James Hird in Perth with his back against the wall… should we really be surprised that something amazing happened?
Following revelations that the Essendon coach allegedly received injections and was knowledgeable of the broader supplement plan for players, the Bombers defied the odds to record one of the greatest wins in the club’s history.
Coming back from a six-goal half-time deficit, the Bombers hit the front early in the last quarter before withstanding a spirited fight back by Fremantle in the final few minutes. The scenes after the game would have softened the hearts of even the harshest critic, with the players love and appreciation of their coach and club there for all to see.
It was one of the toughest weeks that the Essendon FC and Hird, in particular, have ever faced. For Essendon fans it was difficult as well, not simply because their club sits on the verge of crisis but because Hird is widely viewed as the Bombers’ greatest living player, a Bombers hero and favourite son who could seemingly do no wrong.
While the allegations against Hird remind us all that everyone is fallible, they remain just allegations and the presumption of being innocent until proven guilty must be adhered to at all times.
When the investigation is completed we can determine who, if anyone, was at fault but until then we should analyse everything that is said in the media with a critical eye.
At present the facts of the issue remain similar to when the investigation was announced in February.
Essendon had a supplements program which they claim was designed to maximise player performance within the rules of the game.
The investigation seeks to discover whether Essendon and Steve Dank went too far by prescribed supplements that were banned under the Australian Sporting Anti-Doping Authority (ASADA) code. Furthermore, if banned substances were prescribed it seeks to discover who knew that it was occurring.
If the supplement program was designed to be in line with the ASADA code then it is not relevant that Hird knew about the program, nor is it relevant that he personally took ‘performance-enhancing’ drugs, which no doubt aided his ability to sit in the coaches’ box and watch the game.
The only thing that matters is whether Steve Dank or anyone else at Essendon prescribed banned substances to players and whether others at the club knew that it was happening or consented. To date we do not have clear answers regarding this and we will have to wait for the ASADA investigation to be completed.
This past week highlighted the football media’s lack of accountability. With assumptions of guilt and speculation ruling the print and broadcast media, we saw just how ugly and counter-productive ‘trial by media’ can become.
On Friday, the media suggested that Hird should stand down as Essendon coach until the investigation was complete. Hird stood his ground claiming that ‘when the truth comes out, I think I’ll be in a very, very good position and so will this football club.’ It was the correct decision.
If the post-match celebration was any indication it will take a lot more than unproven allegations to remove Hird as coach of the Bombers. Neither the players nor the fans have lost faith in him as coach and that puts him in a favourable position.
The media spent the week trying to sensationalise the issue in an attempt to sell newspapers and provide online ‘hits’. They referred to supplements with sensational names such as, ‘pig’s brain extract’ and ‘calves blood’ (apparently the football media only have their steaks well-done), which are designed to sound foreign and frightening.
The media were successful in their endeavours; however, if the Bombers and Hird are cleared of any wrongdoing you can be sure that there will be no apologies and certainly no accountability. At present, Hird’s greatest crime may be that he was not initially honest with the media, which in their eyes may be the biggest crime of all. It would go some way to explaining the current witch-hunt.
Drugs in sport is arguably the biggest issue that Australian sport has ever faced. It strikes at the very credibility of the sport and, to date, has tarnished the reputations of so many across several sporting codes.
These allegations require deeper investigation, which should be realm of the ASADA investigation or investigative reporters and not at the mercy of football ‘journalists’. For the public it remains important that we be more critical of speculation and remember that the Bombers and other sports teams are innocent until proven guilty.
For now though we can sit back and admire the resilience of this Essendon team and their coach, who had every right to fall in a heap on Friday night but instead defied the odds and achieved an historic win.
It reminded me of a remarkable match between Essendon and West Coast in 2004, when James Hird informed the football world that it would take a lot more than some controversy to bring him down.
This investigation may end in tears for the Bombers but it is clear that they are not going to stand by and let the media play the role of judge, jury and executioner.
And that is exactly the way it should be.
D.Bugeja
Guest
There is no way James Hird would permit or have turned a blind eye to essendon players doping. Not even Carl Williams would feed a footy side full of drugs and think it wouldn't get out eventually. Last year it was the media pointing the finger at "The Weapon" for the bombers being too soft but now theyre shouting too "hard" as they try rubbish Hird. I blame cutting edge science however that's no excuse for Hird asking his men to sign a waiver for what he said he belleived to be supplements and vitamins. Why not ask Where were the parents when they crossed the road at windy hill? I heard a rumor Fletcher escorted them without even having conscent from their parents. Essendon have said as a club they may have made a mistake but stop the witchhunt people and yes GO BOMBERS!
Callam P
Roar Pro
While I disagree with most of what you've written I appreciate the feedback. Thanks for reading.
