Three players set to be targeted by ASADA over use of banned peptide CJC-1295

[voicefromthehill]

. . . I am not saying nothing happened - but their stance is softening from the original "Blackest day in sport"

Well that is certainly great news, I hadn't heard that. Who said what (do you have a link)?

(although of course it wasn't the politicians or ASADA or the ACC who made that 'blackest day' comment)

pps things are continuing to unfold even as I type this, so I recommend no-one jumps to conclusions one way or the other!

Facetiousness aside - you and I both know that there is no "supporting quote" However by way of Riposte.

Senator Jason Clare - Feb 7 Media Release on organised crime and drugs in sport. Main points

Press release attended by heads of NRL; AFL; Union; FFA

1. "investigation identified widespread use (my bold) of prohibited substances including peptides, hormones and illicit drugs in professional sport"

2. "It found it had been facilitated by sports scientists, high performance coaches and sports staff"

3. "The ACC also identified increasing evidence of personal relationships of concern between professional athletes and organised criminal identities and groups. this may have resulted in match fixing and fraudulent manipulation of betting market.

4. "Multiple athletes from a number of clubs in major Australian sporting codes are suspected of currently using or having previously used peptides, potentially (my italics) constituting anti-doping rule violations. Officials from clubs have also been identified as administering, via injections and intravenous drips, a variety of substances."

Since this date the sum total of press releases from Clare about this is 0

Senator Kate Lundy on the other hand has done 1 additional media release, congratulating sporting bodies. Both have been conspicuously absent from any further "revelations" or "re definitions" on this issue.

Now to address what we understand

1. Widespread use - should we use the attendance of the original news conference which was represented by all major footballing codes one could comfortably argue that given ASADA have now said they are wanting to interview 31 players, who it must be acknowledged are not all under suspicion, if we were to use NRL top 25 as the basis represents 6% of NRL top 25. Hyperbole at best, and significantly below the 150 previously quoted by the ASADA head (or was it WADA).

To date no mention of the other codes, so one can reasonable assume they are either
a) not even in scope
b) have less issues
This assumption (acknowledge it is an assumption) is based on common sense, target your resources on the biggest opportunity first. So "widespread" seems to be becoming more "isolated"

2. Note use of plural, all clubs - with the possible exception of the Sharks are clear. Again exaggeration of facts based on what was presented yesterday

3. Silence on this point, so will not comment. But a salient point is all the betting agencies have said there is nothing they are aware of.

4. Again use of plural, and again with the exception of the Sharks clubs and by extension officials are cleared. And again silence on the other codes so I will keep my counsel there

Yes I believe there is something to it, no I do not believe it is as extensive as we were led to believe

PS - I checked for any breaking or unfolding news, there isn't any in relation to this issue that I could find

 

[Ralphie]

With all that's going on in the media today, I am expecting ASADA to call another media conference at 4.30pm today.

 

[voicefromthehill]

With all that's going on in the media today, I am expecting ASADA to call another media conference at 4.30pm today.

Jason Clare will do a proxy vote in the spill 😉

 

[susan]

Have you read the report SER8 & Susan ?

No Jatz.All I am saying is that people who have seen the report say there is an issue to be dealt with based on the evidence at hand and when compared to people who base their case on zero information you simply have to give more credence to the investigators simply and solely because they have access to information.It is pretty hard to fault that logic. It is no more complicated than that and for the record I hope these people are wrong in their analysis.

My main point is that if you don't know anything at all (as we all don't) the most sensible thing to do is simply wait for the result and not just declare the whole thing a hoax with zero information.To suggest that they have nothing and it is all just a big fairytale defies logic. The issue lies in the extent of the problem, not that a problem exists. It exists in every professional sport in the world and to suggest it doesn't in our game is naive and ridiculous.

The good news is that other than Cronulla there seems to be no systematic use by clubs which is the bigger issue.If it is individual players trying to rort the system as looks likely-catch them, boot them out for two years, set up proper systems going forward and it is all done and we can get back to watching the eagles win another title.

As I said before the footy is good and Manly is winning.

 

[The Royal Soup]

i need a PM, someone PM me! Im having PM anxiety!!!!!

