CAS verdict

[GCSkiwi]

For all the Essendon supporters who are still confused as to why the players are being held responsible, here's the short of it:

The AFL complies to the world anti-doping code, which has a very rigid and strict set of rules to be followed. Players have to be available to be spot tested at any time (hence recently a few clubs were fined for not updating information about players whereabouts), and there are all sorts of ways for players to raise concerns or investigate things. The players have to provide information on what supplements they have taken and how they are administered which all gets looked at.

It's important to realise that committing an anti-doping offense does NOT mean you have to test positive for a substance. That's only a part of the anti-doping code. Having the means to take a prohibited substance is an offense (eg let's say a player is found with a vial of anabolic steroids and a bunch of syringes in their home. That's an offense, even if they don't test positive for the substance). Trafficking substances for another person to use is an offense, even if the intended recipient is not an athlete. It is an offense for a coach to have gear/substances to dope players. So basically if you're in a situation where there is a possibility or likelihood that you could take a prohibited substance, you're probably committing an anti-doping offense. It is also important that at the end of the day, the buck stops with the player. It is the players duty to ensure they do not take a prohibited substance. Yes, they should be able to rely on the advice of the club etc, but it is ultimately still their responsibility.

The WADA case was pretty simple really. The players consented to being given a series of injections (alarm bell 1) of "Thymosin" under direction of Dank. These were being given with the express purpose of aiding faster recovery from training (alarm bell 2), which is not an outcome achieved by any of the non-prohibited Thymosins. The players were also advised to keep this off doping control forms (alarm bell 3), which they did (an offense) and keep it under wraps from the club doctor (alarm bell 4), under guise that they didn't want their super-awesome-but-yeah-its-totally-legal programme getting to other clubs. At no stage did any player make any attempt research thymosin, what it is or whether it is indeed legal, which is not clever. Dank, through several associates, arranged for the purchase and acquirement of thymosin beta 4 and/or it's precursors for compounding locally. Dank also has a murky history of doping with other sporting groups. The injection regimen used was also consistent with a regimen described between Dank and an associate for the use of Thymosin beta 4.

That I believe was all undisputed fact. This was supplemented with a lot of more circumspect evidence from communications between Dank and others, which included him specifically talking about giving players Thymosin beta 4, and discussing the use of substances not cleared for human use on players (an offense, both anti-doping and probably criminal). But essentially, the question WADA asked was: if the thymosin the players were being given was NOT Thymosin beta 4, why did Dank have it, how could the substance used have aided their recovery in any way, why was the injection regime consistent with TB4, why were they told to keep it from the doc, and why did he specifically say in communications that it WAS TB4? Given the body of evidence they presented, it's pretty hard to come to any conclusion other than players having taken TB4 - and that's without looking at the test results.

As to why the players were considered to be significantly and negligently at fault, rather than unwittingly duped, essentially because they failed to act when they should have. As above, alarm bell 1 was being asked to consent to a regime of injections for a supplement. Obviously there are legitimate medical reasons for either an individual jab or a regime of injections, but purely for a  supplement it's a delivery method which should have raised eyebrows in the least. On it's own it's not a big deal, but when you combine it with alarm bell 2, that the purpose was to aid recovery, they should have started asking more questions. An injection to aid in recovery, what's the first thing that comes to mind? Steroids. But even that could be legitimately explained. Alarm bells 3 and 4 are the real kicker, if this was all totally legit, why keep it off anti-doping forms and away from the club doc? To protect the secrecy of it? That fails the common sense test, it really does. So, you've got an injection to aid recovery that you shouldn't tell the club doc or anti-doping authorities about. Looks like a duck, walks like a duck, quacks like a duck. Yet the players didn't ask further questions, didn't independently research what they were give, and didn't alert any authorities. Not declaring the injections on doping control forms is an offense in and of itself, but it also really calls in to question their judgement. At best they were willfully ignorant, at worst knowingly complicit. Players are well educated about all of this, they can't claim ignorance about it.

