http://www.abc.net.au/news/2016-01-12/cas-upholds-wada-appeal-essendon-anti-doping-verdict/7081874?section=sport

List of current players banned for 12 months

ESSENDON
Tom Bellchambers
Travis Colyer
Dyson Heppell
Michael Hibberd
Heath Hocking
Cale Hooker
Ben Howlett
Michael Hurley
David Myers
Tayte Pears
Brent Stanton
Jobe Watson

AT OTHER CLUBS
Jake Carlisle (St Kilda)
Stewart Crameri (Western Bulldogs)
Jake Melksham (Melbourne)
Angus Monfries (Port Adelaide)
Patrick Ryder (Port Adelaide)

This is totally not news worthy.

Why does the media persist in talking about these non entities :(

Sir lastnail wrote on Jan 12^th, 2016 at 12:37pm:

This is totally not news worthy. Why does the media persist in talking about these non entities :(

Because the AFL, WADA and ASADA are operating as semi-politically entities

There are a million or more afl fans who are interested. 

Can we crowd fund Maqqa to go back and complete his primary school education? His English is atrocious.

Sun Tzu wrote on Jan 12^th, 2016 at 1:06pm:

Can we crowd fund Maqqa to go back and complete his primary school education? His English is atrocious.

Whatsa matter with me Engwrish  >:( >:(

past the salt you reckon.... ;D ;D

Maqqa wrote on Jan 12^th, 2016 at 12:44pm:

Sir lastnail wrote on Jan 12th, 2016 at 12:37pm: This is totally not news worthy. Why does the media persist in talking about these non entities :( Because the AFL, WADA and ASADA are operating as semi-politically entities

Take away media attention and they will die away and so will their money supply ;)

Passed????

Passed out? Passed water? Passed wind? Dead?

Maqqa is inhaling too much anus gas in his wood shed.

Quote:

THE systematic doping of 34 players has dragged Australia’s most popular sporting code through the mud. The Essendon saga will be remembered as the most damaging episode in football history. After more than 1000 days of subterfuge and innuendo the players, 17 of whom are still within the AFL system, have been handed two-year bans commencing from March 31, 2015. It may be a desperately sad day for football but it’s a great day for upholding the integrity of sport. The moment that the Word Anti-Doping Agency took the case to the Court of Arbitration for Sport, appealing the AFL Anti-Doping Tribunal’s decision, the AFL lost any semblance of control it had over the scandal. The league’s arrogance in attempting to manipulate the outcome of this sordid affair has backfired spectacularly and now surely there must be scrutiny of CEO Gillon McLachlan’s handling of the case. There are also several board members at Essendon who should hand in their resignations today. It’s worth remembering that the players could’ve taken deals, similar to the ones accepted by Cronulla Sharks’ players, and ended this saga in 2014. Those close to the case say that it was the players’ own evidence during the CAS hearing that ultimately sealed their fate. The guilty CAS verdict and penalty signifies to the sporting world that professional footballers are not above the rules that apply to every other athlete under the WADA code. It’s a triumph for ASADA’s Ben McDevitt who took over a fractured, and some would argue compromised, investigation and refused to take a backward step. Today he was damning in his assessment of the club and the players who never seriously questioned the reckless doping regimen. “This unfortunate episode has chronicled the most devastating self-inflicted injury by a sporting club in Australian history,” McDevitt said. “There were very little grounds for the players to claim they were at no significant fault. “The players had received anti-doping education through the AFL and ASADA, and were well aware that they are personally responsible for all substances that entered their body. “Unfortunately, despite their education, they agreed to be injected with a number of substances they had little knowledge of, made no enquiries about the substance and kept the injections from their team doctor and ASADA. “Of 30 ASADA testing missions during the period in question, none of the 18 players tested declared the injections, despite being asked each time whether they had taken any supplements. “At best, the players did not ask the questions, or the people, they should have. At worst, they were complicit in a culture of secrecy and concealment.” But if you listen to the fanboys of the football media, the players are nothing more than innocent victims and any penalty against them is a miscarriage of justice. The insular footy world is so used to treating grown men like children that the prospect of adults being held to account for their own actions seems utterly unfair. After more than three seasons of vicious self-flagellation the fans, players and clubs can begin to move on from the most damaging saga to have afflicted the game. However, it won’t be the last we hear of the Essendon drugs scandal; multiple lawsuits against the club and perhaps even the league are expected in the coming months. From here on every footballer knows that they, and they alone, are ultimately responsible for what is in their body. Under the WADA rules there is no “get out of jail free card” for those who have taken a banned substance unknowingly.

