The banned Essendon 34 will be damned forever.
Drug cheats. Stupid. Naive. Secretive. Brainwashed by the cult of Hird.
People have made up their minds, and they are not for turning.
Mind you, we haven’t really heard from any of the Essendon players yet. We heard from Michael Hurley through a pre-recorded interview on the Footy Show, but even that lacked depth.
Hurley was emotional and clearly scarred by everything that has happened, but any insight from the players into what really happened at Essendon during 2012, is still left unsaid.
And yet, much of the football public have made up their mind. I heard both sides of the argument coming through loud and clear on talkback radio as I drove to work.
Let’s be honest, most Essendon fans have a more favourable view of Essendon than those who barrack for opposition clubs. However, let’s not for a second pretend that those who don’t barrack for Essendon are completely objective.
Give me a break.
Essendon is not a much-loved club. Even before the drug saga they were hated. Those who walk around with their chest out stating that they can see the issue objectively because they don’t barrack for Essendon are kidding themselves.
The curious thing is that most people I talk to haven’t read the AFL interim report. They haven’t read the summary of findings from the independent AFL tribunal, nor have they bothered to read the report released by the Court of Arbitration for Sport, outlining their findings following their guilty verdict in January this year.
Furthermore, most have not read books such as The Straight Dope, which, while not painting a pretty picture for any of the key players in the saga, provides a lot of fascinating insights into the AFL’s biggest scandal. None of those I’ve talked to have spoken directly to any of the Essendon players about what happened and none seemed to have done their own investigative research.
They have, however, read articles, favouring some over others. It seems most like the ones that get stuck into Hird and, now it seems, the players.
Many footy pundits love to cite the fact that the Essendon players failed to declare Thymosin on their ASADA forms, yet few players, if any, have discussed this publicly. None have spoken about it in great depth. They may very well be able to provide some clarity around this.
Whatever way you look at it, it is a baffling case. Confusing, bizarre and downright odd. I’ve read a lot about the case and followed it closely and I can’t for the life of me figure out exactly what happened, who did what and who knew what others didn’t.
But, many footy fans have made up their mind. It’s very simple for them. They see this issue as black and white. Yet, given most people haven’t read half of what’s available to them, I’m left scratching my head wondering, ‘how the hell do they know?’
Redb
Roar Guru
Opinion is polarised & no amount of reasoned argument will sway. Let them hate us it will make beating their team all the sweeter. ⚫️?
Lamby
Roar Rookie
You are living in la la land. WADA, the code and the process have been set up to catch athletes (and countries) who are actively trying to cheat and bypass all the systems put in place to catch them (see cycling, athletics, weight lifting) . So what WADA do is not let an athlete compete unless they sign away a bunch of rights that would apply to normal citizens - including most of the 'burdens of proof'' that common law is built around. This is because in order to prosecute a 'drug cheat' you would need to catch them injecting (as you can not randomly drug test an individual on the street). So WADA is allowed to include a bunch of circumstantial evidence to prosecute. In a criminal case you would need to prove all steps in a chain - in a WADA case you are allowed to prove steps 1, 2, be missing 3 & 4, and show step 5 and 'infer' that there can be no other conclusion than 'trying to cheat'. 'Scrapping the WADA charade' would bring us back to the free for all drug cheating in sport. You are not seeing the Essendon case in the wider world drugs in sport issue - where WADA assume that everyone is trying to cheat. To WADA, they see a bunch of athletes going 'off-site' to get injected with substances where there is no record, the club doctor is not notified, there are substances being injected that are not put on declaration forms, there is a bunch of links from the doctor doing the injecting to banned substances - it looks guilty! The athletes could not prove they were innocent, WADA proved that there was enough evidence according to the less 'burden of proof' rules to find them guilty.
Philip Maguire
Guest
According to The Age Hawthorn pioneered injection science to gain an advantage. Odd isn't it? And it is not odd that 48 non-Essendon players when tested had higher levels of thymosin beta 4 than the Essendon players? They could not have been found guilty in a criminal court on the evidence presented by WADA and yet the penalty levied had a more significant impact on their lives than many criminal penalties. It's time to scrap the WADA charade and establish a real anti-doping appeals court under Federal Legislation that operates under the same system as the Federal Court. Indeed, why not associate it with the Federal Court? It would hear ASADA appeals and appeals by athletes who have been sanctioned by various tribunals. Let's do it.
Dad of footy-playing kids
Guest
Yep - micro-management of every aspect of players lives. Except what drugs were injected. And the author wants us to listen to what Essendon Club or Players have to say.
Lamby
Roar Rookie
"Seriously – Why would you accept face value of someone that can not tell you what chemicals were administered to people in their care." Especially when the club can give you the weekly stats for skinfold/beep/100m/3k tests going back 20 years for every single player.
DB
Guest
Best response I've ever read on the saga!
Pumping Dougie
Guest
Spot-on Tom. Whatever innocence the Essendon players (including Crameri) protest, they cannot deny they accepted the club's program, of which the objective was to gain an advantage over the rest of the competition through injecting chemicals into their bodies with needles and to keep secret about it. And yet a quarter of their list chose not to. I've read all the stuff you cite too. I don't think there's any doubt they have done the wrong thing.
Dad of footy-playing kids
Guest
I have not spoken with any murderer, nor read the transcripts of cases, however am comfortably satisfied that due process was applied and if found guilty, and confirmed on appeal - that will satisfy me. In this matter, a genuinely independent body has found sufficient for guilty verdict, that will do me (not an AFL under-the-carpet tribunal). There appears to have been nothing but lies and misdirection in the Essendon case, so why even bother asking people from Essendon. Seriously - Why would you accept face value of someone that can not tell you what chemicals were administered to people in their care.
