Essendon Football Club Drama

[ShockOfHair]

McVeigh embarrassed himself when the scandal broke by claiming nothing had happened so you'd wonder why anyone would take him seriously, but I guess he's the only one available to speak 'for' the players.

[wolftone57]

As far as I am concerned once you start injecting chemists into a footy club you are trying to find a way to cheat. I am with Sheeds here. get rid of the chemists as they are bringing our game into disrepute. All players should be naturally evolving due to good weights & fitness regimes plus skills work. There should be NO injections at all. If a player needs an injection he is not fit to play the game and i am including injuries here. The damage that can be done by injecting players with cortisone and other steroidal Anti-inflammatories and pain killers over a long period is mind boggling. Long term arthritis, resistance to anti-inflamitories, resistance to pain medication, high tolerance to pain killers which can lead to the need to use high dose pain relief leading to kidney and liver problems. These othersubstances that are not approved for human consumption and have never been trialled are downright dangerous and there is an NRL player suing at the moment due to side effects of one of these substances.

[bodgie]

I've always wondered why all performance enhancers are banned but a player can get a jab, almost at will, if he has some pain. Quite enhancing I would have thought.

[Jewels]

I've always wondered why all performance enhancers are banned but a player can get a jab, almost at will, if he has some pain. Quite enhancing I would have thought.

Garry Lyon argued with the old Geelong idiot on this point on the footy show last night. He said pain killing jabs are performance enabling as opposed to performance enhancing - they enable the player to take the field without enhancing his abilities. Made sense to me.

[bodgie]

That is pretty fair logic but you could also say...
(I don't watch the show and at risk of running the village idiots argument)
A player rolls an ankle while out walking the dog, or after having a few drinks, during the week. He has an injection so he can play at his normal level.
A player has a few too many drinks after a bad day, loses judgement and eats a bucket of chips. He takes a diuretic or anti-obesity drug so he can perform at his normal level.
There is a slight difference but not much.

[CureTheSane]

Wow, that was a long bow....

[bodgie]

I've always preferred a long bow.

[Jewels]

Gee The Bombers are a complete rabble now. I wonder if it's just they're regular midseason collapse just a little late or the pressure of recent events finally getting too much.

[hot potato]

Why would the AFL consult with the Essendon hierarchy to see if they are happy with the penalties about to be handed down ?

[SPC]

I still don't understand how after WADA has come out so strongly and said AOD-9604 is a banned substance, see - [URL="http://www.theage.com.au/afl/afl-news/stick-with-code-says-wada-20130719-2qa08.html"] - that ASADA & the AFL are now saying that the players are ok even though Watson at least has admitted to taking this same banned substance???

[Bexl]

I still don't understand how after WADA has come out so strongly and said AOD-9604 is a banned substance, see - [URL="http://www.theage.com.au/afl/afl-news/stick-with-code-says-wada-20130719-2qa08.html"] - that ASADA & the AFL are now saying that the players are ok even though Watson at least has admitted to taking this same banned substance???

All the AFL are saying is that at (this time) there is not enough to charge the players but the asada investigation is still going. They still haven't forced dank to talk to them yet but they can now that legislation has come in this month that people who do not co-operate can be fined about $5,000 a day. It will take time to finish this report but when it is done then the players could well be charged.
Also once the report is complete wada can still challenge any outcome from it in international court.
This will still take a while before we will know all the results of this mess they brought on them selves.

[alt_mattr]

The organisation which is coming out of this whole thing looking the worst is ASADA. It now seems entirely possible that ASADA gave Essendon an official OK to use a substance which WADA says is banned. How many months has it been now and all they have created is an interim report. It appears that the report includes nothing to pin on individual players and the AFL has only (been able to?) charge them with "doing stuff which looks bad".

What we really need now is an investigation into the @@@@-up at ASADA - sack the lot of em I say

[Ruck'n'Roll]

Question

I still don't understand how after WADA has come out so strongly and said AOD-9604 is a banned substance, see - [URL="http://www.theage.com.au/afl/afl-news/stick-with-code-says-wada-20130719-2qa08.html"] - that ASADA & the AFL are now saying that the players are ok even though Watson at least has admitted to taking this same banned substance???

