Bombers Ruling To Be Handed Down 2 Days Before Season Start

[didick]

Cutting it fine!

2 days before. Convenient to let them off so they don't miss a beat.

[Dave The Man]

Bet the players get 3 Match Back-Dated Suspension so they be back for Anzac Day

[watt price tully]

[neil]

How can they get a 3 match suspension? Cronulla players got 12 months backdated till the Show Cause notices. The EFC Show Cause notices were issued in November.

[swoop42]

How do they know they'll be able to reach a decision two days before the season starts?

LOL.

Answer.

Because they've already reached one.

[Jezza]

About time this is concluding unless Essendon players consider suing if found guilty on March 31 as the article below suggests.

http://www.heraldsun.com.au/sport/afl/essendon-players-could-sue-the-afl-if-found-guilty-of-doping-by-anti-doping-tribunal/story-fni5f6kv-1227261875765

[perthmagpie]

To me it would appear the tribunal has made a decision on the verdict and the next 13 days will be spent documenting the reasoned decision. I would argue it is a logical explanation as to how the Tribunal can set a date of the handing down of the decision. Assuming this is correct then I would suggest the verdict is guilty because the provisional suspensions have not been lifted.

As to punishments the WADA code makes it clear what would normally happen. Also previous case law adds to that clarity. Even if the players' lawyers can prove that the doping was inadvertent, the evidence in the public domain (which is doubtful) makes the likelihood of short bans almost impossible to believe. The players have no chance at having bans reduced from two years under the No Fault Defence but some possibility under the No Significant Fault defence. But if you read the case law since WADA introduced the exceptional circumstances clauses to the code - compared to previous athletes who managed to get reduced bans the players' arguments look weak.

Without political interference from the AFL (commission) or someone of greater influence the bans should be two years with perhaps a reduction to 1.5 years if there some leniency under No Significant Fault. This would be backdated to November when the Infraction Notices were issued. Effectively the players miss the whole season and the early part of next year.

As to the AFL manipulating the punishments so as to limit the damage to assets, revenue and reputation I would guess they will attempt to have the backdating pushed back a few more months. I don't trust the AFL and their history of doing cosy little private deals. But if there are no cosy deals and what happens to all other athletes happens to Essendon, here this is what I think will eventuate (assuming guilty verdict based on proof of supply chain of Thymosin Beta4):

All if not most will be banned for between 2 years and 1.5 years
All points stripped from 2012 and also possibly 2013 season
All AFL awards stripped including Brownlow from 2012 season
Dank banned for life from any sport under WADA code

Further it is possible arguments could be made for Essendon to play for no points this year considering they require top up players to compete. I doubt this will happen, but it would be a justifiable punishment considering this was a club sanctioned system of long term doping.

[richo]

Just like a monkey in captivity, they'll get off in front of everyone

[Damien]

[swoop42]

http://www.heraldsun.com.au/sport/afl/essendon-drugs-saga-how-stephen-dank-ran-the-controversial-supplement-program/story-fni5f6kv-1227281669383

[Bucks5]

The purpose of that article is an attempt to make out that Hird was squeaky clean and was duped by Danks. The author must think we have forgotten about Hird's text messages to Dank telling him to "push the envelope" and about Collingwood's drug use.

[Jezza]

From what I could gather from the article, I get the impression that Dank is depicted as being the mastermind behind the supplements regime however it still doesn't paint Hird in a good light due to the fact that he was either ignorant to Dank's practices or he was well-aware of what was really happening. I choose to believe the latter over the former.

I don't like the fact that Gil recently came out and allegedly said that the Essendon players were ignorant, but most would respond however that being ignorant shouldn't exempt responsibility and punishment. Personally I don't think he should have said anything until the decision is made on Tuesday.

If Hird was truly unaware of what Dank was doing then he's guilty of poor communication management and should be responsible for breaching the duty of care for his players. Essendon as an organisation was a poorly run club in 2011-2012 and is now paying the price for it now. I'm still staggered that Hird is still coaching the club and I don't think Essendon can truly move on until he's no longer working for the club.

[Pies4shaw]

I wouldn't get too excited about tomorrow. As I understand things, the decision will only be as to guilt or otherwise, not penalty. This has not been clarified in any recent report that I've read but the following is what was said at the time the hearings concluded:
"Should any of the current and former Essendon players or the former Essendon employee handed infraction notices be found to have breached the AFL Anti-Doping Code, a hearing would follow to set a sanction."

http://www.afl.com.au/news/2015-02-17/bombers-close-their-case

[think positive]

Shred the paperwork and all will be forgiven

[Cam]

Total shock. Did Alavi and Charter scupper the whole case? All those injections... I can't believe it.