Paul D
Roar Guru
Ignorance has never stopped people holding opinions on issues, witness gay marriage, global warming, the economy, boats, refugees, Trump and Essendon football club. My views are much the same as Tom, Essendon tried to do something a little dodgy and copped a big whack in part as punishment and part as a deterrent to other clubs. There’s enough links in the chain for me to believe their punishment was warranted.
Cat
Roar Guru
That is why the smart people don't put much weight into the media stories. We read the actual findings from the AFL tribunal and from CAS, especially the evidence contained in appendices. Sounds like you formed an opinion based on nothing at all.
Jakarta Fan
Roar Rookie
Evidence presented and accepted by WADA is that the players, most likely, were administered an illegal drug. No evidence was presented or accepted that all the 34 were administered this drug, but some evidence indicated that at least some players were. Therefore, it seemed probable that all did. However, there was no evidence that the players knew that they were taking an illegal substance, but that is irrelevant. Motive is not in question. The question is, in the balance of probabilities was an illegal drug administered? On the balance of probabilities, some were, maybe all were. Therefore, collectively all are found guilty. All are suspended. Were the players naieve? Probably. Was Hird naieve? Probably. Was Dank guilty of administering an illegal drug without the players, Hird, or the club knowing it? Probably. And he has been suspended for life. Yet, have we seen justice? The players, right or wrong have served their time. Crowly did his and there has been no cries of "shame" from the public. That's how it should be, so it's time to let the players be and to not hound them any more. It's over. Let's all move on!
Ian Whitchurch
Guest
What I do know is CJC-1295 has a number and not a name because an Argentinian bloke died during it's clinical tests. https://forums.t-nation.com/t/igf-1-and-cjc-1295-questions/97345 is a dodgy source that was available before Dank started work at Cronulla or Essendon. Now, the stuff was being used at Cronulla http://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/sport/nrl/cronulla-sharks-were-allegedly-injected-with-a-performance-enhancing-peptide-prior-to-matches/story-e6frexnr-1226598549985 Was it being used at Essendon ? I dont know. There are no records. But what I do know is that if it was, 34 Essendon players would have neglected to tell not only ASADA, but also their managers, but also their union, but also their team doctor, just like they did with all the other drugs. Am I happy that none of those players are dead ? Yes.Very happy. Vale Jon Mannah, who made the mistake of trusting Stephen Dank.
me too
Guest
tom's reply seemed somewhat more informed and objective than your emotional and childish retort.
Cat
Roar Guru
Like you voicing your option on Tom's post without knowing anything yourself? What makes you think anyone cares about your opinion regarding Tom's opinion? This is an opinion site. That's why we are allowed to converse, to give our opinions and our thoughts. Just because you have a different opinion does make your any more right or wrong. My opinion is you sound like a person who has read very little of the evidence widely available and had made up your mind before even that. I doubt no matter how much or how good the evidence presented is you wouldn't believe it.
TomC
Roar Guru
Classy stuff, Rohan.
Kurt
Guest
Oh good lord. I admit I haven't read every piece of evidence pertaining to this case, but do you know who has? The Court of Arbitration for Sport, who confirmed the players' guilt. Pardon me if I give more weight to their opinion than footy fans.
Rohan
Guest
They only part of what you said that had any credibility is "I dont know" and "I believe". Since you know nothing of any value on the matter, what makes you thinking anyone cares about what you believe or the mind you have made up? The whole article is about the ignorance of people voicing their opinion without fact and there you go following it up with exactly that. Haha I have come to change my mind our your post now, you have really jus given the author a free rerefence. Nice job Mr mind made up.
Julie
Guest
Most people don't care for the facts, just believe biased media articles, to honestly think players deliberately took PED's shows ignorance as well as their own bias. FYI Ess players didnt list TB4 on test forms as most didn't receive, weren't tested or according to asada date TB4 alleged importation hadn't occurred ! Media won't let facts get in way of good story & readers won't bother finding facts !!
Mike from tari
Guest
What a strange article, CAS verdict is the verdict, so that's the end of it, those players that went along with Hird & Danks cheated, that's why they were suspended, no ifs or buts.
TomC
Roar Guru
Other players have given interviews. Brent Prismall and Hal Hunter are two that spring to mind. Sam, everyone believes their club gets the rough end of things. Essendon aren't a particularly hated club, and while there's some natural schadenfreude from other footy fans there's no reason to think the Bombers were treated worse than any other club would've been. In fact, a large, powerful club with many friends in the media almost certainly comes off better than - say - the Bulldogs or the Power would've done. And less wealthy clubs wouldn't have had the resources to fight as hard as Essendon did, nor to recover as quickly as they're likely to. You might dismiss my opinion as biased for some reason or other, but I've read the interim report, the CAS verdict, and most of what I could get my hands surrounding this case, and many other drugs in sport cases. What I know is that the Essendon players engaged in a highly secretive program to take substances without any serious attempt to validate what they were actually taking. I know that they believed they were taking Thymosin, but not one of them said so on their doping control form. I know that neither the club nor the players took reasonable precautions to make sure everything they were taking was valid. What I believe is that the Thymosin repeatedly referred to was most likely TB-4, and that on the balance of probability some or all of the 34 players that were part of the program were administered that banned substance. I don't know whether they deliberately set out to cheat - most people say they didn't, but I genuinely don't know - but I do know that they deliberately chose not to make sure they were doing the right thing. As far as I'm concerned, an anti-PED regime requires individual responsibility for the athletes, and those who put themselves at risk of taking a banned substance are culpable the same as those who fail a drug test. So yes, I've made up my mind.