Answer

First line defence:
Essendon denies that anyone took AOD, despite the consent forms they had players sign. Even Watson didn?t admit to taking the stuff, he merely said he believed he may have.

Question

Why would the AFL consult with the Essendon hierarchy to see if they are happy with the penalties about to be handed down ?

Answer

Final Observations:
Much as I find it distasteful, I suspect that Evans and Fat Andy had been negotiating a soft landing for the players. Whether the brinkmanship of James Hird, Essendon?s "Dear Leader" and ?Great Successor? jeopardises this is less certain, but it?d be ironic if it forces the AFL to draw a clear line in the sand on this issue, rather than producing another ambiguous ?negotiated settlement? like the Demon Tankathon.

FWIW I suspect ASADA may have stuffed up in either one of two ways. In which case we come to . . .

Catch 22
Even if there proves to be insufficient evidence of drug cheating, and without positive tests or admissions this is a distinct possibility, the AFL can always crack Essendon?s egg with their ?Bringing the Game into Disrepute? hammer, should they so wish.

[SPC]

Question

Originally Posted by SPC
I still don't understand how after WADA has come out so strongly and said AOD-9604 is a banned substance, see - [URL="http://www.theage.com.au/afl/afl-news/stick-with-code-says-wada-20130719-2qa08.html"] - that ASADA & the AFL are now saying that the players are ok even though Watson at least has admitted to taking this same banned substance???
Answer

Originally Posted by Ruck'n'Roll
First line defence:
Essendon denies that anyone took AOD, despite the consent forms they had players sign. Even Watson didn?t admit to taking the stuff, he merely said he believed he may have.

Not quite the case RnR. There was a nice bit of spin put on the comments later, but what he said was "I signed that consent form and my understanding, after it being given through (club doctor) Bruce Reid and the club, that I was receiving AOD," he told Fox Sports program On The Couch. No 'mays' in there.

He believed that it was legal. Watson said ?The understanding we had through the advice we got and from the medical doctor at the football club [Dr Bruce Reid] was that it was a legal substance. It?s my belief that we have done nothing wrong. I don?t have any feeling of guilt. All I want is for the truth to come out.?

[Ruck'n'Roll]

You?re right, there are no 'mays' - however there are repeated 'understanding's'

But isn't one 'weasel-word' as good as the next?

The Watson quotes contain no admission that he was injected with AOD, despite repeated questions by the habitues of the couch. He admits he thought AOD was "legal" (interestingly he didn't say 'WADA or ASADA approved') and he admits he signed a consent form to receive the drug. At no time did he say clearly and without equivocation 'Yes I took AOD!'

- - - Updated - - -

Indeed, I suggest that his statements fall so neatly within a ?Shell Game? defence strategy that I personally doubt Watson 'went rogue' at all.
For those unfamiliar with the term, a ?Shell Game? is where a single dried pea or similar object is hidden under three half walnut shells and then invites bystanders to guess under which shell the pea may be found. The problem for the bystander is that they never find which shell contained the pea (and frequently waste lots of money looking).

To return to ASADA situation. They are trying to identify individual infringing individuals in a squad of players. To make matters worse there is an absence of any positive tests for banned substances. Moreover it has also been reported that there is a remarkable lack of documentation as to who was injected/ingested/infused/dripped/applied with what and when. No wonder they couldn?t pick the right shell!

In the case of Watson and AOD, it could easily be claimed that Watson was given a placebo rather than AOD itself, remember that as Essendon has already admitted to a "pharmacologically experimental environment" should the existence of a control group surprise anyone?
In short, Essendon?s behaviour can be viewed in the light of their adopting such a ?Shell Game? strategy to help their players escape sanction in the current crisis.

Such a hypothesis as this might also explain how Essendon can tell the parents of their younger players that "no evidence of anything being administered to the players that was harmful or injurious to the players".

As previously suggested this lack of evidence may also convince the AFL to crack Essendon?s egg with their 'Bringing the Game into Disrepute? hammer. What I didn't expect was that the Bombers newly adopted brinkmanship may go beyond bombast and all the way to the courts!