So the bureaucratic B-52 that is ASADA has started up its engines and taken to the sky trailed by an ugly plume of greasy smoke.
Its destination, of course, is Windy Hill. There this metaphorical bomber will take aim at the footballing variety.
At the time of scribbling these words the firm whisper was that official phone calls had been made.
>> ESSENDON RESPOND TO ASADA SHOW CAUSE NOTICES
>> Full report: Essendon bring legal action against ASADA
The broad understanding is 34 people, most thought to be players from Essendon (including those who were at Essendon at the relevant time but have since moved on), will be asked to show cause as to why they shouldn’t be found guilty of offences relating to the use of a substance known as Thymosin Beta 4.
That’s 34 separate ASADA briefs checked innumerable times over the course of sixteen months. A brief every two weeks.
Put in that kind of perspective – and given the stakes – perhaps us news-thirsty sideliners shouldn’t be so critical of the slow time-line. A prosecutor’s lot requires precision. Out of necessity wheels grind before they spin.
Still, this has been an agonising wait.
For the players and their families it must have been all but unbearable even if it’s just as likely that time has fortified them against wanting anything beyond a conclusion.
For others it’s all been a drawn out game of chess played between three main schools of thought. On the one hand sit besieged and defensive loyalists, conspiracists and denialists.
Those who’ve borne the brunt of Essendon’s aggressive swagger over the years share the other with the rest of us who can’t stomach the idea of cheating at the expense of player welfare.
And yet for all the banter, misinformation and amateur sleuthing so many fundamental questions remain satisfactorily answered.
Who the hell is Stephen Dank? What did he promise? What did he deliver? How and who did he convince?
Who knew what and when? Who did what?
How can a club desiring pushed boundaries not have recorded the finer details?
Did the players twig? Did they not smell an ill wind at the scope of the pin-cushioning? Or do athletes simply do first and ask later, if ever?
For me the latter question remains the hardest to reconcile. If I was a professional athlete armed with knowledge and forewarned of the hazards of breaching relevant codes would I not ask the waiter to list the ingredients of my soup?
I can’t help but assume that I would.
But I’m not fighting for a senior game. Not every moment of my young life has been geared towards participation in a sport that entrenches itself in the dreams of kids everywhere. I’m not all but owned by an institution that sees a Premiership window ajar.
I don’t have Dick Reynolds staring down at me from a wall and the spectre of Kevin Sheedy lurking as I lace my boots before training. I’m not being mentored and tutored by a now suspended bloke who’d all but been canonised by a place whose unfortunately timed mantra was ‘whatever it takes’.
When working the Gabba boundary in commentary at the Brisbane versus Essendon game a month or so ago I saw in the Lions the usual pep. The chatter was rife. Players sat restlessly. Brisbane were anxious about their lot in the way footballers need to be. There was an enthusiastic edge to their work.
On the other side of the interchange gates the Bombers were largely voiceless and lethargic, an observation I made to air. Their bench was almost silent. Later in the game – juiced perhaps by an inability to put away a less fancied opponent – players started bickering as they came and went from the pine.
Goddard and Chapman, two high profile post-scandal recruits, were spitting ten flavours of venom over relatively innocuous on-field incidents. Chappy was flicking elbows. Goddard was fuming. At the time I wondered if they were looking for a reason to let steam spew.
Essendon still won that night, if only just. Ryder sealed things a minute from the end with a terrific kick from an awkward spot. The celebration was eerily muted for a side who’d just snagged a victory that evened their season’s win/loss record.
In hindsight maybe there really was something in what I saw – if I recall correctly there’d been a Fairfax report in the lead up to the match hinting that ASADA was coming to the end of its process.
Or maybe there was nothing at all in what I observed and it was just a plain old flat night for the visiting side.
For too long now this is how plenty of us view the Bombers – with a whopping great question mark next to an equally prominent asterisk. It’s a horribly depressing distraction.
Many will now measure Essendon by how they front up against Melbourne on Sunday. Maybe the Bombers will link arms for a week. It’s hard to see how they will for two. With (apparently) only ten days to show the kind of cause necessary to beat further action you’d reckon minds will naturally drift.
One thing is now certain – the talk is over and the game is on. Already de facto club spokesman Tim Watson has hinted at legal action by the Bombers. You’d reckon this squabble is only just warming up.
I can’t help but conjure a list of broader possible ramifications if it all ends up with the wigs and gowns. But who brings action against who? Are years tied up in court really worth it?
How would years of litigation affect the future competition and Essendon’s part in it? Does the club indemnify each player or official affected? To what extent?
Will players break ranks? What are the insurance implications? How deep are the pockets of Essendonian benefactors?
What is the contractual position of players signed since this all broke? Can Goddard and Chapman argue for reinstatement of their free agency? Clearly they haven’t got what they bargained for. Will future draftees and rookies baulk at Windy Hill?
What do current and potential sponsors do? Who ultimately pays all the bills?
For all the fighting talk by the hard-nosed red and black few who remain ensconced in finger-pointing amid a quagmire of conspiracy and spin, a hard reality will surely eventually bite.
Pockets may be deep, but arms eventually shorten. And no club can bleed like this forever.
pope paul v11
Guest
that's tops
Mitch
Guest
France will kick him out immediately they discover a lowlife Aussie Rules / "Seagull chasing a chip" player is found hiding out in their great Football heartland!
