ASADA doubles down

As we indicated:

This leaves ASADA in a very difficult position. They don’t have a case that’s going to stand up, yet as a bureaucracy it has to justify their wastage of taxpayer funds. So do they brazen it out and issue show cause notices and get crucified in the courts, or do they back away and hope nobody notices?

Bureaucracies just can’t help themselves. They can never admit to getting it wrong and can never admit to having wasted taxpayer dollars – so double down. Keep shaking the tree and hope you can get someone on a technicality.

So this evening ASADA issued show-cause notices. Listen to the interview with Matthew Lloyd – what I find remarkable is the implicit assumption that if lawyers get involved this will drag on for yet another season and that is somehow a “bad” thing.

The only person in this whole saga who has actually shown any backbone has been the club doctor, he went to court, and quickly was absolved of any guilt or allegation by the AFL.

So Paul Little – this is what they look like. Hire some if you can’t grow any yourself – it never pays anyone to roll over to an allegation if they think it to be untrue.

Go hard. Go nuclear. Take no prisoners.

This entry was posted in AFLgate. Bookmark the permalink.

74 Responses to ASADA doubles down

  1. Token

    I was wondering how long before Sinc got a post up

  2. Infidel Tiger

    No surprise.

    The ATO are probably still working out how to get Paul Hogan.

  3. Andrew

    Fat Andy’s legacy lives on!

  4. Alfonso

    Bwaaa….20 cent Labor intimidators doubling down.

    They hope the simple souls playing AFL will do a Hird.

  5. Grigory M

    The players nominated and the Essendon Club should tell ASADA to get stuffed.

  6. Token

    Its not like it is their money they are spending.

    Considering the time of year, people may say they are they ensuring they don’t underspend on their budget to ensure the pot gets refreshed again in 20 days time.

  7. Dr.Sir Fred Lenin

    There should be a lot more of maligned people threatening beaureaucrats and malicious political aparatchiks with legal action against their depradations on freedom..It should be made possiblefor citizens to launch actions against parties and politicians for gross mismanagement,reckless spending and blatant lyingthese acts should be punishable with fines ,cofiscation of proceeds of crime and incarceration fir considerable terms.Public servants guilty of dereliction of duty should be likewise sued and punished.anothe disgrcefull thing is the lawtradespersons ,aiding and abetting lying criminals to try to gain their release ,
    Lawtradespeople ,judges, parole board people should be punished for releasing recividist offenders ,who immediately commit another crime,put them in the same cell as the offenders.

  8. Bruce of Newcastle

    Hmpf, being assaulted by bureaucrats armed with QC’s is scary. I’d nearly prefer to be on the plains of the Euphrates shooting at ISIS kiddies. At least they can only behead you, whereas ASADA minions can make you suffer infinitely.

    This is exactly why Abbott should have a bonfire of the acronyms. The only way to stop such tin-pot dictators is to not have them. Also he should burn down the ABC while he’s at it, before they weigh in on ASADA’s side once more.

  9. Rabz

    All we have to worry about in the real football is the obscene corruption of FIFA.

    But there is the little matter of the world’s greatest sporting event looming on the horizon.

    ALPFL? Who gives a rodent’s!

    :)

  10. jupes

    From the AFL website:

    Show-cause notices require players and officials to explain, within 10 days, why they should not be handed infraction notices for breaching the WADA drug code.

    If ASADA doesn’t accept the explanation it then compiles a report on each player who may have breached the code.

    This report is then given to an independent group of experts which assesses the evidence and decides whether an infraction notice should be issued by ASADA and the AFL.

    If an infraction notice is issued, the player would be suspended immediately until the matter was resolved at a Tribunal.

    Of course the courts have to fit in there somewhere as well.

    My call: ZERO convictions resulting from this sordid saga.

  11. Grigory M

    But there is the little matter of the world’s greatest sporting event looming on the horizon.

    Yeah, Rabz – who will win the Oscar for the best pretend falling down effort to milk a penalty?

