Dear M/s Wilson

RE:Coaches exitas playerpowerrisesintheAFL–October 10, 2014

I don’t care that you appear to have no respect for yourself. However, I am concerned that you appear to have no respect for your readers or your profession. Bad health notwithstanding, I have all the time in the world. You are the reason I get out of bed. You keep writing garbage and I’ll keep exposing it. Hopefully, some of your peers will eventually find enough bottle to tell you that what you are doing is a reflection on them and the profession. It’s almost impossible to find an article of yours over the last 18 months that doesn’t breach the journalists’ codes. The articles are invariably littered with opinions masquerading as facts, factual errors, and are not balanced.

Item (Wilson)1:“Only at one club-Essendon-has playerpower failed to yet force or at least strongly influence the sacking of the coach James Hird.”

MyComment:

This is appallingly written. Many of your readers would believe you are implying that the players want to get rid of Hird and have failed. That is not true.

Item(Wilson)2:This[ the players wanting Hird sacked] despite the fact that the Bombers’ star ruckman / forward Paddy Ryder could finish up leaving Essendon for no return because of the welfare failings of coach and club.

MyComment:

1. Ryder has two more years to run on his contract. He hasn’t challenged the legitimacy of his contract. Adelaide should not be trying to induce him to breach his contract. A decent journalist would have at least canvassed this situation.
   
   
2. The coach didn’t fail to fulfil his obligations. You haven’t even tried to make the case, let alone offered evidence or proof. A decent journalist would have explained what Hird’s legal obligations were.
   
   
3. Essendon failed to fulfil its obligations under the Victorian Occupation Health and Safety Act. A decent journalist would have explained what those obligations were.
   
   
4. Although Essendon failed to fulfil its OH&S obligations, it could possibly make a case that it fulfilled its obligations under clauses 7.3 and 12.0 of the AFL / Essendon / Player Agreement.
   
   
5. The fact that Dr Reid was exonerated by the AFL means that the AFL recognises that Dr Reid could not have done more than he did to monitor the program. Everyone accepts that some players were given substances without Dr Reid and Paul Hamilton’s knowledge. If they have no case to answer, it is incomprehensible that anyone would argue Hird had a case to answer. In the context of legal responsibility, Hird was in a different post code from Hamilton, Dr Reid, Robinson, the Essendon board and the AFL Commission and senior executives such Andrew Demetriou, Gillon McLachlan, Andrew Dillon and Brett Clothier.
   
   
6. The AFL failed to fulfil its obligations to Ryder under clauses 7.3 and 12.0 of the AFL / Essendon / Player Agreement, and therefore should be held equally responsible with the Essendon board for any issues Ryder has. A decent, unbiased journalist seeking the truth would have explained what those obligations were.
   
   
7. And let’s not forget the AFL Players Association. What a useless organisation that is. Although money and conditions are very important, the most crucial function the AFLPA performs is to ensure players aren’t suspended for lengthy periods. If you are suspended for drug violations you not only bring shame on yourself, club and code, but you can’t earn any money. Therefore, the AFLPA’s most important job is to inculcate all its players to comply with Clauses 5.3 (c) i to vi, and 7.4 of the AFL’s Anti-Doping Code. Essendon clearly didn’t comply. I’d bet none of the clubs complies with clause 7.4. If I am correct, it is a monumental stuff up by the AFLPA.
   
   
8. Oh, I nearly forgot, the issue buried by the media. Ryder had responsibilities of his own under clauses 5.3 (c) i to vi, and 7.4 of the AFL’s Anti-Doping Code. Responsibilities, which he failed to fulfil. Ryder is a responsible person. He is a parent. He votes. There is no evidence he was intimidated to take the substances. If he were, he would have taken more than the few he took.

Item(Wilson) 3: “Ryder has publiclydeclaredhow theclub haslet him down, that hehaslost faith after 20 months of empty assurances from Essendon, and how the drugs program Hird allowed had led him to fear for his unborn son.”

MyComment:

1. Although most people experience extreme anguish when they are waiting for the results of MRIs and blood tests for unexplained illnesses, none could begin to comprehend the anguish that Paddy Ryder and his team-mates and their families have gone through over the last 18 months. Apart from the brain-dead people whole troll social media, there wouldn’t be a person who wouldn’t support doing everything possible to improve the players psychological well-being. However, surely the punishment has to be fair on all stakeholders. As will be explained in the following points, the AFL and ASADA were bigger transgressors than Essendon.
   
