Play Nice WADA v Essendon 34: Guilty, 2 Yr Susp. (backdated to Mar 2015). Affects 17 current AFL plyrs.

Remove this Banner Ad

Log in to remove this ad.

SBYM said:
I think he was recovering from and ACL and hence was rehabbing under the direction of others rather than the Dankinator...happy to be corrected on this
Click to expand...
Ahhh OK makes sense then , was surprised his name wasn't mentioned , though I reckon the drug might of helped with his recovery , also 36 players were on it so I assumed 6-10 refused to sign it ?
 


Reimers: "Dean (Robinson) came to us with Stephen Dank, the Doctor behind everything, and said basically sign this."

"It gives us basically a legal right with what we give you, nothing's not legal to take but it's your own choice and you can stop taking the whenever you want."
"That's all it really was, it wasn't anything too serious, just saying we give permission to take it but if we don't want it then we don't have to."

Barrett: "It seems unusual that practice, did you find it unusual?"

Reimers: "It wasn't normal obviously but a lot of boys obviously got around it and gave it a chance."

Barrett: "Were you OK with it personally?"

Reimers: "I didn't really take too much of it, yeah I didn't see the point."

Barrett: "Obviously pushing boundaries in what they were doing Robinson and Dank?"

Reimers: "From what they were saying it was right on the borderline what they giving us."

Barrett: "Did you sign it yourself?"

Reimers: "I signed it yeah but I never, I just didn't take any of the stuff."

Barrett: "Some players didn't sign it?"

Reimers: "I think everyone signed it, it was just personal choice wether they took the stuff that was given to them."

Barrett: "Did you know what it was or did you enquire?"

Reimers: "They did tell us but they spoke in scientific terms that no-one if they tried to could understand."

Barrett: "Does it seem strange mate reflecting on that kind of practice now?"

Reimers: "After a couple of months away from it, it does seem very odd, the type of stuff we were taking."

Barrett: "What was it? What'd it do?"

Reimers: "It's just basically a supplement to increase muscle growth and stimulate the body a lot quicker so it helps recovery because they wanted to put size on us and help with putting on size."

Barrett: "Did it help you in that regard when you did take it?"

Reimers: "Unless you were taking it for a couple of weeks to a month, two months, you wouldn't really see much straight away."

Barrett: "I'm not aware of any club asking any players to sign such a document before, were the Essendon players surprised by it?"

Reimers: "Speaking to blokes at other clubs I don't think anyone's ever thought about signing it or doing the stuff that we were doing."

Barrett: "Did they explain to you why they wanted to do it?"

Reimers: "They gave a brief outline but never went into too much detail about it."

Barrett: "But admitted that it was borderline?"

Reimers: "Yeah they admitted to it, it was right on the edge."

Barrett: "Of legality?"

Reimers: "Of the levels you could be taking."

Mark McVeigh

'Kyle Reimers has come out and said some things that are untrue. He is a disgruntled player, was delisted from the football club, very rarely turned up for pre-season training in any sort of form that resembled a professional footballer."

"Every player knew what we were taking ... if you didn't know, you must have been asleep in the meeting, which Kyle probably was."
''I knew 100 per cent that it was within the WADA [World Anti-Doping Agency] and the AFL doping regulations,''

'THREE YEARS LATER
McVeigh banned
 
Last edited:
footyfan78 said:


Reimers: "Dean (Robinson) came to us with Stephen Dank, the Doctor behind everything, and said basically sign this."

"It gives us basically a legal right with what we give you, nothing's not legal to take but it's your own choice and you can stop taking the whenever you want."
"That's all it really was, it wasn't anything too serious, just saying we give permission to take it but if we don't want it then we don't have to."

Barrett: "It seems unusual that practice, did you find it unusual?"

Reimers: "It wasn't normal obviously but a lot of boys obviously got around it and gave it a chance."

Barrett: "Were you OK with it personally?"

Reimers: "I didn't really take too much of it, yeah I didn't see the point."

Barrett: "Obviously pushing boundaries in what they were doing Robinson and Dank?"

Reimers: "From what they were saying it was right on the borderline what they giving us."

Barrett: "Did you sign it yourself?"

Reimers: "I signed it yeah but I never, I just didn't take any of the stuff."

Barrett: "Some players didn't sign it?"