GOOD.

its about time these cheats got what they deserved.

all too often they have walked away with get out of jail free cards with drugs, alcohol abuse, assault and even rape

its good to see the "good ole boys club" get a fair kick up the clacker!

All this fuss about Aussie rules -

it's an awful game with no offside rule like Rugby or soccer.

The only real footy game is Rugby Union where the All Blacks are the best.

BlueBeard wrote on Jan 12^th, 2016 at 8:16pm:

GOOD. its about time these cheats got what they deserved. all too often they have walked away with get out of jail free cards with drugs, alcohol abuse, assault and even rape its good to see the "good ole boys club" get a fair kick up the clacker!

And what was the decision based on? Not one tested positive to anything illegal. Which means that it is circumstantial.

And I'm not even an Essendon supporter.

Circumstantial evidence is allowed in a court of law.

I have no dog in this fight whatsoever.  I'm a Qeenslander and have not much than passing interest in the AFL.

But......my point is......if someone you trust to know the Rules says "take this.....it will be good for you," and I do, why ought I be blamed if it is banned stuff.  Is there any evidence these players knew what they were ingesting?  If there is. Okay, fine. They deserve the ban.  If they had no idea, why ought they be punished as naughty.

Schitt......they are handed bottles of water which they assume is ........  umm......water.  If it turns out some yanker has put a banned substance in it.....so, why ought they be subject to a finding of wrong doing?

Prime Minister for Canyons wrote on Jan 12^th, 2016 at 9:16pm:

Circumstantial evidence is allowed in a court of law.

Yeas it is. 

Aussie wrote on Jan 12^th, 2016 at 9:23pm:

I have no dog in this fight whatsoever.  I'm a Qeenslander and have not much than passing interest in the AFL. But......my point is......if someone you trust to know the Rules says "take this.....it will be good for you," and I do, why ought I be blamed if it is banned stuff.  Is there any evidence these players knew what they were ingesting?  If there is. Okay, fine. They deserve the ban.  If they had no idea, why ought they be punished as naughty. Schitt......they are handed bottles of water which they assume is ........  umm......water.  If it turns out some yanker has put a banned substance in it.....so, why ought they be subject to a finding of wrong doing?

Yes but its also the case that the code of conduct they sign up to says that any substance they inject they should know what the contents are. So even if they didnt know, its still a problem because its their responsibility to know.

Prime Minister for Canyons wrote on Jan 12^th, 2016 at 9:27pm:

Aussie wrote on Jan 12th, 2016 at 9:23pm: I have no dog in this fight whatsoever.  I'm a Qeenslander and have not much than passing interest in the AFL. But......my point is......if someone you trust to know the Rules says "take this.....it will be good for you," and I do, why ought I be blamed if it is banned stuff.  Is there any evidence these players knew what they were ingesting?  If there is. Okay, fine. They deserve the ban.  If they had no idea, why ought they be punished as naughty. Schitt......they are handed bottles of water which they assume is ........  umm......water.  If it turns out some yanker has put a banned substance in it.....so, why ought they be subject to a finding of wrong doing? Yes but its also the case that the code of conduct they sign up to says that any substance they inject they should know what the contents are. So even if they didnt know, its still a problem because its their responsibility to know.

What are they supposed to do.  Send everything off to you to ensure there is no nasty?  Huh?  How on Earth can the player know unless they all test every bottle of water they are offered before ingestion?

Yep they are supposed to know or at least ask.

Thats why Shane Warne got a year off for diuretics evenif he could argue they werent performance enhancing he should have known they are on the banned list.

Prime Minister for Canyons wrote on Jan 12^th, 2016 at 9:31pm:

Yep they are supposed to know or at least ask.

Me:  Dear Colonel, is there anything in this bottle you ought declare before I take a drink of water I really need?

You:  Nah.  It's just to hydrate you.

Aussie wrote on Jan 12^th, 2016 at 9:33pm:

Prime Minister for Canyons wrote on Jan 12th, 2016 at 9:31pm: Yep they are supposed to know or at least ask. Me:  Dear Colonel, is there anything in this bottle you ought declare before I take a drink of water I really need? You:  Nah.  It's just to hydrate you.

False analogy since 1. they asked 2. its not an injection
Why would an AFL player need an injection.

Second rate "sports" men who broke the rules, because they're weak front bottoms.

Ban 'em for ten years, I say.