Moderator: bbmods
I'll be there too, but I'd hope the rest of the fans join me in showing any bomber fans that are brave enough to show up the respect they deserve, and the players who are brave enough to be out there, busting their guts, the respect they deserve.Funkadelic wrote:All I know is ill be at both games we play them with a belly full of boos and a head full of snappy one liner zingers.
And... he is now the proud owner of not one, but two arse-holes: the one he was born with, and verbalises through; and of course, the new-improved upgrade Jojo ripped for him on her daughter's behalf!think positive wrote:sorry honey....piedys wrote:Hey skip, some of us 6 foot 4 jerkoffs might take resemblance to that remark!think positive wrote:... my daughter ^&*^*% ex has been training with them for 8 months, when he is a basketballer. 6 foot 4 jerkoff! fit right in!
Dyso
actually its ok, hes shorter now, i took him down a peg or two!!
Surely Essendon will appoint a personal trainer [$50K?] to monitor the exiled players away from the club, with a programme tailored to mirror their regular AFL training, week-in, week-out? They will lose match-fitness only over that period, but not any of their actual physical conditioning, i'd suggest...think positive wrote:... a year away from footy, copping the heat that will surely come their way, I reckon it will end a couple of careers. Just think how long it takes a player to get back after coming off a layoff for injury, and they will be doing it without ANY club support. It's always hard to get match fit, a lot harder than staying there once you are there, anyone who plays a team sport knows that. Reckon Jobe will struggle. I reckon Heppell will survive.
Oh and the AFL? Shame shame shame
Better use them all up on Anzac day bro, we only get one shot at the title in 2016, and not two.Funkadelic wrote:All I know is ill be at both games we play them with a belly full of boos and a head full of snappy one liner zingers.
Apart from the Essenflogs who taunted you in the final round of 2015, they will be entitled to a special bake; the rest shall be granted immunity eh?think positive wrote:I'll be there too, but I'd hope the rest of the fans join me in showing any bomber fans that are brave enough to show up the respect they deserve, and the players who are brave enough to be out there, busting their guts, the respect they deserve.
I'll stand by them, side by side.
It's over. Let it go, get back to football.
And hating for the right reason.
Don't care how they would treat me, that's their problem, not mine, I don't define myself or my behaviour by what others may or may not do.ANNODAM wrote:^ Aha & you reckon they'd show you the same respect if the roles were reversed?
That's how I look at this whole sorry mess.
They can sit & fester on the bottom of the ladder for eternity as far as I'm concerned & as for the corrupt shit organisation that is the AFL, they too can suck my dogs fat one!
Both deserve everything they get & then some!
*Back to my cocktail now, relaxing on my cruise*
I think the players are not completely innocent victims, but undoubtedly were duped by the powers that be at Essendon at that time. The killer for the players was they didn't declare the injections etc on their drug testing forms. A bit like bringing back a load of contraband by plane, not declaring it on your customs form and when your bags get searched, plead ignorance.RudeBoy wrote:Despite the WADA findings, I still consider the players to be innocent victims of an experimental drug program run by their club. Their employers are the one's responsible for the program. What seems to be missing from the WADA judgement, is any real acknowledgement of the realities of players in a team environment. The WADA rules were designed around policing drug use by individual athletes, where the athletes are expected to make their own decisions about this sort of stuff. In a large team environment such as a football team, it is inevitably much, much more difficult for players to be expected to challenge/refuse to abide by instructions from coaches etc.Member 7167 wrote:If you read the review of the decision I think you will change your opinion on how you apportion blame and responsibility. There has been a great deal of misinformation out there and there are some such as Dank and Hird who continuate to attempt to muddy the waters.RudeBoy wrote:The players are the innocent victims in this sad and sorry episode. However, banning them is the correct outcome, otherwise future players will always be able to use the out clause of "we were told to take this stuff".
Hird, 'Bomber' Thomson, their club doctor and the board members at that time, should ALL be banned from ever working at a sports club.
If the AFL-Players Association had any guts, they'd be initiating damages claims against the Essendon Football Club, who, as an employer, breached their duty of care to the players, and their actions have ruined the careers of the players. I'd estimate the total damages claim could run to over 100 million dollars.
But don't get me wrong. I think the players had to be banned, to prevent it happening again. I just think, they are not the real wrong-doers in this case. Hird, 'Bomber' Thomson, and the Essendon Board bare the main responsibility for this disgraceful episode, and I hope the players sue the arse of these jerks.
My point David was that there was a contention that the "WADA rules" were designed around policing individual athletes making an individual decision and not a "team environment". I suggest that this is inaccurate. When State sponsored cheating is involved then that could be argued to be precisely a team environment. I'm not sure that many of the East German athletes from the 70's actually had a choice.David wrote:As for those bringing up the systematic doping in the Soviet Bloc (and modern-day Russia, I should add), it's a very different kettle of fish when we're talking about individual athletes. All the same, it may well be that we overestimate those particular athletes' complicity or ability to say no. I would rather that such dynamics be taken into account when sanctioning people for offences like these.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9a5sqNi-I-QCam wrote:Zacharakis said no.
Sammy Mitchell was right!