   
2. Allowing Ryder and three or four other players to leave wouldn’t be fair on those players who chose to stay. Allowing Ryder to pick his club is a joke. If Essendon lose Ryder, they have no hope of winning a premiership in the medium term, so, Heppell, Carlisle and Watson may also choose to join Ryder at Port Adelaide. David Koch would love to have them. His indignation is only confined to a coach who he wanted banned for life for not stopping the programme. Apparently, he has no problem with players who took the substances.
   
   
3. Although I don’t agree with allowing Ryder to leave, if that is the AFL’s decision, why not give him a choice of Melbourne, St Kilda, Western Bulldogs or Brisbane?
   
   
4. Notwithstanding, the AFL’s failure to stop the program in 2011, when it learnt of problems at Essendon, ASADA has contributed more to Ryder’s problems than anybody. The Herald Sun (10 October 2014) said “These fears were first raised at an ASADA interview – at that stage Jess was pregnant with Harlan – where he learnt there was potential for complications with the birth because of the supplements program he was part of in 2012.” The paper quoted Ryder saying ‘We were told that we could have serious complications for our child. It just put so much stress on my partner and my family.’ I don’t know the law, and after Justice Middleton’s decision to allow ASADA to include sealed Australian Crime Commission SMSs in the Interim Report, I apparently don’t know the ASADA Act, but I can’t believe it was ethical for the ASADA investigator to convey such advice to Ryder. He was an ex-cop. I note he didn’t quantify how many babies had complications from their father taking these substances. I’d be amazed to learn that the ASADA investigator was qualified to give such advice. As it transpires, the only substance of concern to ASADA is Thymosin Beta-4, and Ryder wasn’t administered any form of Thymosin. If Ryder received a show-cause notice, he shouldn’t have. Perhaps, just another ASADA ploy to play with the players’ minds!
   
   
5. Why is it that you and your colleagues at the Age rarely use quotation marks unless you are quoting unnamed sources or lifting quotes made by Tim Watson on Channel Seven? Won’t anyone talk to you? I’m not surprised.
   
   
6. I can’t find any reference to Ryder talking about “the drugs program Hird allowed”. That reference is a grubby comment created by you. Hird wouldn’t know an aspro from a vitamin C tablet. Hird left the program to the experts. His only involvement was to stipulate that all substances had to be WADA permitted.
   
   
7. The Herald Sun (10 October 2014) quoted Ryder saying: “If it had been done and dusted and all wrapped up within six months, as I trusted it would – and everyone was telling us that it was going to be over soon – then I would still be happy to be at the footy club.”
   
   i. On 20 February 2013, an ASADA official told the players they had nothing to worry about. If they told the truth they wouldn’t be suspended.
   
   ii. The only substance of concern to ASADA is Thymosin Beta-4. As Ryder testified to ASADA that Dank told him the name of each substance he was given, and that Ryder told ASADA he wasn’t administered any form of Thymosin, Ryder shouldn’t be worrying about his health or about being suspended.
   
   iii. The delay up until June this year was caused by ASADA and the AFL’s incompetence. Essendon and Hird didn’t cause any delay until they lodged their Federal Court action. Even then, if ASADA had acted responsibly an included its evidence with the show-cause notices, Essendon and Hird may not have commenced proceedings.

Item(Wilson)4: “Tellingly,Ryderwouldnotsupportthecoachwhohangsontohisjobdueto a series of legal threats.”

MyComment:

1. Once again, this is appallingly written. There are two unrelated points in the one sentence. What has Hird’s alleged “legal threats” got to do with Ryder’s attitude to Hird?
   
   
2. This is more Alice in Wonderland stuff. It’s disgraceful journalism. It is a breach of the various codes. The Herald Sun (10 October 2014) said “He would not discuss the role of embattled coach James Hird, describing their relationship as ‘pretty good’.” How do you keep a straight face and equate a ‘pretty good relationship’ with: ‘Ryder would not support the coach’? I have no idea whether Ryder would or wouldn’t support Hird. The fact you haven’t used direct quotes suggests you have no idea either. Why mislead your readers?