Reimers: "I think everyone signed it, it was just personal choice wether they took the stuff that was given to them."

Barrett: "Did you know what it was or did you enquire?"

Reimers: "They did tell us but they spoke in scientific terms that no-one if they tried to could understand."

Barrett: "Does it seem strange mate reflecting on that kind of practice now?"

Reimers: "After a couple of months away from it, it does seem very odd, the type of stuff we were taking."

Barrett: "What was it? What'd it do?"

Reimers: "It's just basically a supplement to increase muscle growth and stimulate the body a lot quicker so it helps recovery because they wanted to put size on us and help with putting on size."

Barrett: "Did it help you in that regard when you did take it?"

Reimers: "Unless you were taking it for a couple of weeks to a month, two months, you wouldn't really see much straight away."

Barrett: "I'm not aware of any club asking any players to sign such a document before, were the Essendon players surprised by it?"

Reimers: "Speaking to blokes at other clubs I don't think anyone's ever thought about signing it or doing the stuff that we were doing."

Barrett: "Did they explain to you why they wanted to do it?"

Reimers: "They gave a brief outline but never went into too much detail about it."

Barrett: "But admitted that it was borderline?"

Reimers: "Yeah they admitted to it, it was right on the edge."

Barrett: "Of legality?"

Reimers: "Of the levels you could be taking."

Mark McVeigh

'Kyle Reimers has come out and said some things that are untrue. He is a disgruntled player, was delisted from the football club, very rarely turned up for pre-season training in any sort of form that resembled a professional footballer."

"Every player knew what we were taking ... if you didn't know, you must have been asleep in the meeting, which Kyle probably was."
''I knew 100 per cent that it was within the WADA [World Anti-Doping Agency] and the AFL doping regulations,''

'THREE YEARS LATER
McVeigh banned
Click to expand...

So now this begs the question, why didn't Reimers get done? He signed the form but never took any stuff (like Howlett). Hal Hunter didn't sign the form, but took stuff and didn't get done.
 
Reimers: "It's just basically a supplement to increase muscle growth and stimulate the body a lot quicker so it helps recovery because they wanted to put size on us and help with putting on size."


And yet players are surprised at a 2 year ban for taking something to increase muscle growth /facepalm
 
swingdog said:
More of the "WADA doesn't understand our unique Australian ways" crap:

http://www.theage.com.au/afl/essend...ted-in-questionable-hole-20160113-gm5j5y.html
Click to expand...
Just complete bullshit. The infantisation of AFL footballers is ridiculous.

While it is unfortunate that the lesson had to be learnt in this fashion, the simple fact is that the lesson had to be learnt. One thing we can guarantee out of this fiasco is that the concept of 'strict liability' has been etched into the minds of all AFL footballers, and is not some airy fairy notion that applies only to other sportspeople.

As Gerard Healy so succinctly put it... it's about the integrity of our game.

Healy Editorial

Scroll down for Gerard Healy's Editorial
 
ODNBlue said:
Just complete bullshit. The infantisation of AFL footballers is ridiculous.

While it is unfortunate that the lesson had to be learnt in this fashion, the simple fact is that the lesson had to be learnt. One thing we can guarantee out of this fiasco is that the concept of 'strict liability' has been etched into the minds of all AFL footballers, and is not some airy fairy notion that applies only to other sportspeople.
Click to expand...

The thing I'd always want to ask people pushing this line is, how much power to say no do you think a 15 year old Chinese girl has if her coaches are telling her it's all fine?
 
Last edited:

(Log in to remove this ad.)

swingdog said:
The thing I'd always want to ask people pushing this line is, how much power to say no do you think a 15 year old Chinese girl has if her coaches are telling him it's all fine?
Click to expand...
Should we just ignore it and let their medal/record stand? Who do you punish if you want this practice to stop? When medals are stripped countries are embarrassed.

And there is a big difference between a 15-year-old Chinese swimmer and Jobe Watson, Dustin Fletcher, Mark McVeigh et al..
 
Gavstar said:
Reimers: "It's just basically a supplement to increase muscle growth and stimulate the body a lot quicker so it helps recovery because they wanted to put size on us and help with putting on size."


And yet players are surprised at a 2 year ban for taking something to increase muscle growth /facepalm
Click to expand...

