How many people really know what went on at Essendon through the supplements saga? Millions, apparently!
Everyone has a view of course, a personal opinion that they are none too shy about venting. That is how it should be. But an awful lot of people also seem to know exactly what went on.
I have heard so many different versions of ‘The Truth’ over these past two years that it would be laughable, if not for the seriousness of the situation at hand. Speculation becomes fact, hypothesis suddenly becomes reality, a theory becomes an indisputable recount of the said events.
Well, here’s the thing. If these people weren’t there at the time, then they don’t know what happened. I certainly don’t know, odds are you don’t know either, and neither does Caroline Wilson, Mark Robinson or any journalist for that matter.
We can make an educated guess at what might have happened, but even these guesses will be based on reports that haven’t always been accurate and are themselves the creation of others who are putting their own speculative spin on matters.
The way Fairfax media has reported the whole saga has differed from the way News Limited has. Having said that, neither has stuck to straight reporting of the issue, and the facts have often been entangled with opinion and personal bias. It has been left up to the reader to discern which is which.
What we do know is that the whole saga is taking an enormous personal toll on all those involved. It has to be. It is a human trait – we don’t like to be criticised or held to scrutiny.
The players, coaches and staff of the Essendon Football Club have endured two years of negative publicity and with it, two years of angst about where their careers will ultimately end up.
Some have handled it better than others.
James Hird, for instance, has handled it superbly. At least publicly. Forget what you think he may or may not have done, not once have we seen him chuck a wobbly when approached by the cameras. He always speaks civilly.
I’m not sure I would be so accommodating if a throng of media set up camp on my doorstep for so long.
That is not a comment on his guilt or otherwise, but an observation of his composure. And love him or hate him, he has it in spades. No one has been under more pressure than him throughout this saga. Daily speculation about his tenure as coach, personal attacks on his character and a newspaper that has seemingly had him in the gun since day one, has to hurt. It must have a negative impact.
But he hasn’t let it show.
For others, such as ruckman Paddy Ryder, the daily grind of uncertainty became too much. After two years of hearing one thing and then another, Ryder decided he had had enough. And who could blame him?
He left Essendon for a fresh start at Port Adelaide. But while he may escape the day-to-day negativity that surrounds Essendon, his ASADA nightmare will not quietly disappear with a change of clubs. A show-cause notice doesn’t care which team you play for.
You can run but you can’t hide.
It is the same for Angus Monfries and Stewart Crameri.
At least Monfries (who had left the Bombers before the furore broke) was not banned from the finals last year, so you could say that things have worked out better for him than his former teammates. It remains to be seen if that run of good luck will continue, though personally I hope it does.
I would hate to see any player removed from the game or be forced to admit to something they may not have done in order to cut a deal, especially when others involved in the saga have escaped pretty much unscathed.
Dr. Bruce Reid signed off on at least some of the supplements that are alleged to have been administrated to the players. We know this because Jobe Watson said so on Fox Footy’s On the Couch.
And yet, when push came to shove and the whole club rolled over under AFL pressure – accepting its penalties without a whimper (despite some big talking from new CEO Paul Little beforehand) – only Reid decided to continue with court action.
The AFL buckled and almost instantly dropped its charges. Reid was free to continue in his role.
It is also often conveniently forgotten that the man many thought should permanently replace Hird as coach of the Bombers, Mark Thompson, was also punished for his involvement in the scandal. A $30,000 fine, which until last week at least was still unpaid, was deemed appropriate.
Almost comically, Thompson was not only allowed to continue at Essendon with barely a hiccup, he was also promoted. At least Hird had to spend time away from the club.
Self-titled sports scientist Stephen Dank was also a central figure in the affair. He just refuses to speak or cooperate with anybody and nobody seems to know what to do about it! As such, he seems to have been placed in the ‘too hard basket’. He has been allowed to continue on with whatever it is he does.
And former high performance manager Dean ‘The Weapon’ Robinson actually benefited financially from the whole affair by selling his story to Channel Seven. The result was a forgettable interview with Luke Darcy in which nothing new or startling was revealed.
There are no winners in this, but some have escaped more unscathed than others. Public opinion too has wavered between harsh and sympathetic, depending on the individual. Public opinion however should have nothing to do with the final result.