Don't get me wrong, I think the players were deceived and did not knowingly take TB4. But they certainly did commit offences and didn't act in the way they should have, and at the end of the day they are all well aware of the fact that the buck stops at them. It seems as though Dank pulled a swift one on just about everyone, but there were a lot of other people who didn't do what they should have done.

For those of you who've seen the move "a few good men", it's a bit like the end where the marines are convicted, despite it coming out that they were acting under orders. The younger of the two doesn't understand what they did wrong, because they were just doing as they were instructed. The other recognises that despite it being an order, they should have acted differently.

[DazBurg]

Thanks for the breakdown GCSkiwi
I appreciate your knowledge in response to all this making it easier  to understand through my bombers colored glasses

Still shattered though  :(

[Ricochet]

GCSkiwi, what are your thoughts on Hird after reading through all the report, and with everything that has happened?

I read through most of that report that came out the other day, I'll admit i glossed over a few of the later things, but my initial feeling was that Hird wasn't necessarily as evil as what he's been made out to be. While everything obviously had to go through him, I saw numerous times it mentioned him stating that whateva is done must stay within the laws, and it was Dank that went a bit rogue. I could have misread though so would love to hear your thoughts?

[RiOtChEsS]

this is just the flowerin best, even Essendon supporters should get a giggle outta this ;D
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_TcZikqG654

[T Dog]

this is just the flowerin best, even Essendon supporters should get a giggle outta this ;D
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_TcZikqG654

That didn't take long  :o

[GCSkiwi]

Thanks for the breakdown GCSkiwi
I appreciate your knowledge in response to all this making it easier  to understand through my bombers colored glasses

Still shattered though  :(

Yeah, and fair enough too, it's pretty crap for all involved though I do genuinely believe this is the correct course of action, as much as it sucks for the players.

This is a pretty good read for quick info too http://www.afl.com.au/news/2016-01-12/eight-burning-questions-about-the-essendon-34

I think one question that has been asked is why the AFL complies with the WADA code, as Schmook says:

Why is the AFL bound by the CAS decision?
The AFL is a WADA signatory and therefore must accept CAS's decision. The League, which previously operated under its own tailored testing regime, has expressed concerns about how the code is applied to team sports in the past. Withdrawing from the WADA code would, however, see government funds and support withdrawn from the game. Tuesday's decision sparked debate about the suitability of the WADA code to the AFL and the League said it invited that discussion.

In all honesty I see nothing wrong with how this decision was reached and nothing wrong with how the sanctions were applied. I know it hurts for supporters, but this is exactly how you deter people from doping, you make the penalties harsh and you're absolutely merciless in applying them when it occurs. A low-level (10kph over) speeding fine is ~$150 depending on your state, you still get people speeding. How would the numbers change if that fine was $1500 instead? Sure, there would always be some who will speed, just as there will always be athletes who dope. But the greater you make the risk if you get caught, the more people will think twice.

GCSkiwi, what are your thoughts on Hird after reading through all the report, and with everything that has happened?

I read through most of that report that came out the other day, I'll admit i glossed over a few of the later things, but my initial feeling was that Hird wasn't necessarily as evil as what he's been made out to be. While everything obviously had to go through him, I saw numerous times it mentioned him stating that whateva is done must stay within the laws, and it was Dank that went a bit rogue. I could have misread though so would love to hear your thoughts?

Yeah I agree with that. There was a little implication in there that he perhaps didn't give Doc Reid the respect/credit he should have when Reid first raised concerns about things, but on the whole yes I think through the media he was made to seem a lot worse than he actually was. Again though, I think what happened with him was appropriate, he should never have been operating a system which allowed Dank to go so rogue, and he should have been doing a lot more due diligence about the programme. If I was in charge of a group of athletes such as this I would always seek an outside, independent verification on a new supplement etc. There are ways to do that while maintaining the secrecy of a method designed to give you competitive advantage. So his position really did become untenable.

