Footy Classified | PUNT ROAD END | Richmond Tigers Forum
  • IMPORTANT // Please look after your loved ones, yourself and be kind to others. If you are feeling that the world is too hard to handle there is always help - I implore you not to hesitate in contacting one of these wonderful organisations Lifeline and Beyond Blue ... and I'm sure reaching out to our PRE community we will find a way to help. T.

Footy Classified

tigertim said:
How does a not guilty not vindicate Hirds, Essendon and the players stance over the last 2 years?
Click to expand...

Because a 'not comfortably satisfied' reason sounds unconvincing that they really were not guilty. Insufficient evidence proves evidence was there but mis-handled and not proven by the prosecutor. ASADA didn't have enough witnesses to testify against the Bummers.

Why was Hird apologising?
 
The tribunal rejected the notion Thymosin Alpha was used.
They were comfortably satisfied Dank had possession of Thymosin Beta 4, but not comfortably satisfied it was for his role at Essendon.
The injection regime timetable perfectly matches the half-life properties of Thymosin Beta 4, and not any other Thymosin.
During interrogation, Essendon players said they were told by Dank they were receiving 'Thymosin', in a needle, and they saw "Thymosin' on it.
Dank said he injected players with Thymosin Beta 4 in an interview, apparently unaware it was banned (he again argued it wasn't banned recently).
The Tribunal are comfortably satisfied that Thymosin Beta 4 was banned at the time.

These are facts.
It's astonishing how the tribunal were not comfortably satisfied. But then again, it's the same guy who gave Barry Hall the all-clear for the 2005 Grand Final.

How are these actions vindicated?
James Hird tried to get all the evidence thrown out on a technicality, to avoid a trial. Why squash the evidence?
Each player received 1000s of injections in the stomach, many off-site away from professionals, including being chased up by Dank at training and injected on the field.
There are no records of what went into their body.
The players felt "Bigger, stronger, faster" and were "amazed" are how big they became after only 2 weeks.
Jobe admitted to taking AOD, which was an experimental drug unapproved for human use.
A number of other drugs were given to players. Records cannot be found.
Hal Hunter is suing the club for not providing him with his own medical records.

I don't care if the guy who gave Barry Hall the all-clear for the 2005 Grand Finals says "I'm not comfortably satisfied any player received Thymosin Beta 4" - Essendon instigated a team-wide injection regime without documentation and are linked to a number of banned drugs in a preseason that led to them 'shooting up' to 2nd on the ladder before injuries hit.

Essendon are not vindicated.
Essendon are much closer on the spectrum to 'guilty' than 'innocent' regardless of Barry Hall's lifesaver not being 'comfortably satisfied' of TB4 alone. This whole saga stinks, simply put.
 
Chimptastic said:
The tribunal rejected the notion Thymosin Alpha was used.
They were comfortably satisfied Dank had possession of Thymosin Beta 4, but not comfortably satisfied it was for his role at Essendon.
The injection regime timetable perfectly matches the half-life properties of Thymosin Beta 4, and not any other Thymosin.
During interrogation, Essendon players said they were told by Dank they were receiving 'Thymosin', in a needle, and they saw "Thymosin' on it.
Dank said he injected players with Thymosin Beta 4 in an interview, apparently unaware it was banned (he again argued it wasn't banned recently).
The Tribunal are comfortably satisfied that Thymosin Beta 4 was banned at the time.

These are facts.
It's astonishing how the tribunal were not comfortably satisfied. But then again, it's the same guy who gave Barry Hall the all-clear for the 2005 Grand Final.

How are these actions vindicated?
James Hird tried to get all the evidence thrown out on a technicality, to avoid a trial. Why squash the evidence?
Each player received 1000s of injections in the stomach, many off-site away from professionals, including being chased up by Dank at training and injected on the field.
There are no records of what went into their body.
The players felt "Bigger, stronger, faster" and were "amazed" are how big they became after only 2 weeks.
Jobe admitted to taking AOD, which was an experimental drug unapproved for human use.
A number of other drugs were given to players. Records cannot be found.
Hal Hunter is suing the club for not providing him with his own medical records.

