 |
|
|
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
Jezza 
2023 PREMIERS!
Joined: 06 Sep 2010
Location: Ponsford End
|
| Post subject: |  |
|
| swoop42 wrote: | How can Dank be guilty if Essendon are not?
What am I missing here?
It isn't common sense. |
They'll claim that Dank was guilty for trafficking performance enhancing drugs when he was working with Essendon and these drugs were used by the coaching staff including James Hird but of course this isn't illegal under the WADA code but this was never used by the players.
However it can't be proven that the players used the substances even though the circumstantial evidence for such usage is quite compelling and strong and there was no documentation retained proving that Essendon was either guilty or not.
Blind Freddy can see that Essendon players are guilty whether they intentionally took the substances or not but to say that they're innocent because of the verdict a few weeks ago is laughable and proves how farcical this whole situation has been since it first came to light in February 2013.
_________________
| 1902 | 1903 | 1910 | 1917 | 1919 | 1927 | 1928 | 1929 | 1930 | 1935 | 1936 | 1953 | 1958 | 1990 | 2010 | 2023 | |
|
|
|
 |
think positive 
Side By Side
Joined: 30 Jun 2005
Location: somewhere
|
| Post subject: | |
|
Yep and it's seriously pissing me off
Asada s 21 days are up, come on wada
_________________
You cant fix stupid, turns out you cant quarantine it either! |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
You cannot attach files in this forum
You cannot download files in this forum
|
|
The Rules
FAQ
Usergroups
Calendar
Search
Log in
Register