Blind Bomber Fan
Guest
Not wanting to disrespect your piece, well done on it, but... As Ian says, one of many things that matter is whether they took banned substances. Knowingly, unknowingly, it doesn't matter. There are many many other things that matter. Ethics, truth, welfare and care for his players, accountability of the senior coach and all those around him (ie. Bomber Thompson), judicious use of information (ie. only drip feeding info when pressured to), only acting when caught, total lack of governance, and so on. Many more can be added to that. I'd also argue that it's disingenius to say Hird 'possesed knowledge' of the programme - he oversaw it. The buck stopped with him. He approved Danks to go with this or that. Passing off responsibility by saying he sent an email is slack, unacceptable, but sadly common in our soceity today. If your son was playing and you knew he was being injected, would you just send an email and feel that was ok? Is it ok to make players (and they were made to) sign waivers? The person in charge is saying "I can't be sure this won't harm you, but by forcing you to sign this I'm saying you can't sue me". I would like to hope I had the ethics and moral backbone to check out what it was, to have a doctor confirm it wouldn't cause long term damage, or god-forbid cancer. Where is the evidence of anyone at Essendon showing any ethics or moral backbone? Only when busted, cold, in the spotlights, do they call in the parents? Why do that if they know the substances are fine? They signed a waiver right? That's all ok then. It is relevant if Hird took performance enhancing drugs. Totally. Check the AFL drug code. It is also relevant to someone overseeing a programme to inject players, if they are willing to take banned substances are they somehow going to get all ethical with the players? Being a rookie (and I am assuming you are not a journo, or have any degree or substantial work experience in that field), it's a bit unfair to label real journo's when you are seeking to join them, just on the other side of the argument. Is your argument the presumption of innocence, or the rights of the media to report the facts? If anything reported is untrue, libellous, etc, then Hird and Essendon have more than enough money and resources to sue. Essendon would have far more ability than Danks as well, or you or me. You should be aware that 'print' journalists don't just pump out anything, stories are 'legalled'. Should the Age and Herald Sun in particular, or the ABC with its 7.30 report, be worried because they reported anything untrue? I would be happy to punt that those media organisations are comfortable that the facts presented will not get them sued. If you are arguing trial by (social) media, then it seems funny that you then use the same avenue to forward your argument. So, you can use it but anyone who you disagree with can't? Where is the responsibility here? If the coach is feted, deified, held up as a hero to his club, and paid a fortune, then doesn't he bear any responsibility? Answer me this - a surgeon or doctor is facing a malpractice suit, for a serious matter. Do you thnk he should continue treating patients? An accountant or senior financial director is facing embezzlement charges, nothing proven yet. Should he stay in his job? They both may be found innocent, mind.
joe blackswan
Guest
Seems like yesterday the same football journalists were going to town on West Coast, and they also had to make some hard decisions about a favourite son. Can't help but think essendon are yet to be upfront, and won't be until ASADA force their hand.
Callam P
Roar Pro
And I follow that paragraph with: "The only thing that matters is whether Steve Dank or anyone else at Essendon prescribed banned substances to players and whether others at the club knew that it was happening or consented. To date we do not have clear answers regarding this and we will have to wait for the ASADA investigation to be completed." The point I tried to make was that Hird possessing knowledge of the progman does not directly imply that he knew about any banned substances - that connection is an assumption made by journalists.
Ian Whitchurch
Guest
"If the supplement program was designed to be in line with the ASADA code then it is not relevant that Hird knew about the program, nor is it relevant that he personally took ‘performance-enhancing’ drugs, which no doubt aided his ability to sit in the coaches’ box and watch the game." Its not relevant what was *designed*. What is relevant is what the players actually took. And, remember, the club doctor wrote a letter of protest to the Board ... which never actually got there. The program, in short, went rogue.
Callam P
Roar Pro
Thanks Sean!
Callam P
Roar Pro
'Sources reveal' is a tough one since protecting sources is pretty important for a journalist to do their job. Burn a valuable source once and you probably won't get any more out of them. But reading 'sources reveal' can be unsatisfying.
Callam P
Roar Pro
Thanks Stuart. Appreciate the feedback. There are Twitter and Facebook options for this article at the top of the page and to the right of screen. Just have to click on them and then send out a tweet or facebook message.
Redb
Roar Guru
Seems this concept is lost on the media and the sheep that follow their every word.
Stuart Warner
Guest
This is easily the best summation of the past weeks that I have read. Well done. Now if only some in the mainstream media would take notice. How do we post linkd to this from our various social media pages. This meed to be read by all who wish to comment. Finally spme balance.
saga
Guest
couldnt have put it better...just on this media sensationalisation....post d advent of internet- there needs to be overarching governance & a level of accountability (especially chief football writers quoting 'sources reveal' as their substantiation to level allegations that impact more than a persons (champion of the sport in this case) career. by the way - im not even an essendon supporter(happy hopeful tiger man)
Sean Lee
Expert
Well said Callam.