I don't care if the guy who gave Barry Hall the all-clear for the 2005 Grand Finals says "I'm not comfortably satisfied any player received Thymosin Beta 4" - Essendon instigated a team-wide injection regime without documentation and are linked to a number of banned drugs in a preseason that led to them 'shooting up' to 2nd on the ladder before injuries hit.

Essendon are not vindicated.
Essendon are much closer on the spectrum to 'guilty' than 'innocent' regardless of Barry Hall's lifesaver not being 'comfortably satisfied' of TB4 alone. This whole saga stinks, simply put.
Click to expand...

Thats what i don't understand either, if Dank said he injected them with TB4 and it was legal and they have matching record that indicate dosages etc given to the players how can they come the tribunal can come to the conclusion they did.
 
RemoteTiger said:
The "Legal Battle" you refer to is the very foundation of our society - without our legal system there would be anarchy.

This legal system is what we all must abide by. Some try to get around it - some try to buy their way through it. In the end most get caught.

Accept this legal decision or form a lynch mob and go hang the culprits - I know which society I prefer to live in.........
Click to expand...

Who is forming lynch mobs? Come off it, overly dramatic, straw man bulldust.

The nub of it is, either, 1) at worst the players took banned drugs but got off due to lack of evidence, OR, 2) at best, the players took unknown substances, everybody has admitted to this, it was the central plank of the defence. This is the best case scenario: they willingly and knowingly took UNKNOWN SUBSTANCES.

The ludicrousness of the latter option makes it obvious, to me at least, that it was used as a cynical defence to get off the former option.

You may think that is all fine, not me.
 
Chimptastic said:
The tribunal rejected the notion Thymosin Alpha was used.
They were comfortably satisfied Dank had possession of Thymosin Beta 4, but not comfortably satisfied it was for his role at Essendon.
The injection regime timetable perfectly matches the half-life properties of Thymosin Beta 4, and not any other Thymosin.
During interrogation, Essendon players said they were told by Dank they were receiving 'Thymosin', in a needle, and they saw "Thymosin' on it.
Dank said he injected players with Thymosin Beta 4 in an interview, apparently unaware it was banned (he again argued it wasn't banned recently).
The Tribunal are comfortably satisfied that Thymosin Beta 4 was banned at the time.

These are facts.
It's astonishing how the tribunal were not comfortably satisfied. But then again, it's the same guy who gave Barry Hall the all-clear for the 2005 Grand Final.

How are these actions vindicated?
James Hird tried to get all the evidence thrown out on a technicality, to avoid a trial. Why squash the evidence?
Each player received 1000s of injections in the stomach, many off-site away from professionals, including being chased up by Dank at training and injected on the field.
There are no records of what went into their body.
The players felt "Bigger, stronger, faster" and were "amazed" are how big they became after only 2 weeks.
Jobe admitted to taking AOD, which was an experimental drug unapproved for human use.
A number of other drugs were given to players. Records cannot be found.
Hal Hunter is suing the club for not providing him with his own medical records.

I don't care if the guy who gave Barry Hall the all-clear for the 2005 Grand Finals says "I'm not comfortably satisfied any player received Thymosin Beta 4" - Essendon instigated a team-wide injection regime without documentation and are linked to a number of banned drugs in a preseason that led to them 'shooting up' to 2nd on the ladder before injuries hit.

Essendon are not vindicated.
Essendon are much closer on the spectrum to 'guilty' than 'innocent' regardless of Barry Hall's lifesaver not being 'comfortably satisfied' of TB4 alone. This whole saga stinks, simply put.
Click to expand...
You're confusing your own emotions with the AFL decision. There was not sufficient evidence of guilt. Simple. You don't have to like the decision.

And in terms of vindication, maybe I should've said this. Hird, Esendon etc would FEEL vindicated by the decision.
 
As a father of two boys, the biggest injustice here is that there are 34 young men who have been subjected to hundreds of injections and no one is prepared to tell them exactly what they were injected with.

For that fact alone the club needs to be taken to task in the toughest possible way.
 