  12. steve

    So Mr Little, what exactly did rolling over the first time get you. We thought your bluster and blather when you first came in meant you would stand up for the Essendon Football Club, but instead you rolled over to the Fat Hairy Greek’s threats and ate some dirt. What did it get you? Essendon was punished without proof, without even a trial, and we are still standing in a steaming pile of doggie doodoo.
    There are two types of Essendon supporters, those that want this to go away and those that want justice. I am of the second variety. Take them to court. Make them prove what they claim you did…….and if they can’t go them for damages and get our draft picks back.

  13. Robert Blair

    Four AFL players are house-sharing just around the corner from me (its a big house).

    My wife was worried that they would have noisy parties and lower the tone of the neighborhood with “laddish” behavior.

    In fact, they are the quietest house in the neighborhood. One of them told me that they are saving the parties and stuff until after their contracts end.

    One wrong step, and they’re out of the league. In the meantime they feel they have to live a life of purity and correctness.

    Wouldn’t have suited me when I was their age.

  14. Token

    Yeah, Rabz – who will win the Oscar for the best pretend falling down effort to milk a penalty?

    It has been amusing to see the staged fall appear in both AFL & league in the past 2 years.

    Of course fans of the code are as mum on this as the ABC is on the AWU royal commission.

  15. Alfonso

    Soccer?
    Not a good cultural lesson for the kids therein. Pouting, excitable, ref pushing, Latin, girl, writhers is not how we teach them to get knocked over and get up again. A very foreign sport.

  16. Combine_Dave

    It has been amusing to see the staged fall appear in both AFL & league in the past 2 years.

    I had thought it an integral part of AFL and no, it simply doesn’t happen in League.

    Shane Webcke’s broken wing, 2000Webcke played a heroic role in Brisbane’s win against the Roosters in the 2000 grand final despite a broken arm. He charged into a battle-hardened Roosters pack by angling his body to limit contact on the arm.

    http://m.smh.com.au/rugby-league/league-news/tales-of-bravery-sure-to-have-you-gritting-your-teeth-20091123-j1xa.html

  17. Docket62

    F$&@ that Steve… Go the AFL for costs, lost draft picks etc etc.. And sue the AFL to within an inch of its miserable fu$&ing life. Cnuts all of them. So…. How’s them socceroos ?

  18. .

    ASADA: Keep fucking that chicken.

    I hope they destroy their credibility and are wound up as a Commonwealth entity.

  19. Grigory M

    the staged fall … it simply doesn’t happen in League

    Correct.

  20. Yohan

    Are the standards for conviction under ASADA the same as the rest of the criminal justice system?

    i.e beyond reasonable doubt, or is it more like civil, on the balance of probabilities.

  21. Dan

    I forget. Exactly how many positive urine samples were taken? How many positive samples from NRL players? Union players? Bueller?

    Conjecture and probable drug use are not the same as steaming hard evidence delivered out of a urinary tract.

  22. Baldrick

    Are the standards for conviction under ASADA the same as the rest of the criminal justice system? i.e beyond reasonable doubt, or is it more like civil, on the balance of probabilities.

    ARTICLE 6 PROOF OF DOPING
    6.1 Burdens and Standards of Proof.
    6.1.1 ASADA or [IF] shall have the burden of establishing that an Anti-Doping Rule
    Violation has occurred. The standard of proof shall be whether ASADA or [IF] has
    established an Anti-Doping Rule Violation to the comfortable satisfaction of the
    hearing body bearing in mind the seriousness of the allegation which is made. This
    standard of proof in all cases is greater than a mere balance of probability but less
    than proof beyond a reasonable doubt
    . Where this policy places the burden of proof
    upon the Athlete or other Person alleged to have committed an Anti-Doping Rule
    Violation to rebut a presumption or establish specified facts or circumstances, the
    standard of proof shall be by a balance of probability.

  23. Mike of Marion

    Baldrick,
    That Clause would be a great Test in the High Court.

