Essendon Football Club Drama

[liz]

Jobe did say the process got the tick from the club doctor; it would be unusual, given the doctor's prestige, longstanding affiliation with the club, and established trust, to feel that a second opinion was necessary.
I think there are obvious possible benefits in taking an AOD: reduced skinfolds. Whether you'd prefer to go down that road rather than hard work and watching your food and liquid intake is another matter.
On the other hand, if WADA had declared the drug banned, it is hard to believe that ASADA would advise otherwise, though stranger things have happened.

And yet, earlier in the piece, Essendon were trying to paint the situation as arising from a rogue operator, with references to Dr Reid's reservations about the club's supplement programme and the mythical letter that was written but never sent to the board. If Jobe is claiming he relied on an "OK" from the club doctor, it is going to be hard for that club doctor to distance himself from the programme if it is proven to be in breach of rules. (And regardless of whether substances taken were in violation of WADA rules, and regardless of how much blame is / should be laid at the feet of the players, it is hard to see, even from the limited information that is undisputed in the public arena - including the internal governance of the programme and the level of documentation of what was going on - how Essendon aren't guilty of procedural breaches of the AFL's doping code.)

WADA rules don't allow a player to completely escape sanction if he has relied on bad advice from his own doctor (or the club doctor, in this case). The code states that the athlete is responsible for determining those on whose advice he relies, and remains liable for the consequences of that advice. So if it is deemed that Essendon players have breached the code (ie taken prohibited substances), they won't escape sanction if they relied on Reid but Reid made a mistake. Their own hope would surely be if Reid could demonstrate he had been misled by ASADA or WADA.

[goswannie14]

Pretty incriminating stuff:I took a banned drug: Watson

Surely the AFL would have to take steps sooner rather than later, August is too far away.

When Cousins owned up to taking a banned/illegal drug, he was suspended.....why not Watson?

[unconfuseme]

Great advertisement for performance enhancing drugs tonight! ... they are clearly superior to recreational drugs ... only one team was still running at the end, and gee, didn't Watson look good!!!

What is the AFL doing FFS!???

[ernie koala]

It's all seems pretty simple on the surface.

AOD**** was banned in January 2011.

Watson, and most likely many other Essendon players, were injected with supplement AOD**** in the preseason of 2011/12.

WADA rules are very clear..."Any athlete who is proved, by test or other evidence, to have taken a banned substance, are liable and will be sanctioned"

The circumstances (ie In this case , ignorance) are inconsequential.

It's hard to see how any players involved will avoid sanction.

[SPC]

It's all seems pretty simple on the surface.

AOD**** was banned in January 2011.

Watson, and most likely many other Essendon players, were injected with supplement AOD**** in the preseason of 2011/12.

WADA rules are very clear..."Any athlete who is proved, by test or other evidence, to have taken a banned substance, are liable and will be sanctioned"

The circumstances (ie In this case , ignorance) are inconsequential.

It's hard to see how any players involved will avoid sanction.

And now Jobe has admitted to the world that he did in fact use AOD****, so we are not dealing with guess work anymore.

Not sure what reception the AFL expected, but no matter how nice the guy is, this circus of booing Watson at the games will continue because at least half the fans believe someone who takes a WADA banned drug should not be on the field untill punishment has been served. The AFL may be forced to step in now that he has admitted to the use himself and stand him down for his own sake plus the image of the game untill the case is wrapped up. This type of spotlight is not a good look.

[floppinab]

Interesting when you compare to Tippett.

Brownlow is a hard one.
To be honest, I doubt he really got any benefit at all from the drug. Same with the other players, so I have a hard time going for retrospective penalties.

I don't think you can say that at all CTS. You only need to look at their season last year, 1st half season, on the juice, winning plenty of games, 2nd half of the season, off the juice and they start losing plenty. And maybe what they were on has a more long term effect leading to stronger more consistent performances this year.
I'm spectulating of course without any hard evidence, but thats the point, what they were doing tarnishes the game by being seen to be having an impact.

[unconfuseme]

If Watson was a Chinese swimmer who beat Thorpie for a Gold Medal, what would the public be saying right now?

[hot potato]

The view that's forming among the cognoscenti is Bombers will be docked ALL Premiership Points in 2013.
HP

[altmattr]

This has been going on far too long - the AFL needs to say now what the penalties will be for certain circumstances. I.e. club-wide injection of banned substances = no premiership points in 2012 or 2013. Individual players who took banned substances = no awards 2012 and 10 match ban from date of sanction. So on and so forth.

Then at least one variable is taken out, we can have confidence the AFL won't stitch up a deal and it is left to the investigators simply to find out the circumstances. It also means a player like Watson can admit what occurred, take his penalty and get on with things. As it is he will be playing under a cloud for months *and* should get a penalty later.

[Nico]

In horse racing jockeys know what substances are banned; right down to codine. Yet the AFL hasn't been able to supply a list of banned substances to footballers. As the governing body you would reckon they would have a comprehensive document for players and clubs. Take away any excuses from clubs, players and medicos.

[Melbourne_Blood]

Interesting article today on Matt Clarke on the AFL website. He's a VFL player banned for 2 years for taking a banned substance, which was some kind of energy/ protein supplement given to him by a teammate before a match. He knew full well he was going to be drug tested that day but took with an assurance from his team mate that it was perfectly legal ( which it turns out it wasn't). If he can cop two years for that, how can any Essendon player systematically injected over a period of time with a substance that is deemed to be banned cop any less? ASADA have set the precedent, they must be consistent or risk a lawsuit from Matt Clarke, who's initial suspension was 9 months but extended to 24 on appeal from ASADA! For one pretty minor indiscretion you would've thought. I recommend reading the article it's quite a sad story.

http://www.afl.com.au/news/2013-07-04/banned-vfl-player-on-road-back

[CureTheSane]

I think it's going to get messy.

all of a sudden *bang* messy.

AFL will be looking to lessen the mess right now, and if that means that the Bombers get off relatively easily, OR if that means they will hit them hard, they will choose the least harmful course of action for the game.

[unconfuseme]

The problem with "stripping points" is that it is unfair to the teams that are being beaten by the cheats ... they don't actually receive those points, and similarly players who are missing out on Brownlow Votes to an opponent who has an (alleged) advantage can't get them back, they're gone!

The authorities have to get the finger out and move ... it is now an official joke!

[alt_mattr]

I will bet you dollars-for-dimes that the AFL goes soft on Essendon. If they were planning to be tough they could not have let it go on this long.

[R-1]

It's tough to go soft while still adhering to WADA.