ASADA have to get this right and the players, who are now the ones facing punishment, must be certain in their next move. If it comes to be that they were administered sinister substances, then they may very well need to cut a deal or go down the line that the club duped them.
But if they honestly believe that nothing banned was given to them, they must fight to clear their names, even if it means prolonging the situation further.
Their reputations depend on it.
conchie
Roar Rookie
I believe the ASADA operation to investigate was called operation cobia. Cobia !!!, sounds a bit fishy !!
peter
Guest
Thank you ...at last some-body that dosn't know every-thing ,I think that wilson women should find a new job .talks so much crap. If afl.and asada are so tough HOW come Danks is walking all the way to the bank..
skeptical mullet
Guest
Hi Needeep your first point about the language used-juice, black ops.- is really drawing a long bow. To conclude wrong doing based on this is really a non-sequitour. Colourful language may be applied through the whole spectrum of being 'blokey/jokey' to the horse racing parlance of illicit. Context is everything. Seems incongruous with Hirds demands (emails-not widely reported) of a safe and legal program. Also, snippets of conversations, texts, emails have been leaked in isolation, thus, out of context. All we can conclude is we don't have all the facts.Remember though. The AFL knew what Essendon were doing and chose not to act. Gillon said after the penalties we should have checked up on them, as did bomber - "they (AFL) knew what we were doing they could have come and asked us or checked periodically"....he said this on Fox's 360 after the sanctioning. As for Reid, he did express his concerns and Hird (at least once) supported him and refered him to the football dept. manager Hamilton. Robinson was 'chastised' (at least once) over not passing everything through the Dr. He did put his concerns in writing to the manager (and Hird), but 'apparently' it sat on hamiltons desk....hamilton left without any anouncement at the end of that year...I won't draw any conclusions though, there could be many reasons. Further, Reid eventually DID sign off on (most of?) the supplements. His court action was the course Hird and Essendon wanted to take. Both Hird and the club were threatened into submission. The AFL can impose any 'rules' they want, punish them any way they want, now and in the future. As to 'falsified' documents, again, dank sells these substances to the public through business interests (clinics). As far as i understand, Alvi (the compounding chemist) could not say if these related to Essendon. He (dank)also tried the same thing with Dr Robin Willcourt, a hormone specialist and anti aging clinician. (as an aside, Willcourt has stated on the ABC he hears so much misinformed 'crap' involving these substances. Everyday he would read something completely false which is ruining peoples reputations....yet he has a vested interest...who to believe?) Ziggy was commissioned by the club to investigate it's governance (NOT, I might add, in relation specifically to the programme). In fact he interviewed no one about the programme specifically, according to a comment I heard by mark Robinson. In his report, after the 'pharmaceutical environment' part, he went on to say- words to the effect- 'I have no idea what I'm talking about, I'm not an expert"...It's like Dr Willcourt investigating the supplements and 'commenting' on corporate governance-not his field of expertise. Interestingly, essendon did this report to better itself and it was used against them. Afterwards, the AFL did an 'in-house' (not public) review of their governance and proposed 'sweeping changes'...it's good to be the king... Again, you say Essendon have ducked and dodged from the beginning. Simply not true. Essendon co-operated fully throughout the investigation. Again, the court hearing confirmed the AFL had an agenda to punish Essendon regardless, and before any reports were undertaken or finished. They did not want a transparent hearing, Essendon did-ask yourself why? They did nothing to Melbourne who were receiving injections from Dank, even when Essendon were being investigated!! Ask yourself why that may be. (Also, dank and Robinson were with suns before being poached....no investigation ). There is much information not 'reported' in the mainstream (AFL accredited?) media. This investigation is/was confidential. We have both sides trying to 'spin' things their way. This is the point of Sean's article. Most people have drawn conclusions based on snippets, interpretations- not 'facts'. When we apply 'critical thinking' we can conclude nothing. I will say, IF, Hird/Essendon are shown to have willfully 'cheated', they should all be flogged. I suspect they were at worst taken in by snake oil, at best, bad management...as the AFL...as were the other 12 clubs who's supplement programmes had not 'one single point of accountability'.