Nah man, it was the good kind of thymosin. The entire team came down with aids and needed treatment.
 
Barry_Badrinath said:
Nah man, it was the good kind of thymosin. The entire team came down with aids and needed treatment.
Click to expand...
It seems conceivable to me that, say, if James Hird was HIV positive, it's quite possible that all the players are, because, as far as I'm concerned, he's ****** them all...
 
Last edited:
ODNBlue said:
Should we just ignore it and let their medal/record stand? Who do you punish if you want this practice to stop? When medals are stripped countries are embarrassed.

And there is a big difference between a 15-year-old Chinese swimmer and Jobe Watson, Dustin Fletcher, Mark McVeigh et al..
Click to expand...
And there is a big difference between saying being afraid to say "no", and fibbing on a drug form.
 
swingdog said:
More of the "WADA doesn't understand our unique Australian ways" crap:

http://www.theage.com.au/afl/essend...ted-in-questionable-hole-20160113-gm5j5y.html
Click to expand...

When the 'comment' starts off with factually incorrect material, you just know the rest of it won't be worth much....and it wasn't.

Somebody should point out to Larry that cycling and swimming at the very least are team sports. So basically, the WADA code doesn't suit team sports except for teams sports that are not football :drunk:

The WADA was very definitely written with the input of team sports and refined with input from teams sports, so all this 'it doesn't suit team sports crap' is just sooking because Australians got caught and somehow thats unfair.
 
imperial_oz said:
When the 'comment' starts off with factually incorrect material, you just know the rest of it won't be worth much....and it wasn't.

Somebody should point out to Larry that cycling and swimming at the very least are team sports. So basically, the WADA code doesn't suit team sports except for teams sports that are not football :drunk:

The WADA was very definitely written with the input of team sports and refined with input from teams sports, so all this 'it doesn't suit team sports crap' is just sooking because Australians got caught and somehow thats unfair.
Click to expand...

When your article is based, and solely relient, on a quote from an episode of M.A.S.H (as great as the show was) then you know you are writing something for the sake of it.
 
good4footy said:
When your article is based, and solely relient, on a quote from an episode of M.A.S.H (as great as the show was) then you know you are writing something for the sake of it.
Click to expand...

First time I've ever been pissed off enough to write to the journalist telling him to lift his game. I feel better now.
 
ODNBlue said:
Just complete bullshit. The infantisation of AFL footballers is ridiculous.

While it is unfortunate that the lesson had to be learnt in this fashion, the simple fact is that the lesson had to be learnt. One thing we can guarantee out of this fiasco is that the concept of 'strict liability' has been etched into the minds of all AFL footballers, and is not some airy fairy notion that applies only to other sportspeople.

As Gerard Healy so succinctly put it... it's about the integrity of our game.

Healy Editorial

Scroll down for Gerard Healy's Editorial
Click to expand...

thanks

I love this from Gerard Healy. Very good
 
jenny61_99 said:
So now this begs the question, why didn't Reimers get done? He signed the form but never took any stuff (like Howlett). Hal Hunter didn't sign the form, but took stuff and didn't get done.
Click to expand...
Maybe Reimers had stopped receiving injections before TB4 had been received by Dank or before WADA could prove receipt. Maybe there was confirmation that Howlett had received injections at the time of TB4 or he sent/received texts that make specific reference to Thymosin.
 
jenny61_99 said:
So now this begs the question, why didn't Reimers get done? He signed the form but never took any stuff (like Howlett). Hal Hunter didn't sign the form, but took stuff and didn't get done.
Click to expand...

According to the CAS award all players admitted receiving injections from Dank.

So I'd say that explains it. The case required both the player admission that they received injections and a signed consent form for Thymosin. If either wasn't present, no case.
 

Remove this Banner Ad

Play Nice WADA v Essendon 34: Guilty, 2 Yr Susp. (backdated to Mar 2015). Affects 17 current AFL plyrs.

Similar threads

Satan
Pharmacist involved in essendon saga sadly found dead
Replies
3
Views
873
Satan
Satan
The_Wookie
Play Nice Happy 10th Anniversary (of the Essendon/ASADA Saga)
2
Replies
30
Views
3K
blackcat
blackcat
A
This is the way to treat drug cheats
2
Replies
25
Views
2K
PoppedCorn
PoppedCorn

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top