CAS verdict

[Barra13]

Calling it now, this appeal will not go well for them.

"The appeal has been made on the grounds that the CAS erred in determining that the World Anti-Doping Agency  appeal should be conducted as a de novo hearing,’" AFLPA CEO Paul Marsh said at a news conference on Thursday morning.

"That is, WADA should only have been allowed to appeal the unanimous decision of the AFL Anti-Doping Tribunal on grounds of either legal error or that it was grossly unreasonable."

IIRC, TB4 was not part of the original AFL tribunal hearing, so WADA could go for a new (de novo) hearing on that grounds alone. In any case, I'm pretty sure the "grossly unreasonable" would be pretty easy to stump up an argument for.

The TB4 question never got asked because ASADA used the links in a chain theory. If they couldn't prove the TB4 got to Essendon then it never happened apparently. That is why it never got to that question. Whereas WADA went and used the strands in a cable approach and used the evidence as a whole. They said that TB4, no matter how it happened, he had possession of it and administered it to the players. Essendon lawyers then had to disprove that. That is the way I believed it went down.

But I agree, this won't end well for them.

[j959]

Calling it now, this appeal will not go well for them.

"The appeal has been made on the grounds that the CAS erred in determining that the World Anti-Doping Agency  appeal should be conducted as a de novo hearing,’" AFLPA CEO Paul Marsh said at a news conference on Thursday morning.

"That is, WADA should only have been allowed to appeal the unanimous decision of the AFL Anti-Doping Tribunal on grounds of either legal error or that it was grossly unreasonable."

IIRC, TB4 was not part of the original AFL tribunal hearing, so WADA could go for a new (de novo) hearing on that grounds alone. In any case, I'm pretty sure the "grossly unreasonable" would be pretty easy to stump up an argument for.

interesting legal argument but IIRC (and it's been a number of weeks since I read the tribunal decision) but they already outlined the basis upon which they allowed WADA to alter the case from that which was put forward by ASADA, allowing a 'de novo' (fresh) hearing ... I just can't recall those reasons.  :P   ;)

it looks like the players' legal team/s are firing the only shot they've got - ie they want the case to go back to 'links in the chain' so that they can be found not guilty again, as that would require some proof of administration of the TB4 to the players ... basically their original argument to the AFL Tribunal when ASADA prosecuted the case ...

[GCSkiwi]

Calling it now, this appeal will not go well for them.

"The appeal has been made on the grounds that the CAS erred in determining that the World Anti-Doping Agency  appeal should be conducted as a de novo hearing,’" AFLPA CEO Paul Marsh said at a news conference on Thursday morning.

"That is, WADA should only have been allowed to appeal the unanimous decision of the AFL Anti-Doping Tribunal on grounds of either legal error or that it was grossly unreasonable."

IIRC, TB4 was not part of the original AFL tribunal hearing, so WADA could go for a new (de novo) hearing on that grounds alone. In any case, I'm pretty sure the "grossly unreasonable" would be pretty easy to stump up an argument for.

The TB4 question never got asked because ASADA used the links in a chain theory. If they couldn't prove the TB4 got to Essendon then it never happened apparently. That is why it never got to that question. Whereas WADA went and used the strands in a cable approach and used the evidence as a whole. They said that TB4, no matter how it happened, he had possession of it and administered it to the players. Essendon lawyers then had to disprove that. That is the way I believed it went down.

Yeah but that's my point, because TB4 wasn't part of the original case, if WADA wants to go after them for TB4 then they can. Whether it's technically an appeal of the AFL tribunal decision or a new case to answer is moot really. So it seems an odd basis for an appeal. Ok, maybe they find that WADA could only appeal the AFL tribunal decision. CAS verdict gets thrown out, WADA hands the TB4 case to ASADA, we replay the AFL tribunal on a different drug which has already been fleshed out by WADA/CAS. If the AFL tribunal then finds anything less than what the CAS already have then WADA appeals again. End result is exactly the same situation they're in now, minus a few million dollars.

interesting legal argument but IIRC (and it's been a number of weeks since I read the tribunal decision) but they already outlined the basis upon which they allowed WADA to alter the case from that which was put forward by ASADA, allowing a 'de novo' (fresh) hearing ... I just can't recall those reasons.  :P   ;)

it looks like the players' legal team/s are firing the only shot they've got - ie they want the case to go back to 'links in the chain' so that they can be found not guilty again, as that would require some proof of administration of the TB4 to the players ... basically their original argument to the AFL Tribunal when ASADA prosecuted the case ...