NeeDeep
Roar Pro
Cheers mullet - appreciate you correcting anything I have got wrong. I do stand corrected on the AOD, not TB4 comment - you are quiet correct. I also understand Hird was receiving "vanity" injections, but he did almost certainly know more about the injections, than he let on at the presser (as you rightly point out, held by the Essendon Football Club, at which he and club President Jackson, did all the talking) Given that the word "juice" was used in the text messages, most people would know that In horse racing and even the fitness world, "juice" is usually used as a term of phrase that implies it is a substance that may have some fairly dubious properties and when coupled with the "black ops" remark, the general public would have to wonder - wouldn't they? With regards to Reid, my point was that he had been inquiring about what was happening with the "supplements programme" the players were receiving and from what I was led to understand, couldn't get any straight answers. As time went by, he felt he was being by passed and avoided. Eventually, he put his concerns in writing, to the club and the coach. I believe this to be the crucial bit of evidence in his particular situation, that has cleared him of "significant" involvement and also, why he stuck to his guns - ie. he felt the truth of his actions, would clear him of any wrong doing, which seems to have vindicated his position. The evidence that was "bogus", was what the club wanted to hang their hat on, with their appeal - the pharmacists bill - receipt, from Shane Charters and also a letter from Dank, indicating that the substances were all good to go. Yet these documents turned out to be falsified and on top of all that, you have the Ziggy Switowski review which the club commissioned, that slammed the "governance" aspect of the whole programme in question. And when you flick back to the text messages between Hird & Dank, you can dismiss them as an innocuous use of terminology, but this wasn't two 8 year olds playing with walky-talkies in the back yard! As for the balance past that - Hird's motives attached to the appeal, Paddy Ryder's reasons for departing, Reimers & McVeigh - I guess that will come down to whether you're a Bombers fan or not, in most cases, as to how you view these side issues. With regards to Caro & Demetriou, they may be simply being diplomatic (personally, I'm quite confident AD tipped the Bombers off and he's covering his backside and Caro as a journo would know how far she can go before she starts getting on shaky ground, legally). I guess my concern mullet is what should we do from here? Open the floodgates and tell all the clubs it's OK to experiment with chemicals and their players? The penalties won't be all that harsh, so why not get some "juice" into them! Perhaps we could have 2 competitions - the Chemically Enhanced Football League (aka the Freak Show) and a "clean" competition. Ultimately, the public want and expect the truth. The Essendon Football Club has kicked and screamed and tried to dodge and duck from day one - why?
skeptical mullet
Guest
the masses working out what happened...aka wild speculation with little critical evaluation....
skeptical mullet
Guest
Needeep back on track... 1 - Hird and jackson?..didn't hold a presser---essendon did. Hird had injection(s) of a tanning agent, a 'vanity' drug. Hird did not know of offsite injections until told. He complained to the football manager and asked they (injections) be stopped. As for 'black ops', it's a tongue in cheek term of secrecy (NOT illegal dealings). The players themselves requested the consent forms, Hird etc. happily agreed. 2 - Watson admitted to taking AOD, not TB4! Why would he do that? Well...turns out the afl knew all along AOD was legal, but chose to say nothing, allowing Watson and team to be villified publically by the press and opposition...suited their 'agenda'. Reid demonstrated nothing. He chose to take his case to the supreme court--the afl pulled out the night before the case was to be heard. Remember, essendon wanted an 'open', public hearing with an independant judge, the AFL did not. 3 - "The evidence they hoped would put them in the clear turns out to be bogus"....huh? What evidence. "Hird’s appeal centered around the damage that would be done to his “personal” reputation and earning"...His appeal did not 'center' around this. This was an 'impact' statement attached to the case..common practice I believe. "outside the court claimed it was all for the “care” of the players, which seemed to be the furtherest thing from his or most other peoples thoughts at the Hanger, back in 2011-12"...His emails demonstrate that his number 1 priority WAS the players welfare. This has been backed up by some players and support staff. Paddy was told by investigators that his unborn baby may be at risk, as was Mcveigh, apparently. This 'interview technique' was unscrupulous and was addressed by 'experts' the club had in. Paddy left because of the 'pressure cooker' environment. He asked Essendon be well compensated. Reimers came across as a 'whistle blower'. Truth is, the full interview as Damien Barret pointed out when presenting it 2-3 months later, showed him differently. He was just answering a few questions. Probably not the sharpest tool in the shed. Saad tested positive (unfortunate), as opposed to what you refer to as 'systematic doping'. THAT is a wholly unfounded assumption. Even Essendon's harshest critics* don't believe they set out to cheat...*caro and Demetriuo, that is, not the fenzied masses. It is so easy to get off the track in this saga. It seems even harder to be on the track in the first place.
