|
|
|
View previous topic :: View next topic |
Author |
Message |
David
I dare you to try
Joined: 27 Jul 2003 Location: Andromeda
|
Post subject: | |
|
Member 7167 wrote: | David wrote: | I understand people looking forward to Essendon's day of judgement (particularly in the aftermath of the AFL's trivial sanctions), but I'm still holding out hope that the players will be spared the brunt of this. Hird, Dank, Corcoran et al should get life bans, and I hope they do, but the players are victims here. However many times ASADA trot out the "ignorance is no excuse" line in a dalek-like fashion, it would be fundamentally unfair for the players to be sidelined for a year or more because of the actions of their superiors. It may be naive, but I hope that the AFL choose to flout the ASADA recommendations and cut ties with them rather than accept unjust penalties, whatever the consequences. Rather a lot is at stake here. |
I didn't see too much sympathy on Nicks for Saad who consumed a commercially available health drink in ignorance and received a 2 year ban.
In his case for a first offence I felt that a 6 month ban would be punitive. 2 years ????
Now some are happy with a 6 week ban on the Essendon Dopers. Hardly seems fair. |
I think Saad was treated harshly too, but I do draw a line between players seeking out supplements independently and being administered substances by the club that 'owns' them.
P4S, I agree that PEDs need to be kept out of sport at all costs. But I think motivation and initiative have to be taken into consideration. The power dynamics here make the Essendon players' situation massively different to that of a tennis player, cyclist or Olympic athlete whose coaches are working for their success alone and can be dumped by the athlete at any moment. These players, on the other hand, were and are treated as cattle—completely disposable and completely at the mercy of the whims of their leaders.
For those who argue "they could have said no", I want to discover exactly what culture of consent/dissent existed at that club. What were the consequences (perceived or otherwise) of flouting a club supplement program? If ASADA is interested in laying down a fair verdict as opposed to just making a point, it should be giving serious consideration to these questions. Nearly everything should hinge on them. _________________ All watched over by machines of loving grace |
|
|
|
|
ANNODAM
Rebel Heart Tour - The Forum, Los Angeles 27/10/2015.
Joined: 02 Jul 2007 Location: Eltham, VIC.
|
Post subject: | |
|
Players who took illegal substances to gain an unfair advantage need a 2 year plus ban, anything else is just bullshit! _________________ WE WERE ROBBED, RIGHT IN FRONT OF ME, RIGHT IN FRONT OF MEEE!
N.Y METS, N.Y GIANTS, PENRITH PANTHERS & HOBART HURRICANES FAN.
WE ALL LOOK GOOD AT TRAINING, IT'S THE MATCHES THAT COUNT! |
|
|
|
|
think positive
Side By Side
Joined: 30 Jun 2005 Location: somewhere
|
Post subject: | |
|
David wrote: | Member 7167 wrote: | David wrote: | I understand people looking forward to Essendon's day of judgement (particularly in the aftermath of the AFL's trivial sanctions), but I'm still holding out hope that the players will be spared the brunt of this. Hird, Dank, Corcoran et al should get life bans, and I hope they do, but the players are victims here. However many times ASADA trot out the "ignorance is no excuse" line in a dalek-like fashion, it would be fundamentally unfair for the players to be sidelined for a year or more because of the actions of their superiors. It may be naive, but I hope that the AFL choose to flout the ASADA recommendations and cut ties with them rather than accept unjust penalties, whatever the consequences. Rather a lot is at stake here. |
I didn't see too much sympathy on Nicks for Saad who consumed a commercially available health drink in ignorance and received a 2 year ban.
In his case for a first offence I felt that a 6 month ban would be punitive. 2 years ????
Now some are happy with a 6 week ban on the Essendon Dopers. Hardly seems fair. |
I think Saad was treated harshly too, but I do draw a line between players seeking out supplements independently and being administered substances by the club that 'owns' them.
P4S, I agree that PEDs need to be kept out of sport at all costs. But I think motivation and initiative have to be taken into consideration. The power dynamics here make the Essendon players' situation massively different to that of a tennis player, cyclist or Olympic athlete whose coaches are working for their success alone and can be dumped by the athlete at any moment. These players, on the other hand, were and are treated as cattle—completely disposable and completely at the mercy of the whims of their leaders.
