f*** off..c***

[Windy Hille]

On the 10 year anniversary of the saga, there seems to be a call out to David Evans to come clean and help out the 34 players get justice.

I haven’t read the article by Robbo, but I’ve heard mutterings about this.

For those who may have read it, is it true?

[robrulz5]

On the 10 year anniversary of the saga, there seems to be a call out to David Evans to come clean and help out the 34 players get justice.

I haven’t read the article by Robbo, but I’ve heard mutterings about this.

For those who may have read it, is it true?

If I had any say it would be the only way Evans could ever come near the club again.

[desmondo]

And NOW, MAYBE, some truth.

f*** I would like see those responsible punished aptly.

https://www.foxsports.com.au/afl/teams/ ... 3fd30d23ff

[Windy Hille]

And NOW, MAYBE, some truth.

f*** I would like see those responsible punished aptly.

https://www.foxsports.com.au/afl/teams/ ... 3fd30d23ff

Yes, I heard Bruce Francis has been gnawing away at the ankles to get his hands on vital information.

The amoebas denied the information existed only to produce a document that was 90% redacted.

Talk about a cover up and absolute stitch up.

[nudder12]

And NOW, MAYBE, some truth.

f*** I would like see those responsible punished aptly.

https://www.foxsports.com.au/afl/teams/ ... 3fd30d23ff

Some truth, or even some transparency, seems unlikely.
"The Administrative Appeals Tribunal in Brisbane will soon rule on whether anti-doping agency documents related to the case will be released under Freedom of Information laws - though Sports Integrity Australia (which replaced the Australian Sports Anti-Doping Authority), the AFL and Essendon itself are trying to prevent the release"
Doesn't look great when even our Club wants to bury the documents.

[grassy1]

And NOW, MAYBE, some truth.

f*** I would like see those responsible punished aptly.

https://www.foxsports.com.au/afl/teams/ ... 3fd30d23ff

Some truth, or even some transparency, seems unlikely.
"The Administrative Appeals Tribunal in Brisbane will soon rule on whether anti-doping agency documents related to the case will be released under Freedom of Information laws - though Sports Integrity Australia (which replaced the Australian Sports Anti-Doping Authority), the AFL and Essendon itself are trying to prevent the release"
Doesn't look great when even our Club wants to bury the documents.

Gets Worse AWFULL Wise,in trying to bury another matter,which otherwise would have Certain parties up for it,knee deep in Piss and Shit!Guess,we’ll Never know though!

[robrulz5]

Not just documents but test samples are apparently going to be destroyed.

I really hope we can have some success soon to somehow forget about all of this.

[desmondo]

Why is it all not just transparent? WHY should they have 'secrets' if it`s all legal and above board WHY all the redaction??.

[desmondo]

Why is it all not just transparent? WHY should they have 'secrets' if it`s all legal and above board WHY all the redaction??.

And how about some actual 'proof' we were using banned substances??. Any of that would be nice.

[BenDoolan]

I think we’ve been down this path before…

The reason why CAS came to the ‘comfortable satisfaction’ that the players doped was because they did not declare any of the supplements program on their doping control forms.

This gave the impression they were hiding something. They also hid things from Dr Bruce Reid.

CAS did not need positive tests to arrive at a guilty finding.

Dems da facts.

[tonysoprano]

I think we’ve been down this path before…

The reason why CAS came to the ‘comfortable satisfaction’ that the players doped was because they did not declare any of the supplements program on their doping control forms.

This gave the impression they were hiding something. They also hid things from Dr Bruce Reid.

CAS did not need positive tests to arrive at a guilty finding.

Dems da facts.

bit of a read - but this is a segment about this issue from Bruce Francis...(approx pages 104-106 of his critique of the CAS judgment)

vii The complete failure of the vast majority of Players who had to fill in a
doping control form ("DCF") during the season to reveal the receipt of
injections does not encourage confidence in their statements as to the
limited or sporadic nature of what they were injected with.

My Comment
580. On first reading this is another example of the panel generalising or being lazy and
failing to be specific. As the panel had access to the players’ doping control forms it
should have taken the extra minute to quantify how many of the 34 players didn’t fill
in their forms correctly. On closer reading, we discover that once again the panel
wasn’t telling the truth. In 2011 and 2012 the players were not required to declare on
the doping control form the substances they were administered. It is
incomprehensible that the CAS panellists didn’t know the rules.

581. The horrifying aspect of the panel’s claim is it had no idea what it was talking about.
The panel cannot substantiate that the 21 players didn’t reveal the receipt of
injections. As Thymosin (which the panel has ruled without any evidence was
Thymosin Beta-4) is the only banned substance, it is clearly the substance that
concerned the panel that it had allegedly been omitted from the players’ doping
control form. The players were not required to list substances taken within seven
days of their test.

582. The panel cannot name a single date that a specific player was injected.
Consequently, it is reprehensible that the panel claimed that the players failed to
follow their fake rules. Even if we applied the fake panel rules, the onus was on
WADA to provide evidence that the players failed to record that they had received an
injection within seven days of their test. WADA failed to offer any evidence to that
effect. Unconscionably, without any evidence to support its determination, the panel
all but decided the players had colluded with each other and had lied when filling out
their forms.

