Former Essendon coach Mark Thompson expects the AFL club’s banned players to sue for $50 million over the long-running supplements scandal.
While the three-time premiership coach at Geelong said he would not join the legal action, he said the 34 current and past players would soon seek damages from the AFL.
Of those players, 17 are still playing in the AFL, with 12 at Essendon and five at other clubs.
They are in the midst of a last-ditch Swiss appeal to clear their names of the doping suspensions.
“They’ve lost three years, four years now,” Thompson told Triple M.
“And I don’t think it will be over next year, either.
“I think it’s just been handled poorly – I think we all admit that.
“They will start to sue … about $50 million, probably.
“I just know it is going to happen.
“I’m not interested in doing it, no.”
It is expected that the banned players will settle out of court with Essendon.
The AFL fined Thompson for his part in the supplements regime that has done so much damage to the Bombers.
Thompson was an assistant coach under James Hird at the time of the regime in 2011-12.
The Essendon premiership captain coached the club in 2014 while James Hird served a 12-month AFL suspension.
Thompson also pleaded with sports scientist Stephen Dank to reveal what was given to the players in the supplements program.
“That is the only thing that matters – nobody cares who is guilty or not,” Thompson said.
“They (the players) just want to know.”
Thompson and Dank have been in the news this week, with the former Essendon captain and coach promoting his autobiography.
Police are investigating after Dank’s house was peppered with bullets early on Saturday morning.
northerner
Guest
Sorry, but he had responsibilities for the players and he failed to observe them. So did Hird, and the players aren't innocent either. None of these guys were being held captive in a cave and forcibly injected - they did it, either knowing what they were doing, or making sure they didn't ask any questions. The players are paying the price now, and the coaches involved should have paid the price as well. I'd have them banned from the game, myself.
northerner
Guest
Sorry, but if the players took illegal supplements, that's on them, not the AFL. It wasn't the AFL injecting them, after all.
Andrew
Guest
Those forms were likely destroyed like all the evidence
Casper
Guest
Slane - having consent forms doesn't mean there was an intent to do something dodgy. Not even Essendon's harshest critics in the media believe that.
BigAl
Guest
They signed - period! - and Bomber's Legal Counsel is his ouija board.
Penster
Guest
Correct. Comment of the day.
Mike Huber
Roar Pro
TWAS What's your problem with critical analysis ? Indeed , are you the selff anointed literary cop on The Roar ? Many people have successful AFL careers , doesn't mean that aren't of dubious character and lack a moral compass .
Train Without A Station
Roar Guru
We all know media communication is the key to coaching...
Train Without A Station
Roar Guru
Hopefully one day he can grow into bring a hero that personally bags people on an Internet forum after such a poor career in the AFL
Lroy
Guest
@Brian... I dont think the players signed up to take anything illegal, that will be the basis of their argument I imagine. ;-)
Mikey
Guest
MF - there is no doubt that the AFL made mistakes and I am sure would do some things differently if they had their time again. But to say " From the players’ perspective, they have an even bigger beef with the AFL than Essendon" is a ludicrous statement. At the end of the day, the players willingly participated in what is now universally accepted as a very dodgy programme. They put their complete trust in the coaches and health professionals employed by the EFC and those people have failed them badly - and that includes Mark Thompson. So whatever level of culpability the AFL has in this sad saga,most of the blame lies unequivocally with the EFC and I think most of the players would clearly understand that now.
Mister Football
Roar Guru
No problem with people being made an example of - as long as direct evidence of use of a prohibited substance exists for each of the players about whom an example is being made.
Mister Football
Roar Guru
What we learned from the various court cases which preceded the court cases which preceded the tribunals, etc, etc is that the employment contracts are held with the AFL - so the AFL is every bit responsible for OH&S matters as each club. If that weren't enough, there were many, many points along the way where the AFL could have intervened, or could have done things differently - in fact, they have changed their policies to reflect that - meaning their original policies were not up to scratch. From the players' perspective, they have an even bigger beef with the AFL than Essendon. At no stage were the players' right to privacy and confidentiality met as exists under the NAD Scheme and the ASADA Act - and that was entirely because of the AFL's role. They are the ones who used their powers to collect the evidence, they had custody of the evidence, and they are the ones which selectively leaked juicy bits and pieces to the media - the original idea was to get James Hird and see the players free, but they stuffed it up royally.
Mike Huber
Roar Pro
What a clown Thomson is . Lied to all and sundry at Geelong that he was badly " burnt out" and needed to get away from the game . Turned out he was wheeling and dealing with Essendon while still contracted at Geelong and spinning a web of lies and deception. Goes to Essendon and oversees the supplement scandal and now claims he, Hird and the poor players didn't know what they took . All what was needed from day 1 was an honest admission what was going on at Essendon , instead we got more of your lies .
Slane
Guest
Why else do consent forms exist if not to limit exposure to litigation?
T-Bone
Guest
How Bomber coached a team, any team, to 2 flags is stupefying. He is the poorest communicator in the media. The Geelong teams of 2007 and 2009 must have been set on autopilot. PS The players only have themselves to blame. They were sheep and had to be made an example of.
AR
Guest
If that is what he meant, then Mark Thomson shouldn't be allowed near any AFL club again.
AR
Guest
What was the club thinking? That they'd get an edge? That they'd be ahead of other clubs? That they'd be fitter? Stronger? My god.
Casper
Guest
Talk about living in fantasyland. As if the club would have been thinking that.
Ian Whitchurch
Guest
EFC made sure the players signed consent forms for the drugs. This meant EFC and Dank were protected from players suing them. Add in the fact that none of the drug cheats told the AFL, or the AFLPA, or ASADA, or their managers, about it makes it pretty certain any lawsuit against the AFL would fail.