Hird and Drugs

[TeeJay]

I think you guys are missing the point.. If hird was found to be guilty he would be sacked by the AFL. It breaches the code of conduct

[nostradamus]

I think you guys are missing the point.. If hird was found to be guilty he would be sacked by the AFL. It breaches the code of conduct

Guilty of what??

......being alleged to have taken a "legal" drug

[TeeJay]

I think you guys are missing the point.. If hird was found to be guilty he would be sacked by the AFL. It breaches the code of conduct

Guilty of what??

......being alleged to have taken a "legal" drug

No, if it was a banned substance. It doesnt matter that he's a coach and that they can take whatever they like. They cant.

[nostradamus]

I think you guys are missing the point.. If hird was found to be guilty he would be sacked by the AFL. It breaches the code of conduct

Guilty of what??

......being alleged to have taken a "legal" drug

No, if it was a banned substance. It doesnt matter that he's a coach and that they can take whatever they like. They cant.

Mate how about we wait for the investigation to actually be concluded instead of making huge assumptions. A little word that seems to be in all of the inuendo and accusations, but being taken as fact, is cenral to everything.

That word..........

                          IF

[tbagrocks]

I think they have the wrong Coach, Neeld and Lyon are the ones on drugs!

[TeeJay]

I think you guys are missing the point.. If hird was found to be guilty he would be sacked by the AFL. It breaches the code of conduct

Guilty of what??

......being alleged to have taken a "legal" drug

No, if it was a banned substance. It doesnt matter that he's a coach and that they can take whatever they like. They cant.

Mate how about we wait for the investigation to actually be concluded instead of making huge assumptions. A little word that seems to be in all of the inuendo and accusations, but being taken as fact, is cenral to everything.

That word..........

                          IF

I didnt say he was guilty.. I said IF he was found guilty he would be sacked. Just clearing it up because I think people are confused by the fact that coaches can take whatever they want but all though theres no rule against it, it breaches the AFL coaches code of conduct as taking illicit drugs does. He would be sacked IF he was found guilty

[nostradamus]

I think you guys are missing the point.. If hird was found to be guilty he would be sacked by the AFL. It breaches the code of conduct

Guilty of what??

......being alleged to have taken a "legal" drug

No, if it was a banned substance. It doesnt matter that he's a coach and that they can take whatever they like. They cant.

Mate how about we wait for the investigation to actually be concluded instead of making huge assumptions. A little word that seems to be in all of the inuendo and accusations, but being taken as fact, is cenral to everything.

That word..........

                          IF

I didnt say he was guilty.. I said IF he was found guilty he would be sacked. Just clearing it up because I think people are confused by the fact that coaches can take whatever they want but all though theres no rule against it, it breaches the AFL coaches code of conduct as taking illicit drugs does. He would be sacked IF he was found guilty

Time will tell

[AFEV]

I think you guys are missing the point.. If hird was found to be guilty he would be sacked by the AFL. It breaches the code of conduct

Not sure when the last time you read the coaches code of conduct but nowhere does it mention that taking player banned substances is not permissible.

[Ziplock]

'Former ASADA chief Richard Ings said that Hird's case was pretty straightforward as far as the regulator is concerned.

"The use of illegal substances is banned for players but not for coaches," Ings told SEN radio on Thursday morning.

He said coaches are not permitted to provide or inject illegal substances to their players, but there was no prohibition on personal use by coaches under both the WADA and AFL anti-doping policies'

http://www.afl.com.au/news/2013-04-11/hird-given-drug-report

[nostradamus]

'Former ASADA chief Richard Ings said that Hird's case was pretty straightforward as far as the regulator is concerned.

"The use of illegal substances is banned for players but not for coaches," Ings told SEN radio on Thursday morning.