 

[voicefromthehill]

i need a PM, someone PM me! Im having PM anxiety!!!!!

Mate don't stress, Gillard is still the PM

 

[mickqld]

UNBELIEVABLE !!!!!!!!!!
Paul K*nt on NRL 360 and i quote.
"We have to be very careful what we print in the newspapers about this drugs issue so we don't speculate and make unfounded accusations against players or clubs."
What a FU**IN hypocrite.

 

[SeaEagleRock8]

VFTH, why quote some reporter's lazily paraphrased summary, instead of the words that were actually said? The footage is still widely available online.

In short – re the word 'widespread' – true, it is not defined. However your reasoning is impossibly flawed in deciding there may be 6% of users in the NRL. You are simply guessing.

Your other points, about the use of 'plurals' in your points 2 & 4, are also incorrect. What has already been revealed in relation to the Sharks and Essendon strongly suggests those points were indeed correctly stated.

Re the last point, though it scarcely needs to be stated, the news that breaks in the mass media is not always correct. Likewise, many things are occurring that are not reported in the mass media.

 

[voicefromthehill]

VFTH, why quote some reporter's lazily paraphrased summary, instead of the words that were actually said? The footage is still widely available online.

In short – re the word 'widespread' – true, it is not defined. However your reasoning is impossibly flawed in deciding there may be 6% of users in the NRL. You are simply guessing.

Your other points, about the use of 'plurals' in your points 2 & 4, are also incorrect. What has already been revealed in relation to the Sharks and Essendon strongly suggests those points were indeed correctly stated.

Re the last point, though it scarcely needs to be stated, the news that breaks in the mass media is not always correct. Likewise, many things are occurring that are not reported in the mass media.

@[SeaEagleRock8] no reporters lazily paraphrased summary - rather a direct extract from Senator Clare's media releases from his parliamentary website, so direct from the source

will address the rest later

 

[SeaEagleRock8]

Have you read the report SER8 & Susan ?

Nope!

---

@[SeaEagleRock8] no reporters lazily paraphrased summary - rather a direct extract from Senator Clare's media releases from his parliamentary website, so direct from the source

will address the rest later

OK sorry VFTH I jumped to that conclusion because the words he used in the speech were similar but not identical.

 

[MadMarcus]

. . . I am not saying nothing happened - but their stance is softening from the original "Blackest day in sport"

Well that is certainly great news, I hadn't heard that. Who said what (do you have a link)?

(although of course it wasn't the politicians or ASADA or the ACC who made that 'blackest day' comment)

pps things are continuing to unfold even as I type this, so I recommend no-one jumps to conclusions one way or the other!

Facetiousness aside - you and I both know that there is no "supporting quote"

The former head of ASADA, Richard Ings, said: ''This is not a black day in Australian sport, this is the blackest day.''

Read more: http://www.smh.com.au/national/this-is-the-blackest-day-in-australian-sport-20130207-2e1i3.html#ixzz2O9zlIrq5

 

[wombatgc]

Mental note...don't take on SER8.Susan,and VFTH ...
some fine intellectual tennis going on!😉

 

[voicefromthehill]

VFTH, why quote some reporter's lazily paraphrased summary, instead of the words that were actually said? The footage is still widely available online.

In short – re the word 'widespread' – true, it is not defined. However your reasoning is impossibly flawed in deciding there may be 6% of users in the NRL. You are simply guessing.

Your other points, about the use of 'plurals' in your points 2 & 4, are also incorrect. What has already been revealed in relation to the Sharks and Essendon strongly suggests those points were indeed correctly stated.

Re the last point, though it scarcely needs to be stated, the news that breaks in the mass media is not always correct. Likewise, many things are occurring that are not reported in the mass media.

OK to the other points

re the word widespread, I do not see the impossibly flawed logic of 6%. Fact, multiple news sources 20 March state that ASADA have moved on from clubs to individuals - with 31 being the quoted, and to date undisputed, number. That number represents a total of 6% of potential targets in NRL top 25 player by club, by rights statistically insignificant, I will wait to see the distribution of those ultimately charged to see if there is a statistical significance of those charged by club association - will happily conduct ANOVA test or Kruskal Wallis as appropriate

Plurals - we all know the intended impact of the word and it is disingenuous to call the two clubs as evidence of the value of the word in this instance. Two clubs being implicated out of circa 50 is again an intended overstatement.