Item (Wilson) 5: “Player power was not enough to stop the injection program and various other potentially dangerous treatments to young footballers.”

MyComment:

1. Once again grubby journalism. What does “player power” mean? I suspect most people would interpret “player power” to mean the players as a group tried to stop the injection program and were defeated, which is what you were inferring.
   
   
2. The players as a group never tried to stop the injection program or the tablet program or the cream programme.
   
   
3. The players were free to make their own decision, proof of which is contained in the table of “Admitted use of substances” created by ASADA from the player interviews. Notwithstanding, ASADA fiddled the figures, only one of the 16 substances was taken by more than half of the players. Ironically, that occurred on 19 October 2011 (the first day of 2012 pre-season training) and Dr Reid reported the matter to the AFL because it was done without his knowledge and because he believed the substance may have been banned. The AFL did nothing. If the AFL had reported the matter to ASADA as it was required to under Clause 4.6 of the AFL’s anti-doping code, the whole saga would not have occurred.
   
   
4. Furthermore, some players took some substances and not others. There was no consistency across the board. That indicates that the players were not intimated to take a substance. More importantly it indicates that the players didn’t feel intimidated to take a substance.
   
   
5. Don’t you think it is time you told us how many injections the players received? And while you are at it, explain what “potentially dangerous” means and nominate the substances which this applies to. Given ASADA has only nominated Thymosin Beta-4 as the only substance of concern, I suspect your list won’t be very long.

Item (Wilson) 6: “It has become clear the treatment afforded the players was reflective of a jab-happy chemical environment in which coaches, executives, trainers and other staffers indulged – too many of whom remain at Essendon.”

MyComment:

1. I am sick of you making sweeping statements you can’t substantiate. “Clear to whom? My understanding is ASADA is only concerned about one substance, Thymosin Beta-4 and the Interim Report didn’t include any evidence that any player was administered Thymosin Beta-4.
   
   
2. Please share the information that you have obviously been leaked. Identify the players, the substances and the number of injections each was administered. And please don’t quote Switkowski. He said he wasn’t qualified to discuss drugs. He didn’t interview Dank or Robinson and I suspect he didn’t interview the man in charge of the football department and supplements program, Paul Hamilton. He only interviewed three players. Switkowski wasn’t in a position to comment about the issue. As I have said previously, I should like to know who wrote the infamous “pharmacologically experimental environment” sentence. I’ve been told it wasn’t Switkowski.

Item(Wilson) 7: That Hird allowedit and still fails to see how badly helet down his players is so disappointing.

MyComment:

1. You have no shame. You have never attempted to prove Hird was in charge of the football department or supplementation program. Hamilton was. You or your newspaper hasn’t described the Essendon organisation structure nor published Hird’s job description.
   
   
2. In mid-2011, David Evans, Ian Robson, Paul Hamilton, Danny Corcoran, James Hird and Mark Thompson decided to adopt a more scientific approach to training and recovery. To that end, Robinson was employed as the high-performance coach and Dank was contracted as an outside consultant. The procedure was simple. Dank recommended substances and Robinson either approved or rejected Dank’s suggestions. Robinson then had to obtain approval from Dr Reid to use a substance. General Manager – football operations, Paul Hamilton was responsible for the overall program and belatedly insisted all paperwork was lodged with him.
   
   
3. I assume, Hird, like most of his fellow AFL club coaches, knows nothing about supplements, peptides, weight training, medicine, physiotherapy, human resources, occupational health and safety, marketing and accounting, and left it to the experts. However, he did stipulate that under no circumstances was a player to be administered WADA / ASADA / AFL banned substances.
   
   
4. Hird has never seen any evidence that the players were administered a banned substance, so, saw no need to interfere. On each occasion, Hird learnt that Dr Reid had been marginalised, he interfered immediately. As did Mark Thompson.
   
   
5. On the other hand, the AFL was told on 19 October 2011, there may have been a breach of the anti-doping code and did nothing. Subsequently, the AFL has been quoted on many occasions that it believed the players were given dangerous banned substances, and did nothing for over 12 months. The AFL should be in the ‘dock’ not Hird. Ryder should be venting his spleen at the AFL.

Item(Wilson)8: “Whilethecoachcontinueshisfighttosuppressthetruth,hischairman, having told him he would be sacked, has at least temporarily backed down.”

