'Dons defend ASADA court action

Are you serious Andy, or just naive. The AFL could have stopped the program by just saying 'stop', as they have done before (Brisbane's hydrating IV's). They have no procedures to consider, they make them up as they go along-just ask the swans or jeff kennett. Both Mark Thompson and Gillon Mclachlan said at the time of the sanctions the AFL knew what was happening and should have enquired. 'You only had to ask', was Bombers summation. You see, it wasn't a problem until the press conference -which both Demetriou and Fahey admit was probably politically motivated.

The AFL did conduct an investigation in 2013, much to the annoyance of Hird and co. You could argue that they should've done it earlier, but that depends on when they got the information they got. Maybe you could brief me further on this.

Andy see my response to Gazza - I amnot arguing that The Essendon board do not have a responsibility just that the AFL as the main employer have the responsibility to check. In regards to what they could have done depends upon their procedures but they have admitted to the following; * being aware of the program * informed by Dr Reid that he had concerns * Dr Hardcourt in his presentation outlined the issues * clothier gave a verbal warning to hird - Given the above and the level of concern expressed that AFL should have acted - that is conducted an investigation into what was happening, checked records, etc - depending upon what was in their policy docs. The concern for the AFL is that they did not do so and the people who failed to need to be moved on as they are incompetent in their jobs.

Aransan, Anzac Day is a form of subsidy for Essendon. Teams like the Bulldogs are poorer because they don't play on Anzac Day, while teams like Essendon are richer because they do play on Anzac Day. Therefore the Bulldogs are sacrificing wealth to help Essendon- this is a subsidy. And yes I go for Hawthorn. While this shouldn't be relevant, I'm saying it because I'm proud to support a team that got to the top the hard way. Any wealth Essendon have is largely an inheritance from the 1910's Worrall era and the 1920's bribery era, not to mention their refusal in those years to let Footscray or North Melbourne join the comp for fear of Essendon losing a few precious players. Essendon's national-comp era record is very ordinary with only two flags. This is stared down to the ground by Hawthorn's six and is matched or beaten by 8 other sides. You haven't won a final for over a decade and your current coach based his entire plan for the club on a dodgy injection programme. That's why the club keeps hanging onto its ancient history and status because its become the only thing they have.

Paul, I've read all the law I can and it's impossible to reach any conclusions other than that if the AFL get sued, Essendon get sued too. After all, it was Essendon who injected the players and without those injections, there's nothing for the AFL to be responsible for. You still haven't answered one simple question- what could the AFL have done to stop the injections taking place?

The only problem Gazza with your argument is that the AFL did not have the policy in place that you suggest it did. It is a signature to the wada code administered in Australia by ASADA and under that code many peds are indeed legal ans illegal. It is not easy to find out the boundaries as one might think. All sports teams at a professional level including the AIS use peptides indeed the AIS bragged about their state of the art program on their website. All clubs try to get an advantage in this way and it is naive to believe it is not the case. The AFL have a procedure that each player and club doctor needs to sign a statement at the beginning of each season of the supplements that they have taken. The best hope for the AFL is that they followed the procedure and then establish that they have been misled by the employees ( the players). The question about Essendon (the club) reduced liability would depend upon steps taken by Hamiltion the man who had responsibility for the program and the actions taken by the board ( they have similar responsibilities to the AFL) but they are diminished as they are a subsidiary employer to the AFL.

They deny that they did anything illegal is correct .. Your assumption that they did ... Is just that an assumption. There is no tie between legality of the supplement program and the AFL responsibilities as an employer. The AFL proved in court last week ( accidentally and the judge did warn them) that they were the employer. Now there only avenue to deal with their responsibilities as employer ( without paying out large sums to players) is for the Tribunal to find them (Essendon) not guilty. However, in doing this they will then be open to a similar case due to the inaccuracy (and deliberate omission) of the interim report as the players could argue mental anguish ( evident in comments from Ryder, Crameri and Hardyingham). Now I am a rugby union and former coach to a current VFL standard and have followed the AFL closely as a matter of interest. It appears to me that the AFL have badly handled the situation from day dot. The media leaks from the AFL and ASADA, the commentary from people such as AD etc have really placed the sport in a untenable position and there needs to be a very intense investigation by all the AFL clubs to the handling of the saga and a restructure of its organisational arm.

Aransan, you really are clutching at straws. A typical Essendon manouvre. "We'll get the Switowski report" = Smokescreen. We'll pay off Dean Robinson, out of court - hide away. We'll pretend Kyle Reimers never existed and Paddy Ryder is just a worry wart when it comes to players and their families immediate heath Legal toing and throwing in an attempt to doge this witness, or that point of law. Dob this guy in and back up that one. Dispute that finding and wave this one. James is a legend and Steven Dank and the other "black ops" guys where just trying to improve the health and lifestyle of the players and add to the overall enjoyment of the Essendon football fan. They certainly weren't doing anything against the "spirit of the game" or undermining the "integrity" of the competition, by injecting "players" in their employ, with substances that hadn't been fully tested, or ultimately, sanctioned by a recognized sporting authority, in this field of sport science! But hey, let's get hung up on who Andy supports!!! I wouldn't care if he followed the Toledo Mudhens - the points he makes are on the mark and only dilllusional bombers fans seem to take exception to this sort of critique - why? The only conclusion I can come to, past loyalty to a club who clearly sought to gain an advantage outside the letter of the law (AFL style) is a lack of intelligence (IQ) or a willingness to be suckered along with the supporters who have no idea. Which are you?