[Capper]

GCSkiwi, what are your thoughts on Hird after reading through all the report, and with everything that has happened?

I read through most of that report that came out the other day, I'll admit i glossed over a few of the later things, but my initial feeling was that Hird wasn't necessarily as evil as what he's been made out to be. While everything obviously had to go through him, I saw numerous times it mentioned him stating that whateva is done must stay within the laws, and it was Dank that went a bit rogue. I could have misread though so would love to hear your thoughts?

Yeah I agree with that. There was a little implication in there that he perhaps didn't give Doc Reid the respect/credit he should have when Reid first raised concerns about things, but on the whole yes I think through the media he was made to seem a lot worse than he actually was. Again though, I think what happened with him was appropriate, he should never have been operating a system which allowed Dank to go so rogue, and he should have been doing a lot more due diligence about the programme. If I was in charge of a group of athletes such as this I would always seek an outside, independent verification on a new supplement etc. There are ways to do that while maintaining the secrecy of a method designed to give you competitive advantage. So his position really did become untenable.

I think the problem with Essendon was that Hird was seen as a golden child and got everything he wanted. Hird trusted Dank and the club trusted Hird. They didnt pay close enough attention to what was going on with Dank and co.

[Capper]

i dont think the players will sue the club, the club has no money and a lot of bills to pay, very little people have signed on as members and the members/supporters wont pay for any of it. I'm still bemused that Hird thinks nothing should happen.

Unfortunately Hird will be remembered as the coach that allowed this to happen at the bombers rather than the player he was

The Essendonains coterie group are all flush with cash. Former politicians and businessman like Paul Little (who is just shy of being a billionaire) will continue to support the club.

The supporters group has paid a showerload of the money from the saga and will continue to do so.

The club also has an insurance policy which would pay all the money from any said legal action from the players.

Legal action could take place

http://www.foxsports.com.au/afl/essendon-cas-guilty-verdict-players-should-explore-legal-options-says-justin-quill/story-e6frf33l-1227706517914

[Ricochet]

GCSkiwi, what are your thoughts on Hird after reading through all the report, and with everything that has happened?

I read through most of that report that came out the other day, I'll admit i glossed over a few of the later things, but my initial feeling was that Hird wasn't necessarily as evil as what he's been made out to be. While everything obviously had to go through him, I saw numerous times it mentioned him stating that whateva is done must stay within the laws, and it was Dank that went a bit rogue. I could have misread though so would love to hear your thoughts?

Yeah I agree with that. There was a little implication in there that he perhaps didn't give Doc Reid the respect/credit he should have when Reid first raised concerns about things, but on the whole yes I think through the media he was made to seem a lot worse than he actually was. Again though, I think what happened with him was appropriate, he should never have been operating a system which allowed Dank to go so rogue, and he should have been doing a lot more due diligence about the programme. If I was in charge of a group of athletes such as this I would always seek an outside, independent verification on a new supplement etc. There are ways to do that while maintaining the secrecy of a method designed to give you competitive advantage. So his position really did become untenable.

Yep and as head coach he overseas everything, so there is blame there. But it showers me when the average person down the street who doesn't have a clue sledges him off like he's the devil who didn't care about the players, when clearly it was Dank and clearly Hird did, he just put too much trust in Dank.

[Capper]

GCSkiwi, what are your thoughts on Hird after reading through all the report, and with everything that has happened?

I read through most of that report that came out the other day, I'll admit i glossed over a few of the later things, but my initial feeling was that Hird wasn't necessarily as evil as what he's been made out to be. While everything obviously had to go through him, I saw numerous times it mentioned him stating that whateva is done must stay within the laws, and it was Dank that went a bit rogue. I could have misread though so would love to hear your thoughts?

Yeah I agree with that. There was a little implication in there that he perhaps didn't give Doc Reid the respect/credit he should have when Reid first raised concerns about things, but on the whole yes I think through the media he was made to seem a lot worse than he actually was. Again though, I think what happened with him was appropriate, he should never have been operating a system which allowed Dank to go so rogue, and he should have been doing a lot more due diligence about the programme. If I was in charge of a group of athletes such as this I would always seek an outside, independent verification on a new supplement etc. There are ways to do that while maintaining the secrecy of a method designed to give you competitive advantage. So his position really did become untenable.