NeeDeep
Roar Pro
Sean, I have to admit that I'm a little confused with your article. It seems to have been written two or three months ago, based on the content you are referring to and the fact that you've omitted several recent outcomes. Your unabashed admiration for James Hird shines through in the article as well and is in stark contrast to what appears to be a rather scathing assessment on Paddy Ryder's decision to leave the Bombers. I wonder how many people would agree with your slant on these 2 characters, involved in the theatre that has become the Essendon Supplements Scandal. Couple of things to perhaps put you back on track - 1. February 2013 - James Hird and Steven Jackson hold a presser to announce that they are going to conduct a review into the clubs supplement programme. At that time Hird clearly stated that he "would be shocked and appalled", if any impropriety was happening at the Essendon Football Club. We later find out Hird himself was getting injections and knew about the off site injections and then we have text messages between Hird & Dank, inferring a "Black Ops" type programme. Players had been asked to sign waivers and consent forms. Kind of suggests he was pretty well aware of MUCH that was going on. 2. Steve Jackson resigns and Hird goes on a study break, that nets him $1M and a year in France. Bomber Thompson gets fined $30K, but is OK to coach - that was a staggering decision, which kind of suggests he was involved, but apparently he was only a little bit pregnant (go figure). Jobe Watson admits on live TV that he and the other players were injected with Thymosin Beta 4. Bruce Reid was cleared, because he demonstrated that he had been left out of the loop, as Hird and Dank stepped things up, due to his concern about what was taking place. 3. Dean Robinson was settled out of court, by the Essendon Football Club. The evidence they hoped would put them in the clear turns out to be bogus and then they try and have ASADA's evidence disallowed. Why? I mean ultimately if the club has nothing to worry about, then the truth isn't going to hurt anyone- is it? Hird and the Essendon Football Club loose their court case and Hird's appeal centered around the damage that would be done to his "personal" reputation and earning capacity, both in football and outside of the game, as a result of a negative outcome for he and the club. Then outside the court claimed it was all for the "care" of the players, which seemed to be the furtherest thing from his or most other peoples thoughts at the Hanger, back in 2011-12. How should this now play out? That is the part I think we don't know and is the issue most people are looking for some sort of comment, theory, or input, about. As far as I'm concerned, I look at recent incidents to try and draw a line and calculate a possible outcome, Lance Armstrong claimed ignorance and the governing body cited a rule that governs most athletes, which states that an athlete (sportsperson) is responsible for everything that enters their body. With the AFL's sign up to WADA and ASADA several years back and the claim that the AFL was one of the most "drug free" sports in the world, backed up by player education programmes about drugs, etc. (which you would have to think would include the use of performance enhancing substances, as well as recreational) the club requesting waivers and consent forms and off-site injections, may have rung a few alarm bells with at least some of the players - surely? Then Ahmed Saad gets 18 months for drinking a sports drink. It's later revealed that if he had consumed the drink Friday night, rather than Saturday morning, he would have been in the clear. It took the AFL and ASADA a total of just 3 weeks to cite the player, hear the case and deliver the decision. Paddy Ryder pointed out that he was concerned for the life of his unborn child and was far from happy that the club had effectively been gambling on outcomes that had far-reaching possible side effects, that may not surface for years to come. And a special mention must go to Kyle Reimers, who was the first player to speak out about this whole matter. I love the way he was vilified by Mark McVeigh and labeled as a disgruntled ex-player who used to fall asleep at team meetings. Well played Spike - what a champion you are! Sean, I'm looking for a whole lot more than a 5 or 6 game suspension from this. If you can rub a bloke out for a sports drink and a few hours, systematic doping over an extended period of time, throughout a whole club, has major implications. If this gets down to just a handful of games, the AFL (and other leagues) run(s) the risk of other clubs saying - "Why not? What's the worst that can happen - we get caught and loose a few players for a handful of games. We can do like Essendon did and drag it out over 3 seasons and disperse players, get fresh ones in, prior to serving the suspension. And we could jag a flag or 2 in the meantime!" The AFL needs to set a strong deterrent and a slap on the wrist isn't going to cut it, if they want the integrity of the game to stay in tact. Many fans are becoming disturbed at the heavy focus on commercial outcomes, such as the "fix"turing, COLA's and the desire for massive TV rights deals, versus a fair and even competition, where each club has as much chance as the next to win a flag. Hopefully Sean, your next article won't be a "Stand By Hird" article as AR correctly put it and with a bit more focus on facts, that "expert" tag under your pic will be reflected in the piece that you post.
