CAS verdict

[Ringo]

Yeah, nothing new

There's also nothing inheritantly wrong with a supplement program either.

Where it gets murky is if you don't document it and the players don't report it.

There's no suggestion that the other clubs didn't have proper records and players didn't act appropriately. Agree more questions and transparency probably should have been asked.

In any case, even if the worse case scenario that all other 17 teams were just like Essendon, implying that Essendon should be excused because 'everyone else was doing it' is silly.

Well said Ossie -  Who is to know whether questions were asked of other clubs? The issue with Essendon is the supplement being used contained illegal substances, Not all supplements have illegal substances.
Trust lessons have been learned by all.

[jvalles69]

Ricky Nixon came to our club a few months back and someone asked him about this relating to the AFL as a whole and he basically said that the supplements were coming into multiple cities ports from China and between 8-12 clubs were using them.  He said Essendon were the only club who didn't STOP using them when it came up as an issue.  How much of that is true I don't know, but he seemed to have some pretty good intel on certain things.

[Ziplock]

There's  nothing wrong with supplement  programs  and Id be surprised  if most clubs didnt have one. It could be that the other clubs on review didn't  have precise enough documenting for instance 'player A was given X supplement 3x a week' rather than 'player A was given x supplement  in day B, C, D at times X, Y, Z'

Most importantly  though, other  clubs havent had their players fail  performance  enhancing drug tests. WADA rules are pretty specific- basically  you cant take any drug that hasnt been ratified safe gor human consumption (by an organisaion like the fda) unless it's  on the approved substance  list (which most unapproved substances wouldn't be).

If the other clubs returned clean blood results there's  not really a reason to investigate tyeir processes as stringently.

Trust me, WADA and ASADA would have flowered every club they could have.

[LF]

http://www.afl.com.au/news/2016-10-11/swiss-court-dismisses-essendon-34s-appeal-against-doping-bans

THE AFL Commission must decide whether to strip Jobe Watson of his 2012 Brownlow Medal after the banned Essendon 34's appeal to the Federal Supreme Court of Switzerland failed.

The appeal verdict brings to an end the drawn-out legal process relating to the Essendon Football Club's controversial 2012 supplements regime, which resulted in 34 past and present players receiving backdated two-year bans for doping offences. 

[Grazz]

http://www.afl.com.au/news/2016-10-11/swiss-court-dismisses-essendon-34s-appeal-against-doping-bans

THE AFL Commission must decide whether to strip Jobe Watson of his 2012 Brownlow Medal after the banned Essendon 34's appeal to the Federal Supreme Court of Switzerland failed.

The appeal verdict brings to an end the drawn-out legal process relating to the Essendon Football Club's controversial 2012 supplements regime, which resulted in 34 past and present players receiving backdated two-year bans for doping offences.

Ok so glad that's over with.
Now the final question, Jobe and the medal. For me if the AFL are not convinced something outside the rules happened then he keeps it, if they are which I don't think they are he gives it up.
Pull your finger out AFL give us an answer and bury this forever more.

[kilbluff1985]

i don't really care if Jobe loses it or not but someone posted some decent arguments for him

- The supplements program was set up by the club and as far as we know the players were given assurance by those running the program that the supplements were okay.
- The AFL supported the no-fault consideration for players in the CAS hearing and believe that club officials are the main people responsible, not the players.
- The players were cleared by the AFL tribunal and only found guilty by CAS.

[AaronKirk]

CAS found the boys guilty.

In that circumstance Jobe IMO cannot keep the Brownlow. Pretty simple.

Im just happy from a CAS/WADA point of view this is all over now.

[Purple 77]

If Watson does get his brownlow taken off him... does he lose his B&F too that year?

Would that mean Zaha, whom finished 6th that year, wins it because the top 5 were suspended?

Should Watson be booted from the 2012 All-Aus team?

Should Heppell not make the 22 under 22 2012 team?

