Skip to main content
Topic: That Saad Lad (Read 19385 times) previous topic - next topic
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Re: That Saad Lad

Reply #1
Now that Saad has been given an 18-month suspension, there is no way known that the Essendon players are going to get off scott-free for their misdemeanours.

Expect to see some infractions handed down between now and the end of January.
"The Other Teams Can Rot In Hell"

Re: That Saad Lad

Reply #2
Now that Saad has been given an 18-month suspension, there is no way known that the Essendon players are going to get off scott-free for their misdemeanours.

Expect to see some infractions handed down between now and the end of January.

January 2020?
Ignorance is bliss.

ONWARDS AND UPWARDS!

Re: That Saad Lad

Reply #3
It will be interesting to see if ASADA appeal for the full two year ban, only to see if their eased up on their zero tolerance stance in the past. 
Excuses year 1, blame year 2, contract extention year 3........

Re: That Saad Lad

Reply #4
Surely if Saad is made the sole scape goat for the AFL by ASADA, WADA MUST intervene. We are not fools.
IN WADA WE TRUST

Re: That Saad Lad

Reply #5
Hopefully the Saad case is a mere practice run for ASADA for when it hits the Bummers with both barrels!
Reality always wins in the end.

Re: That Saad Lad

Reply #6
Surely what the Bummers did was far worse than Saad who c0cked up but didn't deliberately break the rules?
Ignorance is bliss.

ONWARDS AND UPWARDS!

Re: That Saad Lad

Reply #7
Of course it was! That's why ASADA has to make sure it well and truly nails them. A little practice run won't hurt.
Reality always wins in the end.

Re: That Saad Lad

Reply #8
Welcome to the 'top shelf' cookie! :P
Ignorance is bliss.

ONWARDS AND UPWARDS!

Re: That Saad Lad

Reply #9
There's still the unresolved issue of team orders.  Doping by individual athletes such as Saad, intentional or otherwise, can justly be punished by banning them.  But what do you do when the team is, intentionally or otherwise, doping players while assuring them that the drugs are WADA compliant?  That's even more of an issue in the AFL as junior players have no choice regarding the team that they join, so they have no ability to protect themselves by avoiding clubs with suspect ethics.  Once at a club, they have little ability to be conscientious objectors.  If they fail to thrive at their initial club, their career is usually over.  And if they fall out with their 1st club and team mates, that's probably the ballgame.

Of course, Jobe Watson has no excuse.  This is a guy who was trying to organise a sit down at an AFL match to protest against the introduction of the sub rule, showing himself willing to take on the might of the AFL head on.  And yet he had neither the courage nor the leadership to ensure that the players who were under him were safe.   

Re: That Saad Lad

Reply #10
Why would he when the team was clearly benefiting from the PEDs? Obviously he's happy to do whatever it takes, that is the measure of the man.
Ignorance is bliss.

ONWARDS AND UPWARDS!

Re: That Saad Lad

Reply #11
Why would he when the team was clearly benefiting from the PEDs? Obviously he's happy to do whatever it takes, that is the measure of the man.

Yep, it's amazing how "principles" can be affected by self-interest - what did Paul Keating once say - "Never underestimate the power of self-interest".  :)
Reality always wins in the end.

Re: That Saad Lad

Reply #12
Bombers will be off scot free. No question about it.

Re: That Saad Lad

Reply #13
There's still the unresolved issue of team orders.  Doping by individual athletes such as Saad, intentional or otherwise, can justly be punished by banning them.  But what do you do when the team is, intentionally or otherwise, doping players while assuring them that the drugs are WADA compliant?  That's even more of an issue in the AFL as junior players have no choice regarding the team that they join, so they have no ability to protect themselves by avoiding clubs with suspect ethics.  Once at a club, they have little ability to be conscientious objectors.  If they fail to thrive at their initial club, their career is usually over.  And if they fall out with their 1st club and team mates, that's probably the ballgame.

Of course, Jobe Watson has no excuse.  This is a guy who was trying to organise a sit down at an AFL match to protest against the introduction of the sub rule, showing himself willing to take on the might of the AFL head on.  And yet he had neither the courage nor the leadership to ensure that the players who were under him were safe.  

Yet several players opted out, seemingly without repercussion Mav?
Finals, then 4 in a row!

Re: That Saad Lad

Reply #14
It's certainly not a black and white issue - I agree with that, Flyboy.  It would be interesting to know who the stand-outs were.  One was Zaharakis, IIRC.  He was certainly one of the younger players, but had already cemented a senior spot and is a bit of a fan favourite.  That gives him a bit of a bargaining position that a lot of younger players don't have when they're on the periphery.  Fev had a lot of bargaining power given his talent and his popularity with fans, and he used every bit of it.  The other factor is that the youngsters who are yet to prove themselves might feel they have no option other than to follow the Hird, even though in reality they could say no without repercussions.  When you're young and insecure, how do you know unless the coaching staff go out of their way to stress that it is purely optional?