If it was all above board as people connected with Essendon during this have said many times that it was, then why didn't they keep any records? How can you possibly run a scientific program injecting your players with a medical substance to improve their performance and not keep any records of it? How do you measure it's effectiveness on a player by player basis if there are no records about what was used and who was given what and what dosages and how they reacted to it? If what they gave the players was completely legal and not banned why won't they now tell everyone what they were injecting into the players? It's all been cleared, hasn't it? There are still plenty of questions to be answered, and I don't think they ever will be. I rather hope that Essendon get smashed with every game they play from now on and that they're left with little choice, but to sack Teflon Jimmy because he's an incompetent coach who can barely spell the word ethical, let alone say it with a straight face.
 
CarnTheTiges said:
I rather hope that Essendon get smashed with every game they play from now on and that they're left with little choice, but to sack Teflon Jimmy because he's an incompetent coach who can barely spell the word ethical, let alone say it with a straight face.
Click to expand...

Yep, the only way to do it now. Go Swans!
 
CarnTheTiges said:
I don't generally do this, TF, but for the rest of this season I will be barracking hard for every team Essendon plays.
Click to expand...
Even Colingwood?
 
RemoteTiger said:
The Tribunal has come down with a decision that says NOT GUILTY - the judges could not say beyond reasonable doubt that the Essendon Players were administered a banned substance.

Yet all posts on here are sentencing the Club and the Coach as if they are guilty.

THEY ARE NOT *smile*ING GUILTY. FACT

This verdict vindicates a lot of people's actions over the last 26 months,
Click to expand...

It doesn't actually because key witnesses refused to appear.
 
CarnTheTiges said:
I don't generally do this, TF, but for the rest of this season I will be barracking hard for every team Essendon plays.
Click to expand...

me too, my most hated club without a doubt.
 
I barrack for richmond, and every other team that plays Essendon that week! No other team comes close for the hatred I feel for that club!!!
 
strummerville said:
I barrack for richmond, and every other team that plays Essendon that week! No other team comes close for the hatred I feel for that club!!!
Click to expand...

Yep i hate them also.
 
RemoteTiger said:
The Tribunal has come down with a decision that says NOT GUILTY - the judges could not say beyond reasonable doubt that the Essendon Players were administered a banned substance.

Yet all posts on here are sentencing the Club and the Coach as if they are guilty.

THEY ARE NOT *smile*ING GUILTY. FACT

This verdict vindicates a lot of people's actions over the last 26 months, Hird's, the club and the players. But it fairly lambastes ASADA for their p!ss-poor handling of the matter and the Gillard Federal Government who 26 months ago tried to take the focus off the Carbon Tax debacle by creating a sensational sports-drug story - and dutifully the media led Australians followed.

For those of you who wish to boo Essendon players and coach, the club - all you are doing is show your inane ability to follow the crowd like lost sheep.

Accept the umpires decision and get on with supporting Richmond into the top 4 for this season (Which is quite possible - if we had a game breaker against quality opposition, I would say highly likely - but right now I do not see such a player in the Richmond team).

Accept the judicial ruling and lets get on and play footy.
Click to expand...

I can't agree with that Remote. Found not guilty by an internal ruling which could have a vested interest in the result doesn't equate to not guilty FACT in my mind.I Will reserve judgement until avenues of appeal are exhaunted or ignored. Essendon will always be tarnished in my mind for continuously jabbing players and not advising them, or their concerned families, what exactly was used. I haven't wasted much emotional energy on this situation but in my opinion it's a very dark day for Australian sport ànd the AFL in particular.
 
Baloo said:
As a father of two boys, the biggest injustice here is that there are 34 young men who have been subjected to hundreds of injections and no one is prepared to tell them exactly what they were injected with.

For that fact alone the club needs to be taken to task in the toughest possible way.
Click to expand...

Yep. Is this bubbles boiling with players' families or are they a flock of sheep who accept the verdict as all is well and good?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
< List management 2021-2022 | SHOULD CLUBS CHALLENGE RESULTS? >
Official PRE merch now on Redbubble!
Top Bottom