583. The outrageousness of the panel’s negative judgement of the players arising from
this issue is exemplified by the following seven players who were cross examined by
the CAS panel:

i. Scott Gumbleton did not have a doping test in 2012.
RESPONSE TO COURT OF ARBITRATION FOR SPORT ARBITRAL AWARD
WORLD ANTI-DOPING AGENCY v ESSENDON FOOTBALL CLUB PLAYERS
Bruce Francis Response
105

ii. Brent Prismall was tested on 6 December 2011. Prismall hadn’t received an
injection at that stage and therefore he had nothing to declare on his doping
control form.

iii. Jobe Watson was tested in January 2012 and 12 July 2012. Watson hadn’t been
injected before February 2012 and refused to be injected by the end of April.
Consequently, he cannot be accused of failing to fill out his form correctly.

iv. David Hille was tested on 14 May 2012. Like Watson, he too, refused injections
before the end of April.

v. Cory Dell’Olio was tested at 5:15 PM on 14 July 2012. As he had not received an
injection in the previous seven days he had nothing to declare on his doping
control form

vi. Mark McVeigh was tested on 23 January 2012. McVeigh had not been injected
at that stage and therefore had nothing to declare on his doping control form.

vii. Ricky Dyson was tested on six occasions in 2012. As I don’t know, and the panel
doesn’t know, when Dyson received his Thymosin injection, it is impossible to
say whether he failed to fill out his form correctly.

584. Although Dyson Heppell was not required to appear at the hearing, he was in the
same boat as the players listed above who were tested on 23 January 2012. As they
had not been injected at that stage they had nothing to declare on their doping
control forms.

585. Although Ben Howlett was tested on 23 August 2012, he wasn’t required to list
Thymosin on his doping control form because he denied ever being administered
Thymosin. However, he did list other substances on his form.

586. Seven of the remaining 12 players testified that they were never administered a
Thymosin injection. Therefore, only a maximum number of five players may not have
complied with the panel’s fake rules. I cannot comment on those five players because
I have not seen their doping control test forms, despite having made a FOI request to
ASADA for those forms on 22 June 2016.

587. Five out of 34 doesn’t reconcile with the panel’s claim that “the complete failure of
the vast majority of Players who had to fill in a doping control form ("DCF")
during the season to reveal the receipt of injections does not encourage
confidence in their statements as to the limited or sporadic nature of what they
were injected with”.

588. Shamefully, this statement was one of the major reasons the panel found the players
guilty.

[BenDoolan]

I think we’ve been down this path before…

The reason why CAS came to the ‘comfortable satisfaction’ that the players doped was because they did not declare any of the supplements program on their doping control forms.

This gave the impression they were hiding something. They also hid things from Dr Bruce Reid.

CAS did not need positive tests to arrive at a guilty finding.

Dems da facts.

bit of a read - but this is a segment about this issue from Bruce Francis...(approx pages 104-106 of his critique of the CAS judgment)

vii The complete failure of the vast majority of Players who had to fill in a
doping control form ("DCF") during the season to reveal the receipt of
injections does not encourage confidence in their statements as to the
limited or sporadic nature of what they were injected with.

My Comment
580. On first reading this is another example of the panel generalising or being lazy and
failing to be specific. As the panel had access to the players’ doping control forms it
should have taken the extra minute to quantify how many of the 34 players didn’t fill
in their forms correctly. On closer reading, we discover that once again the panel
wasn’t telling the truth. In 2011 and 2012 the players were not required to declare on
the doping control form the substances they were administered. It is
incomprehensible that the CAS panellists didn’t know the rules.

581. The horrifying aspect of the panel’s claim is it had no idea what it was talking about.
The panel cannot substantiate that the 21 players didn’t reveal the receipt of
injections. As Thymosin (which the panel has ruled without any evidence was
Thymosin Beta-4) is the only banned substance, it is clearly the substance that
concerned the panel that it had allegedly been omitted from the players’ doping
control form. The players were not required to list substances taken within seven
days of their test.

582. The panel cannot name a single date that a specific player was injected.
Consequently, it is reprehensible that the panel claimed that the players failed to
follow their fake rules. Even if we applied the fake panel rules, the onus was on
WADA to provide evidence that the players failed to record that they had received an
injection within seven days of their test. WADA failed to offer any evidence to that
effect. Unconscionably, without any evidence to support its determination, the panel
all but decided the players had colluded with each other and had lied when filling out
their forms.