For those who argue "they could have said no", I want to discover exactly what culture of consent/dissent existed at that club. What were the consequences (perceived or otherwise) of flouting a club supplement program? If ASADA is interested in laying down a fair verdict as opposed to just making a point, it should be giving serious consideration to these questions. Nearly everything should hinge on them. |
But some did say no, so that's no excuse _________________ You cant fix stupid, turns out you cant quarantine it either! |
|
|
|
|
Steve86
Joined: 29 May 2006 Location: perth
|
|
|
|
|
Stupied
Joined: 14 Mar 2013
|
Post subject: | |
|
think positive wrote: |
But some did say no, so that's no excuse |
Yep. Zaharakis said no from memory. And the BS explanation from Mark McVeigh about him being afraid of needles doesn't fly, coz he had been getting dirty great cortisone injections in his shoulder the season before. |
|
|
|
|
neil
Joined: 08 Sep 2005 Location: Queensland
|
Post subject: | |
|
If 14 year old Chinese female swimmers are expected to know what they can and cannot take than 20+ yo professional footballers with access to ALFPA, the internet, managers, ASADA have no excuse.
Remember every year all players from all clubs must undergo mandatory anti PED courses. _________________ Carlscum 120 years being cheating scum |
|
|
|
|
jackcass
Joined: 01 Mar 2005 Location: Bendigo
|
Post subject: | |
|
David wrote: | Member 7167 wrote: | David wrote: | I understand people looking forward to Essendon's day of judgement (particularly in the aftermath of the AFL's trivial sanctions), but I'm still holding out hope that the players will be spared the brunt of this. Hird, Dank, Corcoran et al should get life bans, and I hope they do, but the players are victims here. However many times ASADA trot out the "ignorance is no excuse" line in a dalek-like fashion, it would be fundamentally unfair for the players to be sidelined for a year or more because of the actions of their superiors. It may be naive, but I hope that the AFL choose to flout the ASADA recommendations and cut ties with them rather than accept unjust penalties, whatever the consequences. Rather a lot is at stake here. |
I didn't see too much sympathy on Nicks for Saad who consumed a commercially available health drink in ignorance and received a 2 year ban.
In his case for a first offence I felt that a 6 month ban would be punitive. 2 years ????
Now some are happy with a 6 week ban on the Essendon Dopers. Hardly seems fair. |
I think Saad was treated harshly too, but I do draw a line between players seeking out supplements independently and being administered substances by the club that 'owns' them.
P4S, I agree that PEDs need to be kept out of sport at all costs. But I think motivation and initiative have to be taken into consideration. The power dynamics here make the Essendon players' situation massively different to that of a tennis player, cyclist or Olympic athlete whose coaches are working for their success alone and can be dumped by the athlete at any moment. These players, on the other hand, were and are treated as cattle—completely disposable and completely at the mercy of the whims of their leaders.