Richard
Guest
Hi Sean, I am not really sure what you are trying to say here. I fully respect your right to write an opinion piece but in this case you are either repeating what we already know, you are a massive James Hird fan and frankly well I still can't work out what you are trying to say. Of course everyone has an opinion, and of course very few actually know what occurred at the ESsendon club including the Essendon hierarchy. But isn't that the whole problem there in a nutshell and isn't that the whole point of disrepute? Or maybe I am mistaken on what constitutes bringing the game into disrepute. David Evans self reported saying something was amiss. Ziggy was brought in and wrote a report that something was obviously amiss. Yet lo and behold a couple of seasons down the track the current chairman and coach say that apart from governance nothing was amiss. So who do the masses believe? ASADA who say something illegal went on or the AFl who said something illegal went on or the club whose stance is now nothing illegal went on. But according to you people aren't allowed to have an opinion or discuss the saga. Unfortunately, the truths of the story are not yet established apart from the fact that many thousands of injections were given. So please forgive the masses who are trying to work out what has happened and who want their game back.
skeptical mullet
Guest
WOW. A journo with critical thinking skills....well done Sean.
David
Guest
Thank God for a sane, objective view of this saga. It takes out the negative emotional hype and describes the situation as it is.
GazzaW
Guest
Yes i would know and damn well did make sure i knew what my children were injected with. The program was highly organised practically the whole squad was injected. Consent forms were provided and signed consultants were hired specifically to make sure the program happened in a way to maximise performance. The Coach was actively involved in the program and was an enthusiast for it. They thought other clubs were doing it but rather than report their suspicions they set up their own program using medication not passed for human use. The fact there are no records now is highly suspicious. No program like that would be run without a scientific recording of results without records unless it was out side the rules.
micka
Guest
Essendon have been more than happy to hold up the process for MONTHS based on spurious technicalities Mark. The players can wait another week...
Macca
Guest
And those things are related to this how?
peter
Guest
The boss of Asada ,,,GONE ,,big boss AFL,,GONE,..labor sport minster GONE ...And I bet all got big golden hand shake pay out.
KenAgain
Guest
She needs some more plastic surgery
Pope Paul VII
Guest
Seems Dank got confused down Cronulla way as well.
micka
Guest
I wouldn't imagine you would mix the two up when being investigated for potentially using one illegally as part of a doping campaign... Hopefully he wasn't confused when telling the nurses which vials to draw up injections from.
Macca
Guest
SO Essendon employed a sports scientist who gets mixed up between Thymodulin and Thymosin Beta 4? Really! That fills me with confidence. And we have evidence of Dank buying Thmosin Beta 4, we have evidence of Essendon being invoiced for Thymosin, we have evidence that Thymosin Beta 4 was stored at EFC - the only evidence of Thymodulin being involved is a document proven to be forged by Dank - but I am sure you are right he just got confused.
Pope Paul vii
Guest
Of course I'm the real Pope Paul VII. I'm not biased toward them. I hate them as much as I hate Hawthorn and Carlton. But your missing the point. A team is strongly suspected of cheating. That's pretty fascinating don't ya reckon? Just so happens it's your team laddie.
Mark Gurry
Roar Rookie
Haven't heard that oone before. Get which tainted plsyers out and which new players in? If you said prolong things for a few weeks to allow the players to concentrate on finals, it would have made more sense. I support Essendon. I hate to see them being made a scapegoat. Bit like Melbourne with the tanking. What gives you such s passion for this case Macca?