MyComment:

1. Why don’t you publish the truth and explain how Hird is trying to suppress it. Hird has testified to ASADA and Justice Middleton, and given evidence to Switkowski. He initiated Supreme Court action in August 2013 in order for the truth to be revealed but withdrew because of intimidation from the AFL and Essendon.
   
   
2. And let’s not forget you carrying on like a hectoring fishwife denigrating him for wanting to go to court. You didn’t want the truth revealed then. Now you attack Hird claiming he is trying to hide the truth. You are nothing but an arsonist in a fireman’s uniform.
   
   
3. Oh, and what about the AFL not conducting a hearing, and capitulating when Dr Reid initiated proceedings that would have ensured the truth was known.
   
   
4. You and your newspaper have suppressed the truth by NOT:
   
   i. Publishing the Essendon organisation chart and Hird’s job description.
   
   ii. Publishing the AFL’s duty of care responsibilities to Ryder and the players under clauses 7.3 and 12.0 of the AFL/Essendon/Player Agreement;
   
   iii. Publishing that Dr Reid reported a possible breach of the WADA code on 19 October 2011.
   
   iv. Publishing that the AFL breached clause 4.6 of the AFL’s Anti-Doping Code by not reporting Dr Reid’s concerns of 19 October 2011 to ASADA.
   
   v. Publishing, that despite their evidence to the contrary, David Evans and Ian Robson knew about the supplementation program throughout 2012.
   
   vi. Publishing that Dr Reid, Hird and Danny Corcoran wanted Evans and Robson to terminate Robinson’s employment in July 2012, but they refused on the grounds Essendon couldn’t afford the payout.
   
   vii. Publishing that at its August 2012 board meeting, the Essendon board discussed, and endorsed, Evans and Robson’s decision not to terminate Robinson.
   
   viii. Publishing the Essendon board members responsibilities under the Victorian OH&S Act.
   
   ix. Publishing Hird and Thompson’s responsibilities under the Victorian OH&S Act.
   
   x. Publishing Adrian Anderson’s 24 April 2012 email, which flagged catastrophic consequences as a result of many club doctors being marginalised by their science staff.
   
   xi. Publishing Gillon McLachlan’s claim that the whole saga may not have happened, if the AFL had been more vigilant.
   
   xii. Publishing the proof, I supplied you that ASADA fiddled / fabricated the table of “Admitted use of specific substances by players.
   
   xiii. Publishing proof that ASADA omitted key evidence from the Interim Report.
   
   xiv. Publishing that ASADA breached the confidentiality provisions of the Act by including SMSs in the Interim Report that were provided by the Australian Crime Commission.
   
   xv. Publishing a list of claims made by Demetriou which were incorrect. I have a list of those incorrect claims that is longer than Ryder’s arm.
   
   xvi. Ascertaining whether the AFL pressured Essendon to suspend Dean Robinson and whether the AFL pressured Essendon to settle with Robinson for about $1 million dollars.
   
   
5. “His chairman, having told him he would be sacked.” I can’t recall seeing Little being quoted directly to that effect. However, I do recall reading that you said Hird had been sacked. But then again, I have read words to that effect from you for 15 plus months.”

Item(Wilson) 9: “This has led to the inevitable conclusion that James Hird is bigger than the club. Perhaps it was this very aura that stopped players from putting a stop to the experimental treatment that sees 34 of them facing playing bans for doping.”

MyComment:

1. This is garbage. You have never explained where Hird fitted in, in the supplementation program. You have never explained what Hird should have done, and when.
   
   
2. You haven’t even produced any evidence that the players took Thymosin Beta-4.

Item (Wilson) 10: “At the Gold Coast, the Suns appear to be harbouring misgivings about rushing to employ Mark Thompson as senior coach. The AFL denies having influenced those second thoughts despite the competition’s concerns regarding Thompson’s unpredictable behaviour.”

MyComment:

1. I have no idea whether the Suns is having second thoughts about Thompson. I have no idea whether the AFL has tried to influence the Suns. I do know that if the AFL hasn’t tried to influence the Suns it is the first time since this saga started that it hasn’t tried to influence the key decisions.
   
   
2. Sorry, I lie. The AFL did not try and stop the players taking substances, which they thought may be dangerous and banned.

Bruce Francis