Andy still hasn't told us the club he barracks for. Apparently the clubs have found some magic pudding that provides subsidies to everyone -- free money for all.

Black ops to me implies illegal or borderline illegal operation. The AFL may have heard rumors after the program have been running but they also have a drug testing program and rules stating you can't take peds. now if a club runs a covert plan and players don't report their supplements to the AFL or the drug authority how is the AFL responsible. You can't be a mind reader the players are not robots mindlessly following direction. If they wish to make a claim i would think they would have a very poor chance of receiving anything from the AFL. In fact unless they can prove they did proper checks i would think Essendon could even claim a reduced liabilty to any damages.

"Teams have secret game plans and closed training sessions." That's right Paul, and Essendon's choice to do things in secret means they can't turn around and say the AFL knew all about it. The club still deny they haven't done anything illegal nor anything to harm their players. Until the club admits this, they can't say the AFL knew that illegal or anti-health things were going on. And somehow I don't think Essendon would want to admit this publicly, unless they want their legal insurance premiums to go up even further.

You need to understand the term black ops - it basically means to keep secret from the opposition and therefore it is does not imply illegality. Teams have secret game plans and closed training sessions for example. this is a normal procedure so Essendons plan was to stop opposition teams from knowing about it to the AFL who expressed knowledge of it via both Hardcourt Clothier and AD. The fact that the AFL had knowledge of the program ( expressed publicly) and has Been proven to be the employer of the players via their own court action last week makes them open to such a legal challenge as Nathan Lovett Murray and any other player and the publicly expressed concerns make this more so. By the way this is the same as the concussion laws and the AFL responded to by implementing the testing regime and the expressed concerns. The best the AFL can hope for is to minimise the costs by showing they had processes in place that were subverted deliberatly by the employee (the players)

Carlton Aransan -- We bring quite a bit to the party as well. No need to worry about that.

I love your hypocrisy Aransan. On one side you say it is nobody's business how Essendon's finances are. On the other hand you say it is your business if certain clubs are receiving subsidies. All clubs- regardless of their wealth- receive their own set of subsidies. Essendon gets superior blockbuster revenue while the Bulldogs get CBF handouts. What everyone is allowed to hope for in return is that each club is well-managed as it can be. Which my club is and Essendon aren't.

No that is not correct. The applicant has to prove that the AFL is the employer( court did this last week). Therefore the AFL must show that it had the workplace health and safety procedures in place and that they were enforced just like any other employer. The employers responsibility is to ensure that dangerous practices are not allowed to exist hence mining companies testing workers for alcohol etc on entering sires. The AFL procedures require a player to list the supplements etc he has taken prior to round 1 of each season. If these have not been collected, checked and acted upon they are in serious legal strife. Some commentators such as Tracy Holmes have been onto this for a while.

So who do you barrack for? Perhaps we are subsidising you. There are a number of teams that are very important to the financial success of the AFL and I would include all the non-Victorian teams. There are a couple of teams whose supporters come out of the woodwork when they are successful such as Carlton and Richmond. Essendon is financially sound regardless of how they are going and it is no-one's business outside the club how their finances are.

How dare the AFL allow NLM to willingly participate in a program that was specifically hidden from the AFL?

"Thank Essendon for the strength that they contribute to the AFL both in interest to the competition and the money that they bring to the league." Recently I heard someone use that argument to say that every Grand Final should be contested by Essendon and Collingwood, because TV rights and match-day tickets would fetch a better price that way and all clubs would benefit.

For anyone to sue the AFL over the programme, they would have to prove that the AFL actually had the power to shut the programme down. I haven't read all the rules on this but one would assume the AFL couldn't have shut it down unless they had evidence that it was a bad programme, either for ASADA reasons or for player health reasons. As we have seen, it can take time getting such evidence together. Just because the AFL have evidence against Essendon now doesn't mean they could've easily acquired that evidence 3 years ago, especially given Essendon's attempts at secrecy.

Sorry, this is all rubbish. These supposed concerns about finance by so called members of other clubs are just part of the baiting of Essendon players and supporters that has been going on for nearly two years. Please just worry about the finances of your own club and thank Essendon for the strength that they contribute to the AFL both in interest to the competition and the money that they bring to the league. The value of the television rights alone would be worth significantly less without Essendon and we are talking about tens of millions of dollars during the life of a TV contract.