Essendon doping saga: What did we learn?

Although i have argued against him in this old article (and still disagree), i think you're a being a bit harsh AM. Also i always thought Mr F was a Bulldogs man.

Sorry to rain on your parade mr football - but you have been 100% wrong on EVERY point throughout this sorry saga - that's right - 100% W.R.O.N.G. Suck it up princess - your club is a disgrace.

"none of it represents actual evidence that any of the 34 footballers used TB4" To be more accurate you should replace the word 'evidence' in the foregoing with 'iron clad proof'. A great deal of doping cases don't have 100% proof in their evidence but still proceed and athletes are found guilty. But the point is that the CAS does not need iron clad proof. It reviewed the evidence that was presented and found to a level of comfortable satisfaction that doping had occurred.

I'm well over fifty and I remember all of those things. I think the simpler thing to do would be, as I suggest, allow legal drugs in sport. I'd say in 10-15 years time, that's probably going to be the case – the entire philosophy behind drugs in sport will change and the entire business of athletes peeing in little plastic jars after every game will cease. Just like the so-called 'war on drugs', it's a losing battle and having organisations such as WADA and ASADA (who both came up with different decisions in the Essendon case – explain that one (and without claiming this garbage that ASADA is under-resourced) – will be seen as a waste of time. I don't really care about Essendon or James Hird – sure, the rules are in place, and they chose to ignore them, but my point is that the structure of drugs in sport needs to be re-assessed. I'm of the opinion that legal drugs, especially those taking milkshakes that you can readily purchase from a health food store, or painkillers that you can purchase from a chemist without a prescription, should be permitted in professional sports. Read this from the British Journal of Sports Medicine: http://bjsm.bmj.com/content/38/6/666.full It gives some food for thought – it's from 2004, but there are some other learned articles available online. So much of the garbage that we read online is just sentimental and emotional opinion piece arguing Yes or No, without any pharmacological, historical, legal, or political knowledge. So much of WADA has its basis from the Cold War, which lingers until today – it's run by athletes and officials from the West during the time of Soviet-bloc domination, that feel like they missed out on medals in the 1960s and 1970s, so it's pay-back time. A lot of people have jumped onto the WADA bandwagon (depending on whether they support Essendon or not) but, for me, the real issue is about WADA and its grandstanding and politically motivated puritans that have got this idea of sport as a 19th century old-boys club noble pursuit, displaying the best of humanity (its so-called 'Spirit of Sport'). It's not – it's a profession and a business, just like everything else in the world.

you obviously aren't old enough to remember the dying days of Amateur Rugby where quite a lot of the players were amateur in Name only " shamateur" I believe the wags called it, not getting paid directly by their clubs but by third party agreements. Having 2 tiers of sport would head in the same direction. and then there'd be no putting the genie back in the bottle:( How about people just not cheat? Those that do should be banned. That's the far simpler course of action.

kd we all take drugs. In fact, many of us also drink milk shakes. As Ahmed Saad teaches us, all athletes must be careful in drinking milk shakes as well.

andy You really need to separate the Club (and Hird), who combined did spend a small fortune - and the 34 individual players. When you unpick the CAS's strings of spaghetti approach in finding them guilty, the acceptance of bold assumpations and massive leaps in logic, and also see the down right dismissal of individual circumstances - you can see that whatever legal represenation the players had - it was pretty hopeless. Then again, it probably doens't matter - the CAS's ruling is final - it can do whatever it wants - it has stopped acting like an independent tribunal: http://www.abc.net.au/radionational/programs/breakfast/whats-wrong-with-wada-and-the-court-of-arbitration-for-sport/7081534 The only hope is that Australian sportsmen can follow the lead of these European athletes and find a way to appeal beyond the CAS in local jurisdictions, because that is now their only hope of receiving natural justice.

Perhaps the solution is to allow legal drugs in sport. I find it ridiculous that there's a system where a player can be banned for drinking a sports milkshake on game day (any other day is OK), or for taking an over-the-counter pain killer for back pain, but someone taking ice (West Coast Eagles) or Thymosin B4 doesn't even get picked up during random drug testing. Pain killing injections and cortisone are OK, but pain killers with pseudoephedrine are not. Maybe even have two tiers of sports – Open, and Organic. Open sports, where all legal drugs and supplements can be used, and Organic sports, where self-righteous former political hacks like John Fahey and Dick Pound can test and pontificate for all they like (as well as giving themselves something to do), similar to the divide that existed between professional and amateur sports many years ago. I think it will be a matter of time before this happens. Remember that 40 years ago, there were teams of fanatics checking to see whether amateur players were receiving payments of any kind from their sports – professional players were barred from the Olympics. A tiered system for Open and Organic sports might result in something more sensible.

Take that up with the players & their legal team . That is how they wanted to be represented ...as a collective . Now they have been found guilty as a collective ....you think it's wrong . So after a verdict was handed down its suddenly not fair . Oh my Lol . You need to step away from this for awhile . You are not thinking rationally at all

Spot on Fox . The sad thing is there are still those who cannot see what happened . In the bubble 2+2=439.