[ossie85]

i don't really care if Jobe loses it or not but someone posted some decent arguments for him

- The supplements program was set up by the club and as far as we know the players were given assurance by those running the program that the supplements were okay.
- The AFL supported the no-fault consideration for players in the CAS hearing and believe that club officials are the main people responsible, not the players.
- The players were cleared by the AFL tribunal and only found guilty by CAS.

The players have to be responsible for what they take. I feel much sympathy for Jobe Watson in this, but I think Sam Mitchell and Trent Cotchin are the deserving winners.

[AaronKirk]

If Watson does get his brownlow taken off him... does he lose his B&F too that year?

Would that mean Zaha, whom finished 6th that year, wins it because the top 5 were suspended?

Should Watson be booted from the 2012 All-Aus team?

Should Heppell not make the 22 under 22 2012 team?

Yep.

[Mat0369]

The players have to be responsible for what they take. I feel much sympathy for Jobe Watson in this, but I think Sam Mitchell and Trent Cotchin are the deserving winners.

If Jobe were to lose the Brownlow it should be a vacant year like the Storms premierships. You would have to disqualify all Essendon players from receiving votes and in turn all games they played in should not count for votes for any players. That would likely mean a recount if they went down that path or they just don't award a medal which is probably the right result.

[Grazz]

The players have to be responsible for what they take. I feel much sympathy for Jobe Watson in this, but I think Sam Mitchell and Trent Cotchin are the deserving winners.

If Jobe were to lose the Brownlow it should be a vacant year like the Storms premierships. You would have to disqualify all Essendon players from receiving votes and in turn all games they played in should not count for votes for any players. That would likely mean a recount if they went down that path or they just don't award a medal which is probably the right result.

That's a pretty good point mate.

Meanwhile:   AFL Feeds ‏@aflfeeds  8m8 minutes ago
Last-ditch ‘long shot’ for Essendon 34 #AFL @FoxSportsAFL: THE Essendon supplements saga might not be over just… http://dlvr.it/MRRGkx  :'(

[ossie85]

The players have to be responsible for what they take. I feel much sympathy for Jobe Watson in this, but I think Sam Mitchell and Trent Cotchin are the deserving winners.

If Jobe were to lose the Brownlow it should be a vacant year like the Storms premierships. You would have to disqualify all Essendon players from receiving votes and in turn all games they played in should not count for votes for any players. That would likely mean a recount if they went down that path or they just don't award a medal which is probably the right result.

No, ineligible players still get votes in the brownlow all the time, even after they've been suspended.

[TomK]

The players have to be responsible for what they take. I feel much sympathy for Jobe Watson in this, but I think Sam Mitchell and Trent Cotchin are the deserving winners.

If Jobe were to lose the Brownlow it should be a vacant year like the Storms premierships. You would have to disqualify all Essendon players from receiving votes and in turn all games they played in should not count for votes for any players. That would likely mean a recount if they went down that path or they just don't award a medal which is probably the right result.

No, ineligible players still get votes in the brownlow all the time, even after they've been suspended.

Just read if all the brownlow votes for every Essendon game, including opposition players, in 2012 are wiped, Thommo would get it :o I know it won't happen but it's nice to think about  :P

[jvalles69]

The players have to be responsible for what they take. I feel much sympathy for Jobe Watson in this, but I think Sam Mitchell and Trent Cotchin are the deserving winners.

If Jobe were to lose the Brownlow it should be a vacant year like the Storms premierships. You would have to disqualify all Essendon players from receiving votes and in turn all games they played in should not count for votes for any players. That would likely mean a recount if they went down that path or they just don't award a medal which is probably the right result.

No, ineligible players still get votes in the brownlow all the time, even after they've been suspended.

If Jobe is stripped then I think noone should get the medal.  Can't happen, those games Essendon players got votes in, were they because they were cheating?  Results of all of their games could be different due to performance enhancing drugs, they could've won games by more points than they should have and could've lost games by more points than they should've.  Say if Bombers beat Richmond by 40 odd points and Bombers get the 3-2-1, if drugs weren't involved this could be a closer match and Cotchin could've got the 3.  Too many variables, should be stripped and the year voided of a Brownlow.