Oppo Camp The Non-North Footy Discussion & Matchday Chat Thread V

Remove this Banner Ad

Status
Not open for further replies.

Log in to remove this ad.

Barrett has multiple avenues available to him in order to reach his audience.

Why would you include an if then about Danny Frawley starting off with
If Danny is gone.

Barrett straight up you're a ****.
 
Last edited:
Former ASADA CEO Richard Ings on Willie Rioli

How does this happen?
Well it happens because you have a very observant control officer who is facilitating the test. The doping control officer is there to witness the sample being provided. If there is any abnormalities, if there’s any indication of any adulteration of the sample then the doping control officer will report it, it will be investigated and charges potentially laid.

So Willie Rioli has attempted to make the substitution while being observed by the officers?
We don’t have all the details but what we do know is that ASADA is alleging that there was a substitution or a substitution attempt at the point of collection that was clearly picked up by the doping control officer. It has been investigated, the sample has been tested for something which isn’t urine and the process is proceeding accordingly.

What would have happened when they observed something was off in the test?
The doping control officer won’t go to an athlete who is substitution urine and go ‘no, no, no mate you can’t do that, you’ve got to give us the right stuff’. The attempt to substitute is a violation in itself so the doping control officer will simply collect the sample, report the incident and leave it for the authorities at ASADA to investigate.

Conversations with Rioli at the time
It’s very possible that the doping control officer may have indicated that there making a report of something that they’ve seen, there are concerns, it would have been noted on the doping control form. That’s very, very possible. But at the end of the day the doping control officer has apparently done their job, they have noticed something untoward going on and reported it for investigation.

Penalty for Rioli?
This would be considered very seriously. This is an unusual case, we are used to positive drugs test coming through. This is the first case in quite some time of tampering of a sample, certainly at this level. It’s a very, very serious allegation. It’s viewed as the most serious violation of rules and can carry up to a four year ban.

Will we find out what was substitution?
I’m unsure if we will find out any more details. This is a matter that will wind through the AFL process, undoubtedly there will be a hearing, and there will be an AFL tribunal. If a guilty verdict is handed down there will a judgement which will eventually be made public and it’s in that judgement that we will get more detail.

Can Rioli fight the sanction?
Well there is no real ability for the AFL itself to water down anything. These matters go to the AFL’s independent anti-doping tribunal, the evidence is heard, ASADA argues its case for fault, David Grace is an exceptional counsel will defend Willie Rioli and the tribunal at the AFL will make its decision,which can then be appealed of course as we’ve seen with Essendon to the court of arbitration of sport.

Who would have witnessed the test?
Within the doping control room you’ve got the player, you’ve got anybody who is invited there by the player to witness the testing and you’ve got the doping control officer. It’s a very small group. So we don’t know what was said between the parties but I think it’s very safe to assume that the doping control officer must have seen something untowards and that it was reported directly to ASADA. The sample tested for something that wasn’t urine and that has triggered the investigation and allegation of a tampering and substitution offense.
 
Barrett has multiple avenues available to him in order to reach his audience.

Why would you include an if then about Danny Frawley starting off with
If Danny is gone.

Barrett straight up you're a ****.

Had the same reaction to this.

i) TOTALLY inappropriate format to embed an eulogy in; a flippant daily musings (well it's supposed to be ) football column. And to use "If Spud is gone" as the tagline hook.. crikey.

ii) To add insult to injury once again he ****ed the format! As a mate pointed out - "is he suggesting those (positive) things about Danny were not the case before?"

Utterly complete fail.
 
Jimmy Bartel has been left gobsmacked by the Rioli news. Speaking on Macquarie Sports Radio this morning he said:
“I don’t even know why he even attempted it, it’s the most invasive thing you’ll do,” he said.
“It's pants around your ankles and if you’ve got a T-shirt on, you’ve got to tuck it under your chin or take it off.
“You are nude and they’re looking at you front on taking a urine test.
“To think you can get away with it is stupid because as soon as you would have done that, the tester would’ve said ‘what have you done’.
“He hasn’t tested positive, he’s been found trying to alter the test.
“We’ve got to deal with the facts, he’s been done for trying to dodge a test.”
 
Had the same reaction to this.

i) TOTALLY inappropriate format to embed an eulogy in; a flippant daily musings (well it's supposed to be ) football column. And to use "If Spud is gone" as the tagline hook.. crikey.

ii) To add insult to injury once again he ****ed the format! As a mate pointed out - "is he suggesting those (positive) things about Danny were not the case before?"

Utterly complete fail.

Completely tone deaf c***ish behavior.

Using this as a clickbait style headline.

Shows the absolute gutter trash this bloke and his writing are.
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

“When ASADA test for an illicit substance and you glow, you test positive. There’s not even a strike, it’s a slap on the wrist (if not on game day).

“This wasn’t game day. It was a Tuesday after the West Coast Eagles played Richmond at the MCG. He’s gone from in a state of panic, we think, from no ban whatsoever to a potential four-year ban.

“The people I spoke to yesterday say manipulating a urine sample is just about as serious as it gets. This is big stuff.”

 
“When ASADA test for an illicit substance and you glow, you test positive. There’s not even a strike, it’s a slap on the wrist (if not on game day).

“This wasn’t game day. It was a Tuesday after the West Coast Eagles played Richmond at the MCG. He’s gone from in a state of panic, we think, from no ban whatsoever to a potential four-year ban.

“The people I spoke to yesterday say manipulating a urine sample is just about as serious as it gets. This is big stuff.”

Sounds like he might have taken some MD or did some coke on the weekend and has then shat himself when ASADA has rolled in a couple of days later, thinking it might still be in his system.

It's staggering that players aren't comprehensively educated about the different punishments for a positive test of various substances, or the punishment for manipulating the sample. Or maybe they are and he just panicked anyway.
 
Sources familiar with the matter confirmed that follow-up tests were conducted by ASADA to establish whether Rioli had performance-enhancing drugs in his system. Those tests found no evidence of a prohibited substance.


 
Sources familiar with the matter confirmed that follow-up tests were conducted by ASADA to establish whether Rioli had performance-enhancing drugs in his system. Those tests found no evidence of a prohibited substance.

And so the PR campaign begins.
 
And so the PR campaign begins.
Exactly.

I find it hard to believe that ASADA will let it slide though.

This may be a case of the cover up being worse than the crime if no banned substances show up.

The silly campaigner deserves maximum punishment for trying to tamper with a test. I know he's probably not the sharpest tool in the shed but all AFL players are fully aware of the anti doping rules.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Remove this Banner Ad

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top