  24. steve

    Let’s see the fat hairy Greek in the dock answering some difficult questions.

  25. Megan

    I suspect the new ASADA boss wants to make a name for himself by going hard on the issue given how long those infraction notices have been in coming. Bonus for him and the agency which was in danger of being a laughing stock. But, in the usual way of things that take place in the complicated or complex space, there is plenty that could blow up in his face.

    I would like to think that having been humiliated and severely punished on the pathetic governance excuse that the Essendon heiracrchy will stand up and fight this time. But history shows that the clubs will not break away from the rulings of the AFL cartel and I suspect this time will be no different.

    No matter what happens, this is the end of the AFL road for me. The game they play today no longer engages my interest, the continual squeezing of members for more money to reserve seats and the plain stupidity on show during this whole ridiculous saga has seen me hand in my membership after 30+ years.

  26. JohnA

    So Paul Little – this is what they look like. Hire some if you can’t grow any yourself – it never pays anyone to roll over to an allegation if they think it to be untrue.

    True enough, but he also needs plenty of these to see him through.

  27. JohnA

    Grigory M #1345187, posted on June 13, 2014 at 6:45 am

    ASADA boss says players issued with notices face ‘difficult’ decisions

    Yeah – like which wording to use for “Get stuffed!”.

    Ahem, keeping it polite might stretch them, though. How about:

    “Dear ASADA, it has come to my solicitor’s attention that you are trying to shake me down. Since he doesn’t appreciate this level of competition against his profession, you may rest assured that you will hear from him, on my behalf.”

    :-)

  28. MT Isa Miner

    Alfonso

    #1344828, posted on June 12, 2014 at 9:09 pm

    Soccer?
    Not a good cultural lesson for the kids therein. Pouting, excitable, ref pushing, Latin, girl, writhers is not how we teach them to get knocked over and get up again. A very foreign sport.

    I don’t want to be sidetracked but it’s mothers that have diverted the river of boys into soccer. Football is on the nose with mothers.

    Because the money and the media and the lack of public morals mean footballers are seen for what they are: immature young men full of beans who are let loose without older men to pull them into line (or wives/girlfriends to steady them.)

    Bruce Reid shows the way, like Sinclair says. Bruce from Newcastle plays the long game: defund them, use the Rabz doctrine.

    So Paul Little – this is what they look like. Hire some if you can’t grow any yourself – it never pays anyone to roll over to an allegation if they think it to be untrue.

    Go hard. Go nuclear. Take no prisoners.

  29. nilk

    My wife was worried that they would have noisy parties and lower the tone of the neighborhood with “laddish” behavior.

    In fact, they are the quietest house in the neighborhood. One of them told me that they are saving the parties and stuff until after their contracts end.

    One wrong step, and they’re out of the league. In the meantime they feel they have to live a life of purity and correctness.

    Ah, the new Puritans. Religion bad, trial-by-media (and our self-appointed betters) good.

    It’s so offensive how these muppets in various organisations set themselves up as the arbiters of Good Behaviour, and woe betide anyone who deviates from the Right Way.

  30. Grigory M

    John A – having been required to draft the odd document in my career thus far, I am well acquainted with the faux polite lawyerly / officialese that could be used as a prospective parry of the new ASADA boss’s sabre rattling. But – given what has already transpired in this Gilbertian farce, I would instead be strongly inclined to tell ASADA and its new boss to put up or shut up – and in no uncertain terms. IMO, the direct and concise response I suggested above is the response that Essendon and Hird should have given in the first place – if they had, then Fat Andy would be long gone and his ASADA friends would no longer be damaging Australian sport with their pathetic attempts to save face.

  31. steve

    The Bombers should take the initiative and launch legal action for damages. There is no proof of anything and punishment has already been handed out. Further charges are just exacerbating the issue.
    Essendon should sue ASADA. the AFL. the media (and in particular two sycophants of the AFL) and Dimetriou himself.