Oh and no worries about the misunderstanding concerning the quotes. Though it is surprising a Labor minister can't stay on message 😉

 

[Rex]

The reference provided by Berks is good stuff. Probably the most relevant point is:

"We have called for the media and the public to respect the ASADA process, without prejudging any individual or club." - That is exactly where the problem is - in the prejudging.

Only fools prejudge. Yes? Can anyone dispute that? So the real issue is who is prejudging, and who incites these people to prejudge? i.e. who incites people to be fools? Is it really who you think?

On a separate point, who did Bones say above came out with the headline of "Manly next"?

 

[SeaEagleRock8]

Mental note...don't take on SER8.Susan,and VFTH ...
some fine intellectual tennis going on!😉

On the contrary wombatgc, take on anyone and everyone! Debate & discussion helps all parties to clarify our ideas (providing they have an open mind!)

I have mainly bought into this discussion when I read unfounded assumptions or flawed logic. (Of course I'm never guilty of these )

The current example being VFTH's mathematical calculation, which seems to rest on the premise that the 30 players who are to be interviewed (a) are the guilty ones, and (b) are the only guilty ones.

It was made plain from the start that this painful process would take time. The interviews are not the end but just a step in the investigation. Unless you know something more than has been stated to date?

As to the semantic dispute about 'widespread', well I give up there. If an average of one cheat in every single club is not widespread cheating, then what is it? So even 30 is not 'widespread'? How about 35? Does 'widespread' only kick in at 42? :huh:

 

[voicefromthehill]

Mental note...don't take on SER8.Susan,and VFTH ...
some fine intellectual tennis going on!😉

On the contrary wombatgc, take on anyone and everyone! Debate & discussion helps all parties to clarify our ideas (providing they have an open mind!)

I have mainly bought into this discussion when I read unfounded assumptions or flawed logic. (Of course I'm never guilty of these )

The current example being VFTH's mathematical calculation, which seems to rest on the premise that the 30 players who are to be interviewed (a) are the guilty ones, and (b) are the only guilty ones.

It was made plain from the start that this painful process would take time. The interviews are not the end but just a step in the investigation. Unless you know something more than has been stated to date?

As to the semantic dispute about 'widespread', well I give up there. If an average of one cheat in every single club is not widespread cheating, then what is it? So even 30 is not 'widespread'? How about 35? Does 'widespread' only kick in at 42? :huh:

Flawed logic based on your viewpoint does not make it fatally flawed, on the contrary maths is the foundation of pure logic. And your haste to shoot down a contrary viewpoint has caused you to assume twice

1) that I grabbed a newspaper clipping, as opposed to the accredited source in my post
2) Believe the 31 are guilty - clearly refuted in point 1 of my opening post.

We will undoubtedly agree to disagree but my point re "widespread" may not have been clearly stated. It is based on the attendees of original press conference representing ~50 professional teams. I could well have used the players from all those teams to prove the point, taking our end number to a fraction of a percent, but I chose not to.

However it has now been (at this stage) narrowed down to 31 players (not all suspects) in one code. NRL may have a problem, it does not however appear that Australian sport has a widespread problem. Or do you believe equally that 31 players in NRL represent a widespread problem in Australian sport (await reply that NRL is only sport in Australia.

Again I do believe there is a problem, but as I stated I believe it was hijacked for a political purpose, and hyperbole was used to maximum effect.

 

[Brookie]

this thread is crap now, like reading uni essays

 

[voicefromthehill]

this thread is crap now, like reading uni essays

I'm surprised a QLDer would know what they looked like 😛

 

[Brookie]

born and raised in the ACT bud, i'm a public servant too 😛
did a block release uni course in Sydney

i'm a bit like GI, i studied Qld in geography once at school which qualifies me...lol!

 

[niccipops]

Mental note...don't take on SER8.Susan,and VFTH ...
some fine intellectual tennis going on!😉

You forgot to mention me Wombat. I know a lot about sardines.😛