Ironically, if the AFL officials hadn’t breached the AFL’s Anti-Doping Code in late 2011 and early 2012, the whole saga probably would not have occurred.

Integrity Manager, Brett Clothier

1. AFL integrity manager, Brett Clothier, allegedly told Hamilton, Hird and Corcoran, at their 5 August 2011 meeting, that peptides were banned and warned him not to use them. As Clothier was responsible for maintaining the integrity of the competition, he should have immediately investigated Essendon to ensure it was complying with the AFL’s Anti-Doping rules and the Victorian OH&S laws.
   
   
2. AFL deputy chief executive Gillon McLachlan implied that Clothier then should have conducted periodic audits to ensure Essendon was complying with his alleged warning. Clothier also should have written to the AFL’s general manager – football operations, Adrian Anderson, and to Essendon chief executive, Ian Robson, and informed them that he had issued a warning to Hamilton, Hird and Corcoran. If Clothier had done his job the whole saga would not have occurred.
   

Medical Officer, Dr Peter Harcourt

1. On 19 October 2011, 713 days after Clothier’s meeting with Hamilton, Corcoran and Hird, Dr Bruce Reid phoned the AFL’s medical officer, Dr Peter Harcourt, and told him that Dean Robinson had given the Essendon players a substance called Tribulus without his permission.
   
   
2. Marginalising Dr Reid was a possible breach of the AFL’s Anti-Doping Code and Dr Harcourt was required to report the possible breach immediately. Clause 4.6 of the AFL’s anti-doping code says: “Where reasonable and as soon as the AFL becomes aware that a possible Anti-Doping Rule Violation may have occurred, the AFL will immediately advise ASADA of the possible violation. The AFL will provide ASADA with all information pertaining to the possible Ant-Doping Rule Violation.”
   
   
3. Dr Harcourt failed to report the matter to ASADA. Like Demetriou, McLachlan and Clothier’s inertia, if Dr Harcourt had fulfilled his responsibilities, the whole saga may not have occurred.

General Manager, Football Operations, Adrian Anderson

On 24 April 2012, the AFL’s general manager – Football Operations, Adrian Anderson sent an email to every club titled ‘Leading Approach to Sports Medicine & Sports Science in AFL’. The discussion paper that was attached to the email, identified a range of ‘issues’ and ‘possible consequences’ that had arisen under the existing medical arrangements within AFL clubs. Inter alia it said [in] the AFLMOA survey of club doctors (14 clubs responded):


• 7/14 said non-medically qualified personnel had exerted undue influence on medical decision making on one or more occasions in the previous 12 months
• 6/14 said this had adversely affected medical decisions on one or more occasions
• Non-evidence based medical practices are growing which presents potential medical and injury risk ie, IV vitamins/supplements, specialist referrals without doctor input, radiation exposure and unhygienic facilities.
• The possible consequences were potential risk to player welfare (emergency cover, mistreatment, etc; exposes club, club staff & coaches, and AFL to potential litigation; issue with MO recruitment and retention; potential MO insurance issues.

Inexplicably, Anderson and the AFL failed to do anything, despite its obligation under Clause 4.6 of the AFL’s anti-doping code to report it to ASADA.

Chief Executive Andrew Demetriou

1. Andrew Demetriou was aware of Essendon’s interest in supplements in 2011, and aware that its doctor was marginalised by its sports scientists. He was quoted on 12 April 2013 saying “he had erred early last year in not acting more strongly on his fears sports scientists were overruling club doctors”.
   
   
2. Demetriou told Mike Sheahan in his 27 September 2013 interview that “We sought of had an inkling. I was privy to some information and (was) hearing things and certain things were happening Mike. At a couple of clubs, we were having doctors being marginalised. There were just things happening and it was part of an unhealthy, and oh, it was just an awkward trend which we didn’t like and I regret that we didn’t do something earlier. This was a misleading and disgraceful admission. Misleading because “I regret we didn’t do something earlier” implies that the AFL actually did something. That is factually incorrect. The AFL did nothing until Evans self-reported on 5 February 2013. Furthermore, it’s an admission that the AFL failed its governance obligations and that it didn’t fulfil its duty of care obligations to the Essendon players. Demetriou clearly acknowledged that he didn’t fulfil his responsibilities and was accepting some blame for what happened at Essendon.
   
   
3. According to ASADA, in order to enforce anti-doping rules against athletes or support persons, sporting organisations must maintain a contractual relationship with those persons. The contractual relationship is generally enabled through a registration process requiring athletes and support persons to abide with the anti-doping policies of the sport.
   
   
4. As Essendon was never given a home address for Dank and as there wasn’t a single piece of paper in his HR file, it is extremely unlikely that Essendon ever had a contractual relationship that would satisfy the WADA Code. This was obviously a failure by Robson, Hamilton and the HR manager. Just as importantly, whoever was responsible at the AFL for ensuring all support staff were registered, failed to do his/her job.