dr Reid's testimony had been omitted. Last Friday, I spoke to a very important person and he said his transcript of evidence did not reflect what he said and he wasn't given the opportunity to correct it. AT has claimed the interim report meant nothing. He is wrong. The interim report was built on the basis of player interviews. No player testified at the hearing. Consequently, the tribunal members will be relying on the transcripts of the player interviews.
Fair enough. Why didn't players who felt their testimony was altered respond to the SCNs? I
Because none of the SCN's came with any evidence. Which is strange considering you have said "ASADA must have gathered more compelling evidence since the interim report". If so, why wasn't any of it attached to the SCN's?

I look forward to your response on this...
I didn't think that ASADA had to present ANY evidence at the SCN stage. It is there so players can come in with a record of all drugs taken in the time period in question and so refute the charges. So if player A gets a SCN, he shows a record of say thymomodulin injections with dosages and injection schedules signed off by the club doctor. He then says because of this I should not be charged.
Why couldn't any of the players do this?

User avatar
tonysoprano
Club Captain
Posts: 4426
Joined: Thu Aug 31, 2006 6:31 pm
Location: Perth

Re: f*** off..c***

Post by tonysoprano » Fri Mar 06, 2015 6:02 pm

So back to where we started then? We have to prove we are innocent while accusers don't have to prove shit?

misterm
Top Up Player
Posts: 125
Joined: Wed Jun 13, 2007 4:13 pm

Re: f*** off..c***

Post by misterm » Fri Mar 06, 2015 6:10 pm

I didn't think that ASADA had to present ANY evidence at the SCN stage. It is there so players can come in with a record of all drugs taken in the time period in question and so refute the charges. So if player A gets a SCN, he shows a record of say thymomodulin injections with dosages and injection schedules signed off by the club doctor. He then says because of this I should not be charged.
Why couldn't any of the players do this?
Mate you are making this up as you go along.

How can you possibly respond to anything when you have no idea what you are responding to?

Ancient Tiger
On the Rookie List
Posts: 460
Joined: Fri Feb 06, 2015 12:53 pm

Re: f*** off..c***

Post by Ancient Tiger » Fri Mar 06, 2015 6:16 pm

tonysoprano wrote:So back to where we started then? We have to prove we are innocent while accusers don't have to prove shit?
I think that you will find that that is how the WADA code works.
Bottom line is stay away from supplements that you have very little idea about or you haven't checked yourself with ASADA. You do realize that players get lectured this at the start of every year. It is not a foreign idea at all and has been done for many years.

Ancient Tiger
On the Rookie List
Posts: 460
Joined: Fri Feb 06, 2015 12:53 pm

Re: f*** off..c***

Post by Ancient Tiger » Fri Mar 06, 2015 6:21 pm

misterm wrote:
I didn't think that ASADA had to present ANY evidence at the SCN stage. It is there so players can come in with a record of all drugs taken in the time period in question and so refute the charges. So if player A gets a SCN, he shows a record of say thymomodulin injections with dosages and injection schedules signed off by the club doctor. He then says because of this I should not be charged.
Why couldn't any of the players do this?
Mate you are making this up as you go along.

How can you possibly respond to anything when you have no idea what you are responding to?
I didn't say no information. I said no evidence has to be put forward. The SCN will tell the player what they have been suspected of taking. It is up to the player to have a complete record of what they have taken to thus reject this suspicion.
If you are a player that embarks on a supplement program that even needed confidentiality agreements, you'd better have kept a record of everything you took.
They are the rules. I haven't made them up.

User avatar
tonysoprano
Club Captain
Posts: 4426
Joined: Thu Aug 31, 2006 6:31 pm
Location: Perth

Re: f*** off..c***

Post by tonysoprano » Fri Mar 06, 2015 6:28 pm

Every time a player is randomly tested they have to state anything and everything they have taken in the last 7 days I believe. Asada have those records. Why didn't they charge us then?

If they suspected us of taking it and we are to prove our innocence why did they state they had insufficient evidence to bring that charge in August 2013?

Ancient Tiger
On the Rookie List
Posts: 460
Joined: Fri Feb 06, 2015 12:53 pm

Re: f*** off..c***

Post by Ancient Tiger » Fri Mar 06, 2015 6:45 pm

tonysoprano wrote:Every time a player is randomly tested they have to state anything and everything they have taken in the last 7 days I believe. Asada have those records. Why didn't they charge us then?

If they suspected us of taking it and we are to prove our innocence why did they state they had insufficient evidence to bring that charge in August 2013?
Fair question. The onus is still on ASADA to prove their case at the tribunal. I suspect they gained vital information after August 2013. I have very strong indications that this is what happened.
The SCN stage is there to give the athletes a chance to short circuit the whole process by presenting information that may not have been seen by ASADA that shows that the substances they took were all permitted by WADA.
For instance, pretend you were injected by Dank in 2012. You are handed a SCN that states that they suspect that you were injected with tb4. You have a record of thymomodulin injections though. To prove these are authentic, wouldn't you go back and get evidence like purchase orders that show the club bought thymomodulin that coincide with your injections? This would probably save you from going through the tribunal stage.
If you don't have records or evidence to back your story up you gave to go to the tribunal and ASADA has to convince the three judges to a comfortable satisfaction level that you did in fact have tb4.