583. The outrageousness of the panel’s negative judgement of the players arising from
this issue is exemplified by the following seven players who were cross examined by
the CAS panel:

i. Scott Gumbleton did not have a doping test in 2012.
RESPONSE TO COURT OF ARBITRATION FOR SPORT ARBITRAL AWARD
WORLD ANTI-DOPING AGENCY v ESSENDON FOOTBALL CLUB PLAYERS
Bruce Francis Response
105

ii. Brent Prismall was tested on 6 December 2011. Prismall hadn’t received an
injection at that stage and therefore he had nothing to declare on his doping
control form.

iii. Jobe Watson was tested in January 2012 and 12 July 2012. Watson hadn’t been
injected before February 2012 and refused to be injected by the end of April.
Consequently, he cannot be accused of failing to fill out his form correctly.

iv. David Hille was tested on 14 May 2012. Like Watson, he too, refused injections
before the end of April.

v. Cory Dell’Olio was tested at 5:15 PM on 14 July 2012. As he had not received an
injection in the previous seven days he had nothing to declare on his doping
control form

vi. Mark McVeigh was tested on 23 January 2012. McVeigh had not been injected
at that stage and therefore had nothing to declare on his doping control form.

vii. Ricky Dyson was tested on six occasions in 2012. As I don’t know, and the panel
doesn’t know, when Dyson received his Thymosin injection, it is impossible to
say whether he failed to fill out his form correctly.

584. Although Dyson Heppell was not required to appear at the hearing, he was in the
same boat as the players listed above who were tested on 23 January 2012. As they
had not been injected at that stage they had nothing to declare on their doping
control forms.

585. Although Ben Howlett was tested on 23 August 2012, he wasn’t required to list
Thymosin on his doping control form because he denied ever being administered
Thymosin. However, he did list other substances on his form.

586. Seven of the remaining 12 players testified that they were never administered a
Thymosin injection. Therefore, only a maximum number of five players may not have
complied with the panel’s fake rules. I cannot comment on those five players because
I have not seen their doping control test forms, despite having made a FOI request to
ASADA for those forms on 22 June 2016.

587. Five out of 34 doesn’t reconcile with the panel’s claim that “the complete failure of
the vast majority of Players who had to fill in a doping control form ("DCF")
during the season to reveal the receipt of injections does not encourage
confidence in their statements as to the limited or sporadic nature of what they
were injected with”.

588. Shamefully, this statement was one of the major reasons the panel found the players
guilty.

There were lawyers representing the E34 yeah?

[rockhole]

Hard to believe that this was not raised by the defence given that it appears to be the major “strand” in the prosecution’s case. Then again, when our own High Court judges rule that it was OK for the AFL to doctor an interim ASADA report as it did not suit their agenda, then we were fked before the kickoff.

[desmondo]

Hard to believe that this was not raised by the defence given that it appears to be the major “strand” in the prosecution’s case. Then again, when our own High Court judges rule that it was OK for the AFL to doctor an interim ASADA report as it did not suit their agenda, then we were fked before the kickoff.

Again, WHEN will some-one actually answer these questions to every-one`s satisfaction?

And we can all move on...just get to the bottom of it all.

Do you think Bruce Francis would be STILL be fighting, knowing the facts?

Will make a good movie one day.

[Windy Hille]

Why do I get the feeling that when McLachlan heads out the door, things will change in regards to E34 getting some form of justice?

[grassy1]

Why do I get the feeling that when McLachlan heads out the door, things will change in regards to E34 getting some form of justice?

Has the AFL Commission changed Personelle since we got Whacked for it?

[robrulz5]

Why do I get the feeling that when McLachlan heads out the door, things will change in regards to E34 getting some form of justice?

He is possibly the last one who was involved in it so fingers crossed.

[mdso]

On the 10 year anniversary of the saga, there seems to be a call out to David Evans to come clean and help out the 34 players get justice.

I haven’t read the article by Robbo, but I’ve heard mutterings about this.

For those who may have read it, is it true?

It won't happen because the AFL will never allow it and also other influential people. The cover-up is complete unto itself. The last lot of bloods taken from the EFC players which was secretly sent to Germany, has recently been destroyed. Any chance the EFC players and others, might have had to prove their innocence, is now gone. It simply won't happen.

[mdso]

On the 10 year anniversary of the saga, there seems to be a call out to David Evans to come clean and help out the 34 players get justice.

I haven’t read the article by Robbo, but I’ve heard mutterings about this.

For those who may have read it, is it true?

It won't happen because the AFL will never allow it and also other influential people who were involved in this fiasco. The cover-up is complete unto itself. The last lot of bloods taken from the EFC players which was secretly sent to Germany, has recently been destroyed. Any chance the EFC players and others, might have had to prove their innocence, is now well and truly gone. It simply won't happen. David JUDAS Evans is NO champion of this club.

[BenDoolan]

On the 10 year anniversary of the saga, there seems to be a call out to David Evans to come clean and help out the 34 players get justice.

I haven’t read the article by Robbo, but I’ve heard mutterings about this.

For those who may have read it, is it true?

It won't happen because the AFL will never allow it and also other influential people. The cover-up is complete unto itself. The last lot of bloods taken from the EFC players which was secretly sent to Germany, has recently been destroyed. Any chance the EFC players and others, might have had to prove their innocence, is now gone. It simply won't happen.

Hang on a sec… if they’ve destroyed the blood samples that could ONE DAY prove they did take an illegal substance, then it will now never be proven that they did.

You can’t prove a negative.