Why is it that people on this site requote selectively and misquote? I'm not objecting to the suspensions, I'm objecting to the bans on the suspended players can speak to and where they can go. I mentioned 'Australians' because that's what the Essendon players are - Australian citizens. Nothing special about them but if other citizens of other countries are being told who they can't associate with as well, then that aspect of the WADA code should be looked at. Common sense should be applied - sure, Lance Armstrong actually used illegal drugs (not just ones that are on the WADA banned list) and deserved his penalties. But should a player be banned for drinking a milkshake on game day (Saad for 18 months) or taking a pharmacy pain killer (Crowley for 12 months)? If you think that's OK (I think it's outrageous) then maybe your expectations of 'clean' sports are too high.

No, Eddy, this is not an international body telling Aussies what to do. This is the AFL imposing the penalties that are required by the anti-doping code they agreed to follow. Anyway, why should Australians be "special" and not have the same sanctions that are imposed on Canadians, Americans, Kenyans, Brits, Germans, Spaniards, Turks and Italians?

But that one in all approach was what the lawyers for the club and the players presented. I think they simply assumed that they would get off, and didn't think it through. There may be one or two players with a right to feel aggrieved, but should they be aggrieved about the decision by CAS or by the strategy chosen by the club and the lawyers which lumped then in with the majority of players who aren't cleanskins on this matter? The players chose to be judged as a group, and CAS took them at their word.

Read what I said. I've not said 'it's a bit harsh', I've said that its fair enough that they've been banned but the ruling that they're not to set foot at Essendon FC or speak to any Essendon officials is over the top. This is an international body dictating to citizens of Australia who they can speak to and where they can go, a bit like the bikie legislation in Queensland, which was found to be unconstitutional. The ban for 12 months might be acceptable, but the rest of the sanctions are ridiculous.

Well personally, I disagree with the one in all in approach.

Milo Dank's infraction notice listed a range of supplements, and not just in relation to the AFL, it was in relation to other sports as well (at least two other sports were mentioned, I think baseball was one of them) - so there is no contradiction at all between Dank being suspended and the players not. Everything you say above is interesting, but none of it represents actual evidence that any of the 34 footballers used TB4, let alone all 34 (and it is pretty clear now that some of the 34 could not have been administered TB4, so they have suffered a great injustice).

Anyone who follows the game knows the admin is as corrupt as FIFA, just on a smaller scale. One of the biggest problems is that those who run the biggest competition run the whole game. There is no ARL equivalent. The AFL basically controls the state leagues only the SANFL has maintained any sense of independence), the junior ranks, the rules of the game, etc. Australian Football has no separation of powers, not even a pretense. And being as big as they are locally, the AFL clearly thought they were big enough to beat the world. Hopefully this is a wake up call. More likely the denials will continue, and this saga will be far from the last avoidable debacle built in hubris.

Eddy, you seem to be well ensconced in the gee this punishment is a bit harsh camp. I think its about right. there has to be a deterrent factor to stamp out doping in world sport. hence why Lance Armstrong has a life ban from pretty much all competitive sport anywhere ever. I'd say this punishment finally got the attention of the famously insular AFL footy world. The Herald sun said it best on the day with: "But if you listen to the fanboys of the football media, the players are nothing more than innocent victims and any penalty against them is a miscarriage of justice. The insular footy world is so used to treating grown men like children that the prospect of adults being held to account for their own actions seems utterly unfair." hear hear!

I still like it how Bombers still think that they did nothing wrong. I have lost all respect for James Hird who is supposed to be a highly intelligent bloke. Players are pretty much educated at a young age about drugs in sport from the various different sporting bodies. Alarm bells should have rung with the additional confidentiality form that was to be signed for the program. What is even more laughable they still all get paid their base salaries only, so its kind of like forced gardening leave but not allowed near club or AFL grounds. Even Hird was paid including his trip to France when suspended. What is even scarier is that they reckoned that there were no player records for the program. Wouldn't you want to keep records so that you are able effectively monitor the health of the players for any potential side effects? It would be interesting to see what will happen if the players take Bombers to court over their drug program. How much of the blamelies with both parties. It goes to prove that illegal drug taking didn't necessarily improve their on field performances.

As an amused bystander from up north having no interest in AFL I would like to say that the reputation up here is that the AFL admin is living in a parallel universe. They are so out of touch with reality its incredible to think that up to recently NRL fans wished we had an admin like the AFLs. The best thing that the NRL did was to bring in an outsider to run their competition. David Smith put News Limited, the NRL clubs and the so called Media experts offside because he brought an outsiders insight to the sport. As a result the sport has thrived and is going from strength to strength. Cronulla had the same problem but because Dave Smith dealt with it in the appropriate way its over with and the Sharks look to have a great year in front of them.Maybe that's what the AFL needs. Get rid of your CEO, bring in an outsider to run the company in a professional way and won't put up with the rubbish from the clubs and local media and maybe the game will get past this saga. Maybe the previous arrogant CEO retired because he could see what was coming!