    Go hard and go long. For those who say Hird cannot come back while this lingers on, let me just say to you from all Essendon supporters that we don’e give a rat’s arse what you think.

    All we have ever wanted was a forum for both sides of the story to be heard. If that damages the AFL, so be it. I am over being a scapegoat!! Bring on the High Court.

  32. Tom

    The standard of proof shall be whether ASADA or [IF] has
    established an Anti-Doping Rule Violation to the comfortable satisfaction of the
    hearing body bearing in mind the seriousness of the allegation which is made. This
    standard of proof in all cases is greater than a mere balance of probability but less
    than proof beyond a reasonable doubt. Where this policy places the burden of proof
    upon the Athlete or other Person alleged to have committed an Anti-Doping Rule
    Violation to rebut a presumption or establish specified facts or circumstances, the
    standard of proof shall be by a balance of probability.

    The one place you don’t want to try on new age, quasi-legal, touchy-feelgood bullshit like the above is in matters of life and death — like sport. This will finish up in the High Court and with the deknackering of ASADA, which has become just another institution invaded by nanny statist assassins of the national culture.

    By god, Australia has become a toilet.

    I am a Carlton man, but I will buy a one-year Essendon membership if it needs the funds to take this on, as it surely will.

  33. cohenite

    Fuck me: Comfortable satisfaction!

    And:

    This standard of proof in all cases is greater than a mere balance of probability but less
    than proof beyond a reasonable doubt.

    But:

    Where this policy places the burden of proof upon the Athlete or other Person alleged to have committed an Anti-Doping Rule Violation to rebut a presumption or establish specified facts or circumstances, the
    standard of proof shall be by a balance of probability.

    Civil and criminal matters are distinguished by both the higher standard of proof required in criminal matters and the burden of proof which always lies with the accuser, the Crown, in criminal matters.

    Here we have an intermediate standard of proof for charges which are patently criminal in effect and a burden of proof which is allocated to one of the parties on the basis of the civil standard of proof.

    No wonder ASADA is comfortable.

    I would urge anyone who is subject to an ASADA accusation, if that is what they are, to go straight to a real court.

  34. Tom

    I think Essendon fans, separately from Essendon FC, should sue ASADA and the AFL for the wanton, unnecessary and malicious damage they have caused to their club.

  35. rafiki

    Talk of suing the pants off the AFL, ASADA, ‘Fat Andy’ et al is, with all respect (there’s a little bit of the kind of passive aggressive legal bullshit one experiences dealing with lawyers and courts), a bit fatuous. It is akin to the way human rights lawyers and students go on. They talk endlessly about using the ICCPR an so on to sue the ‘guvmint’. As John A so graphically pointed out, taking legal action is very, very expensive. And it’s not just money; it’s time and energy. Another little problem here is that a litigant has to point to a legally recognised cause of action. You can’t just sue and get injunctions, or damages, or whatever the basis that ‘it aint fair’.
    This raises the issue of just how much money Essendon FC can afford to spend on lawyers. (If they had not renewed Hird’s contract then maybe they would have a couple of million more.) Yet, one would think that the players, who are the only really throughly innocent ones here, and who will suffer great losses, deserve as much financial support from Essendon as they need. Bluster from people such as Rod Liddle won’t help (and might indeed hurt).
    So, those of you who are as made as hell and want to do something might turn your minds to how the players can be helped. (Maybe they should go on strike: “We’ve had enough of this and we just won’t play until it’s sorted – and that doesn’t include punishing us in any way”. That might scare the AFL into doing something, such repudiating, retrospectively, the ASADA scheme of regulation. What could the government do if they did that? As I understand it, AFL participation in the scheme is voluntary.)