For those who argue "they could have said no", I want to discover exactly what culture of consent/dissent existed at that club. What were the consequences (perceived or otherwise) of flouting a club supplement program? If ASADA is interested in laying down a fair verdict as opposed to just making a point, it should be giving serious consideration to these questions. Nearly everything should hinge on them. |
Zaharakis has said he declined the program because he hates needles. Had no impact on him getting games. I appreciate there are different power relationships depending on the quality of the player and importance to the team but the lack of any negative outcome in his case tends to support that players ultimately were free to execute choice in this. |
|
|
|
|
jackcass
Joined: 01 Mar 2005 Location: Bendigo
|
Post subject: | |
|
There are some interesting shades of grey related to both these scenarios. Saad actually tested positive to a banned substance, and even though the particular supplement is allowed for use in the off season, it is still banned during the season. Not 1 Essendon player that we're aware of has tested positive for a banned substance and that has to be a mitigating factor. |
|
|
|
|
David
I dare you to try
Joined: 27 Jul 2003 Location: Andromeda
|
Post subject: | |
|
Being a veteran of sorts and a regular fixture in the 22, I think Zaharakis was in a position of some privilege here, as you acknowledge; and his teammates may not have been in a position to foresee that his (or their) refusal to take part in the program wouldn't have negative repercussions. Of course, there were even more senior players who assented, so it's tricky. But I think these dynamics do need to be considered very seriously. _________________ All watched over by machines of loving grace
Last edited by David on Fri Feb 28, 2014 12:51 pm; edited 1 time in total |
|
|
|
|
jackcass
Joined: 01 Mar 2005 Location: Bendigo
|
Post subject: | |
|
Stupied wrote: | think positive wrote: |
But some did say no, so that's no excuse |
Yep. Zaharakis said no from memory. And the BS explanation from Mark McVeigh about him being afraid of needles doesn't fly, coz he had been getting dirty great cortisone injections in his shoulder the season before. |
It's a long bow to suggest because he's had injections in the past that that completely discounts his stated extreme dislike/phobia of injections. |
|
|
|
|
think positive
Side By Side
Joined: 30 Jun 2005 Location: somewhere
|
Post subject: | |
|
David wrote: | Being a veteran of sorts and a regular fixture in the 22, I think Zaharakis was in a position of some privilege here, as you acknowledge; and his teammates may not have been in a position to foresee that his (or their) refusal to take part in the program wouldn't have negative repercussions. Of course, there were even more senior players who assented, so it's tricky. But I think these dynamics do need to be considered very seriously. |
Jobe Watson.
Why didn't he talk to his dad? Seriously. I really want to know. _________________ You cant fix stupid, turns out you cant quarantine it either! |
|
|
|
|
Stupied
Joined: 14 Mar 2013
|
Post subject: | |
|
jackcass wrote: | Stupied wrote: | think positive wrote: |
But some did say no, so that's no excuse |
Yep. Zaharakis said no from memory. And the BS explanation from Mark McVeigh about him being afraid of needles doesn't fly, coz he had been getting dirty great cortisone injections in his shoulder the season before. |
It's a long bow to suggest because he's had injections in the past that that completely discounts his stated extreme dislike/phobia of injections. |
Have you ever had a cortisone injection? Trust me, if you were scared of needles, there's no way you would get one. They're like the granddaddy of all injections |
|
|
|
|
think positive
Side By Side
Joined: 30 Jun 2005 Location: somewhere
|
Post subject: | |
|
Hehe your right, I had them in my back after falling from a horse, they come with an anesthetic guaranteed to wear off in half an hour, and then the real pain hits! _________________ You cant fix stupid, turns out you cant quarantine it either! |
|
|
|
|
collie dog
RIP Shelby 11-10-13
Joined: 07 Jun 2010 Location: Shelby Christmas dog
|
Post subject: | |
|
I'll believe it when I see it. _________________ Rain or hail, I wag my tail |
|
|
|
|
Big T
Joined: 18 Oct 2003 Location: Torino, Italy
|
Post subject: | |
|
Member 7167 wrote: | David wrote: | I understand people looking forward to Essendon's day of judgement (particularly in the aftermath of the AFL's trivial sanctions), but I'm still holding out hope that the players will be spared the brunt of this. Hird, Dank, Corcoran et al should get life bans, and I hope they do, but the players are victims here. However many times ASADA trot out the "ignorance is no excuse" line in a dalek-like fashion, it would be fundamentally unfair for the players to be sidelined for a year or more because of the actions of their superiors. It may be naive, but I hope that the AFL choose to flout the ASADA recommendations and cut ties with them rather than accept unjust penalties, whatever the consequences. Rather a lot is at stake here. |
I didn't see too much sympathy on Nicks for Saad who consumed a commercially available health drink in ignorance and received a 2 year ban.
In his case for a first offence I felt that a 6 month ban would be punitive. 2 years ????
Now some are happy with a 6 week ban on the Essendon Dopers. Hardly seems fair. |
As I recall it was a prize for best on ground from the VFL or associated lower league? Total joke, he should have got off and the league should have been charged. _________________ Buon Giorno |
|
|
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum You cannot attach files in this forum You cannot download files in this forum
|
|