User avatar
swoodley
Champion of Essendon
Posts: 7233
Joined: Wed Aug 30, 2006 9:08 pm
Location: Perth

Re: f*** off..c***

Post by swoodley » Fri Mar 06, 2015 6:56 pm

Ancient Tiger wrote:
BenDoolan wrote:
Ancient Tiger wrote:
Bruce Francis wrote:
Ancient Tiger wrote:
Surprise, surprise. I disagree with Ancient Tiger's statement "Omission and changing of evidence means nothing in the end though because it can just be thrown out at the tribunal with the defence giving sworn statements that state the contrary." I identified changed evidence because I had spoken to the person about it. However, there is a lot of evidence that was lodged that the individuals were not given a chance to check. The average interview lasted one hour and 36 minutes. Hird's transcript ran to over 300 pages. A number were in that vicinity. The players were not given an opportunity to check it. Dr Reid acquired his transcript before his court case and that helped the AFL to throw in the towel. Some of Dr Reid's testimony had been omitted. Last Friday, I spoke to a very important person and he said his transcript of evidence did not reflect what he said and he wasn't given the opportunity to correct it. AT has claimed the interim report meant nothing. He is wrong. The interim report was built on the basis of player interviews. No player testified at the hearing. Consequently, the tribunal members will be relying on the transcripts of the player interviews.
Fair enough. Why didn't players who felt their testimony was altered respond to the SCNs? I
Because none of the SCN's came with any evidence. Which is strange considering you have said "ASADA must have gathered more compelling evidence since the interim report". If so, why wasn't any of it attached to the SCN's?

I look forward to your response on this...
I didn't think that ASADA had to present ANY evidence at the SCN stage. It is there so players can come in with a record of all drugs taken in the time period in question and so refute the charges. So if player A gets a SCN, he shows a record of say thymomodulin injections with dosages and injection schedules signed off by the club doctor. He then says because of this I should not be charged.
Why couldn't any of the players do this?
They provided a heap of evidence to the NRL players...such that the NRL players took their deal....if they did it for the NRL, why not the AFL players?
"You can quote me on this... He is gawn" - bomberdonnie re Hurley's contract status 25 February 2012

Ancient Tiger
On the Rookie List
Posts: 460
Joined: Fri Feb 06, 2015 12:53 pm

Re: f*** off..c***

Post by Ancient Tiger » Fri Mar 06, 2015 7:11 pm

[quote="swoodley]
They provided a heap of evidence to the NRL players...such that the NRL players took their deal....if they did it for the NRL, why not the AFL players?[/quote]
TBH I don't know why they did that for the NRL and not for Essendon. So I won't pretend that I do.

Crazyman
Champion of Essendon
Posts: 7087
Joined: Fri Sep 01, 2006 12:51 pm
Location: Sydney (Don't hold it against me)
Contact:

Re: f*** off..c***

Post by Crazyman » Fri Mar 06, 2015 7:24 pm

btw, can re-add Barrett again to the list of f*** off c****...

misterm
Top Up Player
Posts: 125
Joined: Wed Jun 13, 2007 4:13 pm

Re: f*** off..c***

Post by misterm » Fri Mar 06, 2015 7:42 pm

Why did the initial show cause notices not contain any detail about the alleged offence?

Why did McDuck go on a media blitz begging for players to take deals on the back of these scn?

Why did asada then reissue the scn with 350 pages of 'evidence'?

Strange behaviour isn't it

User avatar
BenDoolan
Essendon Legend
Posts: 25910
Joined: Tue Sep 12, 2006 9:10 pm

Re: f*** off..c***

Post by BenDoolan » Fri Mar 06, 2015 8:09 pm

Ancient Tiger wrote:
I didn't think that ASADA had to present ANY evidence at the SCN stage. It is there so players can come in with a record of all drugs taken in the time period in question and so refute the charges. So if player A gets a SCN, he shows a record of say thymomodulin injections with dosages and injection schedules signed off by the club doctor. He then says because of this I should not be charged.
Why couldn't any of the players do this?
They have to put a case against them so the players know what they're responding to. Otherwise, what are they supposed to say?

And what if "Player A" has no records, does he respond "I have no records, therefore, I took nothing"?

And in any case, the short answer as to why they didn't respond is because they wanted to expedite the process and bypass the ADRVP and go straight to the tribunal. By not answering the SCN's, that's exactly what happened.
Unfortunately, you can't drown a witch!

Post Reply