  36. steve

    Hello Rafiki, we meet again. Once again you tell me that the law is not about justice, it is about money and who am I to disagree.
    You have to understand my position, I am not really about damages, I am about some place in this god forsaken legal system of ours, giving Essendon a forum in which to voice their side of the story and a forum for ASADA to prove what they claim happened. That’s reasonable, isn’t it? I just want to know the full story and for all the Essendon critics to shut the hell up until they know it too. This whole episode is about claims that ASADA and the AFL cannot prove and the fat, hairy Greek reminds me of certain people on his side of politics.
    As for the law students, I am good with that. Knowing that I think like they do before the legal system screws with their heads (and wallets).

  37. Craig Mc

    That Clause would be a great Test in the High Court.

    I wouldn’t assume our High Court is the final authority when it comes to this stuff.

  38. steve

    Think of me as young and naive (although I am a touch older than the red headed guilty one)

  39. rafiki

    Hello Steve. I am feel your pain (God, did I really just say that), and given all the years I have followed the Dons, I share it. But seeking legal redress is not plain sailing. Indeed, to use the time-hallowed Shakespearean phrase, “That way madness lies”.

    The solution – which can and should include what you want – has to be extra-legal. Why cannot the AFL say: ‘Look, this whole episode has been a giant stuff up from the outset, and the people who will be most hurt are the innocent players. Since the AFL is not an international sport, and does not need federal government money, we can just pull out of the ASADA scheme and sort this out ourselves. Once we have done that, we might rejoin.’

  40. rafiki

    Er, and Steve, I don’t think the law students have people such as your goodself in mind. Human rights aren’t for the likes of you, at least in respect of your grievance.

  41. steve

    Rafiki, that seems a logical (and cost free) solution. How do we get there?

    With the Greek now gone (who leaves a $3million a year job voluntarily without another position to go to?) maybe there will be some justice.

    I have a legal question for you. How is it that the act that ASADA performs under, does not require proof that something illegal happened? I thought “innocent until proven guilty” was a basic legal standard in all laws. Silly of me to assume that, apparently.

    And another one. My understanding is that ASADA cannot have joint investigations, it breaches the act. So shouldn’t this whole thing be thrown out from the start? Didn’t OJ Simpson only get convicted on civil charges because the investigators screwed up and criminal charges were thrown out? Something about a glove?

  42. Baldrick

    Baldrick,
    That Clause would be a great Test in the High Court.

    If they don’t buckle and take it to the High Court, they would win hands-down … matter of fact, I doubt if it would even get to first base. It’d be thrown out way before then.
    If they do buckle and give into ADSA, then they’re bigger fools than those charlatan’s stand alongside TLS henchmen Jason Clare and Kate Lundy.

  43. SteveC

    I confidently predict Sinc et al, will be eating their words when players are convicted and suspended. It takes a long time to clear out the drug cheats, but it will happen. Look at Lance Armstrong for an example. Sinc’s problem is he doesn’t think drugs in sport is cheating, which clouds his judgement. But disagreeing with a law doesn’t make it allowable to break it. The drug laws in sport are set by WADA, so if we want to participate in any international sport, we are required to have ASADA.

    So the Bombers were cheats, and Hird the main cheat, and he should be banned.

  44. steve

    Hi SteveC, How are you this fine morning?

    Just wondering what your proof is? No one knows whether it was a legal form of Thyomosin or an illegal one. No one. There are no positive drug tests and no samples of whet was injected. AOD9604 is not even mentioned in the accusations any more.

    So is your objection to injections? Penicillin? That’s injected.

    Otherwise would you be so kind as to pull your head out of your arse?

  45. .

    But disagreeing with a law doesn’t make it allowable to break it. The drug laws in sport are set by WADA, so if we want to participate in any international sport, we are required to have ASADA.

    AFL!?

    The All Australian team playing against Nauru for the world title?

  46. rafiki

    Steve. The questions you raise about legalities are not capable of easy answers, (and that’s why I think some other way has to be found). The two usual standards (balance of probabilities in civil cases, beyond reasonable doubt in criminal) are difficult enough. Applying some intermediate standard is even more mystifying.