He said coaches are not permitted to provide or inject illegal substances to their players, but there was no prohibition on personal use by coaches under both the WADA and AFL anti-doping policies'

http://www.afl.com.au/news/2013-04-11/hird-given-drug-report

here's the video of that interview.....scroll down, it's the "superfooty video"

http://www.heraldsun.com.au/afl

[Justin Bieber]

They're all on drugs

your a tool

You're*

But yeah he's right.

[BB67th]

I think you guys are missing the point.. If hird was found to be guilty he would be sacked by the AFL. It breaches the code of conduct

Guilty of what??

......being alleged to have taken a "legal" drug

No, if it was a banned substance. It doesnt matter that he's a coach and that they can take whatever they like. They cant.

Mate how about we wait for the investigation to actually be concluded instead of making huge assumptions. A little word that seems to be in all of the inuendo and accusations, but being taken as fact, is cenral to everything.

That word..........

                          IF

I didnt say he was guilty.. I said IF he was found guilty he would be sacked. Just clearing it up because I think people are confused by the fact that coaches can take whatever they want but all though theres no rule against it, it breaches the AFL coaches code of conduct as taking illicit drugs does. He would be sacked IF he was found guilty

Time will tell

While Hird cannot be punished under specific drug rules, he can, and if found guilty will, be punished under rule 1.6, bringing the game into disrepute. He would be stood down as a coach in my opinion (not that he deserves it) as the AFL and big Andy really frown on this stuff.

But as Sam Newman says, at the moment they are guilty of nothing. Nothing has been proved to be wrong or right and all we can do for now is wait until these investigations have been completed.

What really gets me is the media. They never miss an opportunity to bash people up and make a headline. And the headline that was used in The Age today was disgraceful. It crucifies Hird in a sentence.

But everyone is taking this from what Dank says. He has no credibility at all in my mind. He has been involved in dodgy practices and is obviously not the person who should be at a footy club. I don't know how the whole of Australia can agree Hird is guilty because of the allegations that this man has made.

The whole thing is a load of bullshower and these reporters should shut up until we get proof of what actually happened.

[nostradamus]

Caroline Wislon does more to bring the game into disrepute than anyone, hell she brings women into disrepute too!!!

[McRooster]

Mud sticks.

Sponsors will jump off Essendon quicker than lemmings off a cliff. This will dictate their rate of demise. Demetriou will also create distance from them and won't want the AFL train to be caught up in the wreckage. He will let them hang if there is a guilty verdict from ASADA. Heads need to roll to create an image of cleanliness, guilty or not - it is what we are instructed to listen to that clouds our perspective.

For me, as a business Manager and a parent, there is no way I want my corporate image or son (future player) tarnished with this. Regardless of whether it is legal for a Coach to take this or that is not paramount, it is the allegation that he actually has taken A drug. I would not want any tie to an association that has tainted issues, that is the biggest problem.

There is no dirtier 4 letter word in sport than 'drug'.

*btw - Adelaide wants their 4 points back from rnd 1.

[Bluke]

Caroline Wislon does more to bring the game into disrepute than anyone, hell she brings women into disrepute too!!!

On March 9, they reportedly had the following exchange:

Hird: "Good work today mate, the boys were up and about, we have a lot to work with.

Dank: "IVs start next week and Thymosin with Uniquinon. We will start to see some real effects.

Then between March 27-28:

Dank: "That is the IV list that will be completed by Wednesday night.

Hird: "Good work mate, (name deleted) rang me tonight and said how good he felt after he saw you."

On April 3, Dank detailed more substances:

"We have cerebrolysin, we will re-oxygenate and re-circulate the brain. We will also be getting Solcoseryl."

Also in April:

Dank: "All IV and injections completed.

Hird: "Great work mate, it would be a great effort to have them feeling fresh for Anzac Day."

On May 11, Dank talks about an unspecified project.

"financials ready for you and David for AOD project. These financials cover all possible revenue streams, where the project applies."

Looks to me like James Hird has brought the game into disrepute. Sack the cow.