This is an unofficial Bulletin Board - owned and run by its users. We welcome all fans of the Mighty Collingwood Football Club.
Ad blocker detected: Our website is made possible by displaying online advertisements to our visitors. Please consider supporting us by disabling your ad blocker on our website.
Use this forum for non-Collingwood related footy topics that don't relate specifically to any of the other forums. For non-footy sporting topics please use Nick's Sports Bar and for non-sporting topics please use the Victoria Park Tavern.
Dark Beanie wrote:So are Dank and Hird going to come clean, be honest and let the players know exactly what they were injected with?
If they are not guilty of using PEDs there is no reason not to.
All the substances were obviously legal.
Spot on - let's find out exactly what was injected. They have nothing to fear if it was all above board. Let the public decide.
Surely if they had nothing to hide they would've revealed the substances used at the start of the investigation rather than at the end of the trial.
I laugh that the AFL are crapping on about Dank still being possibly in trouble. How exactly can that be, according to the AFL he oversaw a completely legal off-site systematic regime of multiple injections that required a player waiver to indemnify Essendon from any future action from the players. If Essendon isn't guilty then Dank can't be found guilty either.
It's not like the AFL have a history of stating things didn't happen and then find a way to punish the club through and obscure rule or scape goat. I mean look at how they handled the Demons match fixing investigation.
A Collingwood supporter since the egg was inseminated.
Got to admit though even before this decision I was finding it hard to watch AFL, but this really has tipped the scale for me. The AFL need to realise they can only push the viewing, and paying, public so far and there are other sports out there to watch.
For me it's now NFL, NRL, and the AFL waaaaaaaay below them. I'll only be watching AFL now when there's nothing else to watch and even then I'll probably just watch a movie, and I'll definitely never be a member of the CFC or pay to watch a game again because I won't use my money to bankroll such a shoddy sports code.
A Collingwood supporter since the egg was inseminated.
In my mind the players got off because, very conveniently, EFC had no records of what they systematically injected their players with, over an extended period. Of course the club, and particularly James Hird, knew. For him to say it wasn't his job and so he didn't know is the biggest load of bullshit in history. If the EFC had any integrity they would have sacked him when it all started and deleted him from club records.
It was impossible to prove the substance used with no records and no talking from those who knew. I don't know what happens if Dank comes out and says it was TB4. Should that mean players get banned? I would think so.
Meanwhile anyone else with a positive test will have to prove they didn't take a substance, which can be as hard a case as Asada had in proving the EFC players did. I feel for those who may suffer the consequences from accidental consumption etc while the bombers players get off after a high probability they were doped.
"The night is a very dark time for me" Chaz Michael Michaels
What a pathetic article!!!
Sticking up for Hird, implying it was all Dank and Robinson's doing. What a croc. The man at the top of the tree, with ultimate responsibility for his players can fob his responsibility to an underling and an outsider? He can let them be systematically injected but not have to know what with? This is just fantasy land!!
Absolutely disgusting.
And I am sick of all the media saying they were found not guilty. It was found that there wasn't sufficient evidence. And that evidence just happened to disappear or not be kept. How convenient.
"The night is a very dark time for me" Chaz Michael Michaels
The problem is that the AFL had every incentive to find them not guilty.
A guilty verdict would have resulted in a flood of legal action against the AFL by the players, and the effect on the 2015 competition, TV rights and the sport's reputation would have been devastating.
I found it interesting that there were two long standing County court judges were on the AFL's tribunal. A court of law uses the "beyond reasonable doubt' test, so I wonder whether these two actually applied the lower threshold of guilt that was meant to have been applied.
How would Siri know when to answer "Hey Siri" unless it is listening in to everything you say?
Went to the MCC Launch of the 2015 season in the members dining room at the MCG today.
Key note speakers were Alastsir Clarkson, Trent Cochin & Matthew Lloyd.
Naturally the issue of Essendon (and us) was raised. I won't bang on about what was said by whom etc, but Lloyd was very circumspect regarding his old club.
It was clear he was very unhappy at what had transpired at Essendon and said so very plainly. He stated he was relieved for the players, but he did not consider the matter over. He clearly as an ex player had the player point of view and he was not in any way supportive of the Essendon club admin.
sixpoints wrote:Went to the MCC Launch of the 2015 season in the members dining room at the MCG today.
Key note speakers were Alastsir Clarkson, Trent Cochin & Matthew Lloyd.
Naturally the issue of Essendon (and us) was raised. I won't bang on about what was said by whom etc, but Lloyd was very circumspect regarding his old club.
It was clear he was very unhappy at what had transpired at Essendon and said so very plainly. He stated he was relieved for the players, but he did not consider the matter over. He clearly as an ex player had the player point of view and he was not in any way supportive of the Essendon club admin.
Interesting considering Lloyd tweeted that he was over the moon about the decision yesterday and said it was a great result for footy.
The drug in question during Tuesday's decision was related to Thymosion beta-4 not AOD-9604 even though I think you raise valid concerns and arguments about AOD-9604.
In regards to AOD-9604 I still haven't been able to ascertain from anyone whether it's legal or not for use by professional sporting athletes in Australia however I'm pretty certain under the WADA code it's illegal to use for sporting athletes but I'm not sure what ASADA's stance is on this.
I suspect you're on the right track Seedsmeister. Essendon undermined the investigation at every point so this wouldn't surprise me.
Anyway last night I was watching 'Talking Footy' on Channel 7 and Tim Watson just couldn't help himself last night. He was whinging about an article in The Age written by Roy Masters who was critical of the Essendon's supplement saga and the fallout of the decision made last Tuesday. I thought his articles about the saga have been great and really aligned with the thoughts of many here and elsewhere.
Watson then asserted that everyone was 'sick of the saga', even though most people would rather hear the truth no matter how ugly it may be so he doesn't speak for me or countless others here who want to hear what really happened at Windy Hill and he said that the decision was made by an independent tribunal and there wasn't enough evidence to establish Essendon's guilt, yet he conveniently forgets that the evidence was either never retained of Essendon supplementation of substances or Essendon destroyed evidence that would have clearly established their guilt in the first place.
Watson and Essendon can mollycoddle it all they like but the general footy public isn't so stupid to fall for your rhetoric and that's why Essendon will always be a tainted club for mine. The mere fact that Hird is still coaching the club is absurd.
| 1902 | 1903 | 1910 | 1917 | 1919 | 1927 | 1928 | 1929 | 1930 | 1935 | 1936 | 1953 | 1958 | 1990 | 2010 | 2023 | 