    How do we get to some extra-curial solution. I can’t say, but if I am right in thinking that AFL participation in ASADA is voluntary (and not a matter of legal compulsion through legislation) I can’t see why it can’t be done. I am not being flippant (and I don’t suggest you think I am) when I say that a player revolt might be the way. One little problem might be that clubs other then Essendon might not wish to help out the Essendon players.

    (I have to leave off now, so if I don’t reply to you it is not through ignoring you. I’ll check in later today.)

  47. Yohan

    The standard of proof shall be whether ASADA or [IF] has
    established an Anti-Doping Rule Violation to the comfortable satisfaction of the
    hearing body bearing in mind the seriousness of the allegation which is made. This
    standard of proof in all cases is greater than a mere balance of probability but less
    than proof beyond a reasonable doubt. Where this policy places the burden of proof
    upon the Athlete or other Person alleged to have committed an Anti-Doping Rule
    Violation to rebut a presumption or establish specified facts or circumstances, the
    standard of proof shall be by a balance of probability.

    Amazing. No traditional standard of proof required at all. Innuendo and conjecture are all that is needed If it sounds bad enough they can be found guilty by ASADA.

    Reminds me of the standards used to convict Bolt under 18c.

  48. Tom

    So the Bombers were cheats, and Hird the main cheat, and he should be banned.

    Being a Greeenfilth zombie, SteveC has a paranoid cartoon view of how the world works like Pickles’ Snuggle Bunny. Since he has never and can’t ever reach the age of reason because of his congenital affliction, he and his bretheren sufferers Shitfer and Monty must be looked down on sympathetically and compassionately.

  49. Rabz

    I confidently predict Sinc et al, will be eating their words when players are convicted and suspended.

    Wonderful, I will now confidently predict the exact opposite will happen. Thanks, stevec!

  50. jupes

    ASADA blinks, tries bribery:

    PLAYERS found guilty of taking banned substances could have their penalties reduced by more than half if they did not know what the substance was. The Australian Sports Anti-Doping Authority chief Ben McDevitt has revealed that ASADA will be lenient on players who co-operate and players who “can demonstrate no significant fault”.

    Now we know they believe they don’t have a leg to stand on.

    http://www.afl.com.au/news/2014-06-13/case-to-answer

  51. SteveC

    The problem with attempting to remove AFL from ASADA control would be related to Australia having ratified the UNESCO International Convention against Doping in Sport 2005. It would probably be difficult to remove AFL from ASADA without withdrawing from the Convention altogether, which would then leave us out of international sport. I can’t see all the other sports federations thinking that was a good idea. And I can’t see any Australian government proceeding to withdraw from the convention.
    But keep dreaming.

  52. Alfonso

    ‘ASADA will be lenient on players who co-operate.’
    Bwaaa…
    Let’s hope the easily bluffed, apparently poorly advised AFL jocks recognise this standard police tactic for the official admission of defeat it is.
    90% of police convictions in courts are via confession…..many are therefore unnecessary convictions.

  53. Infidel Tiger

    ‘ASADA will be lenient on players who co-operate.’

    “Damn it. We have no evidence.”

  54. .

    SteveC is talking out of his arse as usual.

    Martin Hardie from Deakin Uni was just on News Radio and says the whole ASADA investigation may have been illegal.

    “We need da government to play international sport”

    Yeah no.

  55. Beef

    Martin Hardie from Deakin Uni was just on News Radio

    Thanks for that Dot. Will put on dejavu radio in the background. Sure to hear it half a dozen times before I have to go out.

  56. SteveC

    You like reading dot. Read the convention. Give us your considered opinion on how we withdraw from the convention and continue to play international sport. We don’t need the government to play international sport, we just need competitors who want to compete with us when we don’t adhere to the convention. Good luck with that.

  57. Tom

    Essendon has just announced it will challenge in the Federal Court the legality of the ASADA show causes notices, which is says were unlawful and exceeded ASADA’s authority. “We will not be bullied and allow out players to be hung out to dry,” Little says. He says the ASADA notices do not contain any evidence of their claims and that it is now impossible for natural justice to be served. Little press conference now underway and will be up at soundcloud.com shortly via sen.com.au, triplem.com.au, heraldsun.com.au and theage.com.au.