Yep and as head coach he overseas everything, so there is blame there. But it showers me when the average person down the street who doesn't have a clue sledges him off like he's the devil who didn't care about the players, when clearly it was Dank and clearly Hird did, he just put too much trust in Dank.

Dank got a life ban from all main stream sport in Australia but doesnt mean he will stop working and providing supplements. I am wondering why the players dont sue him as well as the club

[ossie85]

I still think James Hird comes off in a bad light. You guys maybe right that he isn't 'evil', but it wasn't so much the event itself, but how he conducted himself after the event.

I really believe he let his ego get in the way of a resolution to the problem. If he had realised his mistake, taken true accountability for it and not sledged from the side, I really believe this whole thing could've been finished 2+ years ago (like Cronulla). If had truly put the players welfare above his own, he'd still be seen as an icon of the club. Now he is forever stained and Essendon's last 2 Brownlow medallists have huge asterix next to their names.

[Football Factory]

Yeah I think you might be right Oss, but part of me thinks they found us guilty because they thought that they had to save the integrity of the drug code, wether they had enough evidence or not. I don't know if we will ever know the complete truth.

Not making excuses for the Bombers here, we were found guilty and the players are banned for 12 months end of story.

But

I think the AFL needs to take some blame aswell, they shouldn't just allow clubs to do whatever they want. There should be strict guidelines that are followed up by AFL representatives (daily if it has to be) to make sure things like this don't happen. Not only do the players have to deal with this shower, supporters aswell .. 3+ years of people calling you druggies etc.

Just shouldn't be allowed to happen.

[GCSkiwi]

but part of me thinks they found us guilty because they thought that they had to save the integrity of the drug code, wether they had enough evidence or not. I don't know if we will ever know the complete truth.

I get that this is a bombers forum and full of staunch supporters, but if you read the report and still don't believe they were given TB4 then I reckon you've got your head stuck in the sand (royal you, not you specifically FF)... Besides, if the bombers were found guilty without enough evidence how would that possibly support the integrity of the code? It would completely trash it. Given the evidence at hand I think it's virtually impossible for any reasonable person to come to a different conclusion than the tribunal did.

Not making excuses for the Bombers here, we were found guilty and the players are banned for 12 months end of story.

But

I think the AFL needs to take some blame aswell, they shouldn't just allow clubs to do whatever they want. There should be strict guidelines that are followed up by AFL representatives (daily if it has to be) to make sure things like this don't happen. Not only do the players have to deal with this shower, supporters aswell .. 3+ years of people calling you druggies etc.

Just shouldn't be allowed to happen.

What would you suggest? The AFL provides anti-doping education to players, they are required to fill out forms about what they're taking, in this instance the players willfully left out information... There's no way the AFL can mandate for that. There are already strict guidelines to follow, that doesn't make it impossible not to follow them. There's professional responsibility of the players and the coaching staff that should prevent this happening, but you can't account for dodgy individuals purely through legislation. The only way you could guarantee this wouldn't happen would be for every player to have an incorruptible and independent AFL representative follow them around 24/7/365 to keep track of everything they did, which is obviously absurd. Short of that, doping will always be possible.

[Grazz]

GCSkiwi, what are your thoughts on Hird after reading through all the report, and with everything that has happened?

I read through most of that report that came out the other day, I'll admit i glossed over a few of the later things, but my initial feeling was that Hird wasn't necessarily as evil as what he's been made out to be. While everything obviously had to go through him, I saw numerous times it mentioned him stating that whateva is done must stay within the laws, and it was Dank that went a bit rogue. I could have misread though so would love to hear your thoughts?

