World Footy News

Essendon players have been found guilty in the Court of Arbitration for Sport for their part in the use of banned substance Thymosin Beta-4 after nearly three years of investigations and hearings. It looks as though the 34 players who were at the time of the alleged offences with Essendon are going to be forced to miss the 2016 season. There is suspected to be civil actions and other possible legal avenues to be investigated which means that the saga may drag out longer yet.

Essendon Football Club have released the following statement

Regrettably we can confirm the Court of Arbitration for Sport has found 34 past and present players guilty of committing an anti-doping rule violation. As a result, the players - including 12 currently listed with Essendon - have been suspended for the 2016 season. The Club is currently digesting the decision and we will provide a further update later today.

Lindsay Tanner Chairman

Statement from the CAS

The Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS) has today issued its decision in the arbitration procedure between the World Anti-Doping Agency (WADA) and 34 current and former players of Essendon

The appeal filed by WADA against the Australian Football League (AFL) Anti-Doping Tribunal's decision of 31 March 2015 is upheld and the appealed decision is set aside. The 34 players concerned are sanctioned with a period of ineligibility of two years, commencing on 31 March 2015, with credit given for any individual period of ineligibility already served. Thus, most of the suspensions will come to an end in November 2016.

The arbitration procedure was conducted by a panel of CAS arbitrators: the Hon. Michael J. Beloff QC, barrister in London, United Kingdom (President), Mr. Romano Subiotto QC, SolicitorAdvocate in Brussels, Belgium, and the Hon. James Spigelman AC QC, barrister in Sydney, Australia and London, United Kingdom. 

The Panel held a hearing with the parties in Sydney, Australia from 16 to 20 November 2015. In its Arbitral Award, the Panel found to its comfortable satisfaction that Clause 11.2 of the 2010 AFL Doping Code (use of a prohibited substance) has been violated and found by a majority that all players were significantly at fault.

The following statement is from the AFL Players Association

Following the announcement of the CAS ruling issued today, the Players’ Association has issued the following statement, to be attributed to AFLPA CEO, Paul Marsh:

 

The AFL Players’ Association is bitterly disappointed by today’s decision of the Court of Arbitration for Sport and shattered for each and every player involved.

 

We have maintained a consistent position that these players did nothing wrong, and today’s decision does nothing to change our view.

 

It is important to note that the players took all reasonable steps to assure themselves that what they were being given was compliant with the WADA Code. They expressly sought confirmation that all supplements they were to be provided were in compliance with the Code, and were provided with written documentation to this effect. 

 

The players’ legal team will now conduct a thorough review of the decision, the process which has led to it, and the general applicability of the WADA regime to our game. As is stands, we are struggling to understand how the CAS decision can be so different to that of the AFL Anti-Doping Tribunal, Chaired by David Jones and including John Nixon and Wayne Henwood, who so emphatically rejected ASADA’s case.

 

With respect to the sanction, we cannot comprehend how the players have received the maximum sanction under the Code.

 

We are staggered to read comments attributed to the ASADA CEO today, that “there were very little grounds for the players to claim they were at no significant fault.” This is despite his previous recommendation to WADA and the AFL that it would be appropriate to reduce the sanction on the basis of no significant fault or negligence.

 

Whilst we have seen no evidence throughout this process that proves the players were administered supplements which were not compliant with the Code, if this is the case then they have been deceived. They are the victims, not the perpetrators. They deserve our sympathy, not our scorn.

 

In circumstances where they’ve been deceived, I ask this question - what more could the players have done to ensure the supplements were compliant?  We believe this is a case where the “no significant fault or negligence” provision should have been applied.

 

To the players – again the victims of this sorry saga – you can stand with your heads held high, notwithstanding today’s decision. Not only did you take all reasonable steps to assure yourselves that what you were being given was compliant with the WADA Code, but you cooperated fully with the AFL, ASADA, WADA and CAS at all times. You are deserving of a huge amount of credit for the way you’ve conducted yourselves at all times through this process.  Sadly you have been horribly let down throughout this process.