  58. hzhousewife

    Press conference happening – Essendon going to court .

    Lawyers lurve fest.

  59. feelthebern

    Asada is an example of everything wrong with public servants.

  60. .

    SteveC
    #1345797, posted on June 13, 2014 at 4:31 pm
    You like reading dot. Read the convention. Give us your considered opinion on how we withdraw from the convention and continue to play international sport. We don’t need the government to play international sport, we just need competitors who want to compete with us when we don’t adhere to the convention. Good luck with that.

    Haha you chump. You stop taking grant money. You get the ASC out of your back pocket.

    Problem solved.

    No?

    What’s the US DHS going to do, stop an Australian boxer challenging for a title in Vegas because Abbott tables a bill which is duly passed and assented which revokes our agreement to the convention?

    What a load of bullshit.

  61. jupes

    Hey just watched a news report on Essendon.

    While the reporter talked they showed footage of Essendon training.

    The thing was, they smudged the faces of the Essendon players. Seriously.

    I’ll repeat that. They smudged the faces of the Essendon players.

    Fucking hilarious.

  62. SteveC

    You didn’t answer the question dot. Can we compete at the Olympics when we haven’t ratified the convention? The FIFA World Cup? The rugby World Cup? The cricket World Cup.? The Tour de France?

  63. .

    It would probably be difficult to remove AFL from ASADA without withdrawing from the Convention altogether, which would then leave us out of international sport.

    Explain the mechanism. Your idea is ridiculous regarding the AFL given it has no international competition.

  64. Sinclair Davidson

    Australia is the only country that plays Australian rules football. So why do we care if we are excluded from international competition?

  65. SteveC

    I thought you liked reading. Read the convention. As far as I can tell Asada needs to cover our national as well as international sporting federations. So that includes the afl as well as international sports. Otherwise we are in breach of the convention. Your argument seems to based on the fact that the afl as a national only comp is not required to be covered by Asada. That’s not how I read the convention. It appears you haven’t read it.

  66. .

    You are totally and utterly full of shit, Steve C.

    There is nothing in the convention which allows this to happen.

    The convention allows members to renounce the convention.

    There is nothing stopping national bodies of sports enforcing an anti doping policy the world body adheres to.

    There is nothing really fantastic about the convention either, given it treats asthma meds, beta blockers, cocaine, marijuana and anabolic steroids all in the same manner.

    It is a bizzare system which doesn’t help sport, it is totally unnecessary and there is no rule arising out of the convention forcing anyone out of international competition if they don’t go along with it.

    There might be a private rule about it, which just points out how useless a treaty is to “enforce” such rules.

    There are non signatories that are UN members and compete through the IOC and other international bodies such as RLI and the ICC.

  67. Snoopy

    The Tour de France?

    There’s an Australian national team in the Tour?

  68. SteveC

    So dot you ARE saying we could withdraw from the convention and still compete in those sporting events I listed as examples. As I said before, good luck with that

  69. Sinclair Davidson

    Dot – according to the legislation Australian sport is covered. The real question is why do we care?

  70. Snoopy

    Pfft! What is Monty’s view?

  71. Dan

    IIRC, National teams are not permitted to compete in Le Tour. Its an aussie green wank company who have hired a few aussie riders.

  72. Nick Ieronimo

    Dan…the Orica Greenedge team is an Australian owned and registered cycling team with more than two thirds of the riders being Australian….get your facts straight before you mouth off.

    The main reason the AFL cant leave wada/asada is the the federal government will onyl fund sports that have signed up.

    As for asada…why are people questioning them: imagine interviewing over 300 people…it takes time…they have done their job and beleive there is a case….now up to efc to prove otherwise.

    Stop being so precious about the afl

Comments are closed.