These were my thoughts to Rico when I read the CAS verdict with the extracts of Hirds texts. My initial reaction was I, the media and the football public have been to hard on Hird and he isn't the demon that some of the media have portrayed him to be. I think he like the players was equally taken in by Dank and misled about what was used in the supplements program.
Where Hird went wrong in all this is much the same as the players in the sense he was complicit in keeping stuff from Dr Reid, he was part of those that instructed the players to keep this all a secret and also make no declaration of the supplements on the ASADA Doping Control forms when players were tested, an offence under the WADA/ASADA doping act. My opinion of Hird now is he is slightly more guilty than the players due to the fact he was issuing these instructions to keep it all secret but not the monster he's been made out to be over the past 3 years.

The monster in this is Dank and his associates. The extract below from the CAS report confirms this in my eyes, anyone willing to try a drug meant for horses on a person someones son without their knowledge or consent is a monster they are scum.



How someone can say "lets test a couple of players" with it and not have their moral compass screaming at them is beyond me.
Dank comes across as someone that was willing to put 34 people at risk in order to become the Guru of supplements programs and progress his career and wealth at their expense and possible health implications in the future is disgusting to say the least. I can't for the life of me understand why this bloke isn't in jail as we speak. Some of these young men are married and were trying to have children, did he not once stop to think of the possible implications to the health of the fetus. For me Dank is the modern version of Dr Frankenstien. No morals at all, no care for his clients all he wanted was for the program to succeed for his benefit and future earning capacity and bugger the risk to the 34 injected and possibly their kids aswell. Flowering scum he is, i'd love for the day we cross paths in the street i'd unleash a tirade of abuse on him that would make Idi Amin squirm and cower, I can't begin to express the utter contempt I have for this animal Dank.

I still think James Hird comes off in a bad light. You guys maybe right that he isn't 'evil', but it wasn't so much the event itself, but how he conducted himself after the event.

I really believe he let his ego get in the way of a resolution to the problem. If he had realised his mistake, taken true accountability for it and not sledged from the side, I really believe this whole thing could've been finished 2+ years ago (like Cronulla). If had truly put the players welfare above his own, he'd still be seen as an icon of the club. Now he is forever stained and Essendon's last 2 Brownlow medallists have huge asterix next to their names.

100% agree Ossie his ego over ruled his better judgement.



   

[Football Factory]

but part of me thinks they found us guilty because they thought that they had to save the integrity of the drug code, wether they had enough evidence or not. I don't know if we will ever know the complete truth.

I get that this is a bombers forum and full of staunch supporters, but if you read the report and still don't believe they were given TB4 then I reckon you've got your head stuck in the sand (royal you, not you specifically FF)... Besides, if the bombers were found guilty without enough evidence how would that possibly support the integrity of the code? It would completely trash it. Given the evidence at hand I think it's virtually impossible for any reasonable person to come to a different conclusion than the tribunal did.

Not making excuses for the Bombers here, we were found guilty and the players are banned for 12 months end of story.

But

I think the AFL needs to take some blame aswell, they shouldn't just allow clubs to do whatever they want. There should be strict guidelines that are followed up by AFL representatives (daily if it has to be) to make sure things like this don't happen. Not only do the players have to deal with this shower, supporters aswell .. 3+ years of people calling you druggies etc.

Just shouldn't be allowed to happen.

What would you suggest? The AFL provides anti-doping education to players, they are required to fill out forms about what they're taking, in this instance the players willfully left out information... There's no way the AFL can mandate for that. There are already strict guidelines to follow, that doesn't make it impossible not to follow them. There's professional responsibility of the players and the coaching staff that should prevent this happening, but you can't account for dodgy individuals purely through legislation. The only way you could guarantee this wouldn't happen would be for every player to have an incorruptible and independent AFL representative follow them around 24/7/365 to keep track of everything they did, which is obviously absurd. Short of that, doping will always be possible.

I suggest they do whatever it takes to stop this from happening ever again, is it possible > flowered if I know.

It's the AFL police, sorry man I didn't know you knew everything.