I am not a lawyer but I wouldn't have thought the structure of the argument was bound in any way. Ie just because ASADA argued it one way doesn't mean WADA were obliged to follow the same type of argument. Seems to me that what the players are saying is that TB4 was not part of the original ASADA case, so it shouldn't be included for the appeal of that verdict. The appeal should essentially be a re-examination of the ASADA case, not a new case on a new drug. Which I guess technically could be true, but as above in the long run doesn't matter.

[Football Factory]

I just watched the news and it looks the Bomber players are going to appeal tonight .... you have got to be kidding  :o

It's never gonna end. If they win the appeal is there anyone that can appeal that appeal?

There is the possibility WADA could appeal this Swiss decision if it goes against it or the Swiss court could even refer the matter back to the Court of Arbitration for Sport.

[AaronKirk]

"The appeal has been made on the grounds that the CAS erred in determining that the World Anti-Doping Agency  appeal should be conducted as a de novo hearing,’" AFLPA CEO Paul Marsh said at a news conference on Thursday morning.

If that is the grounds of the appeal then the players need new legal representation because there is absolutely zero chance that an appeal will be successful.

They are wasting their time and the money of the club which has been continuously raised by the supporters.

I am flowering sick of this. They should cop the bans and move on as hard as it is for the players.

As long as the appeals and other bullshower continue our great football club cannot move on.

[Ziplock]

yeah, tbh, I'd just cop it if I was them.

[Cookie Monster]

Players are still going to serve the suspension, i believe if still found guilty that it would just continue until the end date. I wouldn't think there would be further suspensions.

[Ziplock]

Players are still going to serve the suspension, i believe if still found guilty that it would just continue until the end date. I wouldn't think there would be further suspensions.

mmmm, I don't do law so maybe someone more enlightened can fill me in, but if you appeal you basically reopen the case, so if you were given a lighter sentence because of comparative compliance, can you be given a heavier sentence?

I don't think that's the case in Australia, but I know it's like that in other countries (probably not in this case though because it's a pretty showerty system :P )

[Ringo]

Normally in law that is the case but WADA are a law unto themselves so who knows what will happen.

[Ringo]

http://www.heraldsun.com.au/sport/afl/more-news/dustin-fletcher-barred-from-watching-son-play-football-after-wada-ban/news-story/8895278d56e6a87e83c07c7883

One of the shocking outcomes of the verdict.  A fathers right to watch his son play football taken away.  Really feel for Fletch in this instance especially as he has retired from the game.

[Grazz]

http://www.heraldsun.com.au/sport/afl/more-news/dustin-fletcher-barred-from-watching-son-play-football-after-wada-ban/news-story/8895278d56e6a87e83c07c7883

One of the shocking outcomes of the verdict.  A fathers right to watch his son play football taken away.  Really feel for Fletch in this instance especially as he has retired from the game.

It's just ridiculous, flowering idiots. >:(

[nas]

http://www.heraldsun.com.au/sport/afl/more-news/dustin-fletcher-barred-from-watching-son-play-football-after-wada-ban/news-story/8895278d56e6a87e83c07c7883

One of the shocking outcomes of the verdict.  A fathers right to watch his son play football taken away.  Really feel for Fletch in this instance especially as he has retired from the game.

It's just ridiculous, flowering idiots. >:(

+1  >:(

[JBs-Hawks]

Whos gonna police that though?

[Grazz]

Whos gonna police that though?

There'd be some White Goodman there willing to dob him in I bet.

[kilbluff1985]

what would happen if he did anyway a fine or something?