Mitch
Guest
There will be massive injury compensation claims by the players against the club for it's criminal actions in placing the player's future health in jeopardy! The court awarded damages will bankrupt this club. The AFL will also be bankrupted if they are found to have been in anyway involved. End of story.
Mitch
Guest
No there won't be - Your talking absolute nonsence
Mitch
Guest
"A sad day for Aus, it has to be said. You can flush the fair-go mantra down the dunny. Aus has turned into a spiteful and vindictive nation. I suppose that is what happen when half the population are on entitlements." - deanp Wowww!!!!.....................This is priceless from the Australian champion of spitefulness and vindicativeness!
apaway
Roar Guru
But Dean, what is it Essendon are fighting for if they are in fact found guilty? I don't think ASADA "want" anything other than to be able to determine if cheating has occurred, and if so, to what extent and how institutionalised it has become.
Brian
Guest
Its absolute fact to use the ATO as an example as we all lodge tax returns the steps in the process are 1. Citizen (Taxpayer) lodges tax return 2. ATO either accepts or doesn't accept figures. If not it issues its own assessmant based on its own findings 3. Citizen can object to new amount, ATO can refuse to budge. 4. If Citizen disagrees he can go to Court Where the burden of proof is entirely on the taxpayer. If the taxpayer can't prove their case judge will rule in favour of ATO.
Karma Miranda
Guest
Here's a scenario... I used to drive for Toll. Every morning the heavy vehicle drivers were required to sign on, stating they had NOT taken any illicit substances in order to perform their daily duties. Paul Little was my CEO back then. I find this EFC situation deliciously ironic... deliberately given illicit substances by the organisation to perform their daily duties, now with Mr Little at the helm. Left wondering how he can justify his position in this light.
Dalgety Carrington
Guest
95% of all show cause notices issued end up in infraction notices which go on to bans.
AR
Guest
yep - that's pretty much it.
Ian Whitchurch
Guest
Who is this Bosk, and why is there no reference to "a pack of cheating sillies" ?
yewonk
Guest
If asada goes so does any international competition we might want to engage in.
Macca
Guest
Axle and Grham had chipped my integrity ealrier how is this treating the issue with any integrity - "Essendon to fight ASADA – they have filed an application in the Federal Court of Australia challenging the legality of the AFL/ASADA joint investigation. They believe there is no ability for ASADA to conduct a joint investigation, and if they are right then any findings from the investigation will be null and void." Basically trying to wriggle out on a technicality!! Would you be able to look people in the eye after that?
Tim
Guest
Lol! What are the heck are you on about dp?? Any one with a modicum of capacity for critical thought can see through the spin coming out of Essendon. For peke's sake, EFC's own report condemned the behaviour of the administration. The whole episode stinks - this is not the case of an innocent man being stitched up for a murder simply for the colour of his skin - this is a multi-million dollar organisation that has undertaken a systematic and experimental doping regime for which it either a: failed to keep records or b: destroyed said records. The mob is not baying for blood - this is not a lynching. I think most supporters do however want accountability - something that seems to have been wholly avoided in the case of James Hird who is on a $1M paid sabbatical to undertake an MBA (paid for by the club) for his role in this very sordid episode.
Dockersfan
Guest
Actually a massive difference, take a quick look at the ASADA website and you'll find that innocuous supplements taken orally become banned once taken parentally (injected). But I see both arguments, depends on the substance and all that who ha. Still think TB4 is much worse than anything that comes in a can. Very potent peptide that.
Bosk
Guest
Thousands of tax dollars just to ruin a few careers? I think you need to look at the big picture here. From ASADA's point of view this isn't even really about Essendon, its about sending a very strong message to all the other peptide abusers out there - and I can tell you for a fact that EVERY major professional Australian sport is riddled with them right now.* Make no mistake this case will set a massive precedent for doping in team sports one way or another. * Except lawn bowls. Just because I was desperate to work in a reference to the Essendon Bowls club and point out how sensible they were to kick the Bombers out of Windy Hill when they had the chance.
Macca
Guest
Hardarsed man maybe but delusional almost certainly given he wrote this to members just yesterday; "However, I can confirm we are exploring all legal options for our players in the unlikely event they receive show-cause letters from ASADA."
Bosk
Guest
The time for Essendon swallowing their pride & negotiating died when David Evans quit and they appointed unionbuster Paul Little in his place. Little won't want to give ground to his opponents purely on principle, that's just the kind of hardarse the man in.
Bosk
Guest
Nice idea in theory but if it was Geelong being investigated for the team's DRAMATIC improvement in 2007 (hint: Dean Robinson & Bomber Thompson both involved) would you be terribly keen on standing up for the truth even if you knew that it could mean losing your club's first premiership in donkey's years? Nah I think its far more likely you'd want the truth buried as deeply as possible. Most hardcore supporters of their club would probably feel the same way in a similar situation, especially if potentially spelled the end of a favorite son's coaching career.
CAllen
Guest
How is ASADA and the AFL to blame for Essendon systematically injecting its players and not being able to categorically testify to exactly what was injected? This investigation has been unprecedented and upon review, would definitely be handled different if such a situation ever rose again. But, somehow the investigation is being condemned more than the subject itself. Not one arguement that Essendon has provided in defence (from James Hird claiming that Andy D leaked information, to the joint investigation being illegal) has been that they can categorically show that players were not injected with banned substances-really, that is all they need to do and this case is over.