What's new
By:
Advanced search…
The Front Row Forums

Register a free account today to become a member of the world's largest Rugby League discussion forum! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

Organised crime and drugs in sport investigation part III

Status
Not open for further replies.
S

Spot On

Coach
Messages
13,902
Well, well, well. ASADA have just wasted a shit load of time and money over something they already should have known did not need investigating if in fact they gave clearance to use the drug in question by Essendon players. Just continues to amaze does this whole thing.
 
Last edited:
S

Spot On

Coach
Messages
13,902
BunniesMan said:
Some of you guys have completely missed the point. The interviews were done as a courtesy more than anything else. This won't just go away.

This next week is going to be huge.

Mark my words, charges will be laid within the next week.
Click to expand...

Quote from BM on 12 May 2013.

Who the hell was feeding you information BM? Station talk perhaps???
 
Sea_Eagles_Rock

Sea_Eagles_Rock

First Grade
Messages
5,216
FMD... Imagine the defamation cases Dank is going to go after. He has been made out to be from the pits of hell. If they don't charge any players, this effectively destroyed his reputation without any real reason. He should be entitled to millions of lost $$$.

http://www.news.com.au/sport/afl/es...eged-peptide-use/story-fndv8gad-1226680402347

If I'm hearing this correctly. ASADA said it was not covered by S2, but neglected to mention if it was covered by S0 or confirm with WADA. To me that is effectively giving a green light to use the substance. Sure they never said it was ok, but they implied it was.
 
E

ek999

First Grade
Messages
6,977
Sea_Eagles_Rock said:
FMD... Imagine the defamation cases Dank is going to go after. He has been made out to be from the pits of hell. If they don't charge any players, this effectively destroyed his reputation without any real reason. He should be entitled to millions of lost $$$.

http://www.news.com.au/sport/afl/es...eged-peptide-use/story-fndv8gad-1226680402347

If I'm hearing this correctly. ASADA said it was not covered by S2, but neglected to mention if it was covered by S0 or confirm with WADA. To me that is effectively giving a green light to use the substance. Sure they never said it was ok, but they implied it was.
Click to expand...

I disagree that they should be clear if all they got told was that it was not banned under S2. The fact is there is a section of the code that says if it is not approved for human use then it is banned. Every athlete and doctor should no the code so that is no excuse.

However if they were told that it wasn't banned under the code at all then it is a different story
 
T

The Elephant In The room

Bench
Messages
4,980
Spot On said:
Well, well, well. ASADA have just wasted a shit load of time and money over something they already should have known did not need investigating if in fact they gave clearance to use the drug in question by Essendon players. Just continues to amaze does this whole thing.
Click to expand...

It may come down to what was actually said by ASADA to Essendon (and the proof there of). There is a big difference between being told that a substance is ok to take, as opposed to being told that something isn't on the S2 prohibited list for example.

The reason why they have a S.0 is to ensure that all substances (including those unknown to doping authorities) with performance enhancing qualities are banned and sanctions can be levied against those that use them. It simply means that players risk getting caught even if their chemists are ahead of the game.

I still think the Bombers are in big strife. If they had evidence that ASADA had given them clearance to use the drug (as they have suggested for months) a copy of it would have found its way into the media by now.
 
Patorick

Patorick

Moderator
Staff member
Messages
8,995
Spot On said:
Quote from BM on 12 May 2013.

Who the hell was feeding you information BM? Station talk perhaps???
Click to expand...
134520-matty-johns.jpg
 
S

Spot On

Coach
Messages
13,902
The Elephant In The room said:
It may come down to what was actually said by ASADA to Essendon (and the proof there of). There is a big difference between being told that a substance is ok to take, as opposed to being told that something isn't on the S2 prohibited list for example.

The reason why they have a S.0 is to ensure that all substances (including those unknown to doping authorities) with performance enhancing qualities are banned and sanctions can be levied against those that use them. It simply means that players risk getting caught even if their chemists are ahead of the game.

I still think the Bombers are in big strife. If they had evidence that ASADA had given them clearance to use the drug (as they have suggested for months) a copy of it would have found its way into the media by now.
Click to expand...

And I agree with you here. However, it would seem that carefully leaked snippets of info are being leaked that are slowly indicating that all will be well for the AFL. Even Jobe Watson had no fear in coming out and telling everyone he'd taken a "potentially" banned substance. He then runs out the next week and keeps playing almost as if he knows the outcome of the investigation.
 
T

The Elephant In The room

Bench
Messages
4,980
Hello said:
Excuse my ignorance but could someone tell me what "S2" and "S0" mean?
Click to expand...

They are simply sections under the WADA code. Section 2 (S2) expressly lists those drugs that are banned. S0 is broader, basically catching more "unknown" performance enhancing drugs illegal under the code, and also states that drugs not fit for human use are also banned under the code. S0 was added to the code effectively because testers knew that the athletes and their chemists were often one step ahead of the game.
 
Card Shark

Card Shark

Immortal
Messages
32,237
What the hell is ASADA doing atm? This has been going on for 5 months & not much has happened recently.

If they were a professional organisation, they would've had 95% of their information before the darkest day.

It's time to announce sanctions ASADA or move on!
 
Sea_Eagles_Rock

Sea_Eagles_Rock

First Grade
Messages
5,216
ek999 said:
I disagree that they should be clear if all they got told was that it was not banned under S2. The fact is there is a section of the code that says if it is not approved for human use then it is banned. Every athlete and doctor should no the code so that is no excuse.

However if they were told that it wasn't banned under the code at all then it is a different story
Click to expand...
And that section of the code was not officially enforced for AOD-9604 until April 22 this year when WADA listed it under the section S0. Subsequently as the S2 ruling by ASADA was 'not prohibited' at the time, S0 does not apply. As I said, there is no indication ASADA checked on S0 when they said S2 category was clear. I'm only going of the information in the report from the link I provided.

Watch the report and listen. ASADA admitted the prospect of successfully prosecuting for AOD-9604 was 'very, very, very low'.
 
Phil McGrawhan

Phil McGrawhan

Coach
Messages
15,665
I have seen NO evidence that anything has changed.
where is the press release from ASADA?
All we have is some Fumble twit on a fumble show saying what he thinks..
No facts ,no nothing ,just his opinion.
 
E

ek999

First Grade
Messages
6,977
elbusto said:
ASADA's credibility is now in tatters.

Maybe that is what the AFL is trying to achieve.

I have no idea what this means for Cronulla.

Anybody have a clue?

They seem to have disappeared off the radar completely.
Click to expand...

I disagree about ASADA's credibility being in tatters. ASADA have denied it in a statement and if Dank's emails with WADA are anything to go off he was only concerned with S2 not S0. If he used the same line of questioning with ASADA then they are still stuffed IMO

As for Cronulla, it all went quiet when ASADA were told they weren't allowed to use anything the ACC investigation turned up and the players stonewalled them at the interview. They said at senate estimates that they are still investigating them so I assume they had to start their investigation all over again.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Latest posts

Top