15 March 2015

By email

The Hon S Ley MP

Minister for Health and Sport
P O Box 6022
House of Representatives
Parliament House
Canberra ACT 2600
Dear Minister
GUILTY: THE AFL, ASADA, THE GILLARD GOVERNMENT OR JAMES HIRD?

Although millions of words have been written about what has become known as the
Essendon Saga, few people have any idea of what happened. Here comes the version that
comfortably attracts the description, the truth. Its the version you wont see in the AFL
approved Fairfax one. It is however, the version that will explain once and for all this awful
blight on Australian sport, thrust on us by a desperate Federal Labor Government and taken
up in extremis by an out of control sporting body, a complicit Federal Government agency,
and a media which didnt care about trashing its own profession.
Essendon uses a matrix organisation structure. For some inexplicable reason, someone at
Essendon in an aberrated moment decided that senior coach James Hird should be on a
different branch from the football department. That meant Hird reported to chief executive
Ian Robson and only had his four assistant coaches Mark Thompson, Brendan McCartney,
Simon Goodwin and Sean Wellman reporting to him.
Paul Hamilton headed the football department and was general manager - football operations.
The football department had a $50 million budget which was overseen by Hamilton and he,
unlike Hird, was on the Essendon executive committee. Hamilton reported to chief executive
Ian Robson. The doctors, physiotherapists, psychologist, conditioners, weight trainers,
dietician, all reported to the high performance coach, Stuart Cormack (and then Dean
Robinson on Cormacks resignation). Cormack, and then Robinson, reported to Hamilton.
The supplements program fell under Hamiltons control.
In May 2011, Essendon chairman, David Evans, Ian Robson, Paul Hamilton, the manager
people and development Danny Corcoran, senior coach James Hird and assistant coach Mark
Thompson met and agreed that the players were not big enough, fast enough or strong enough
to win a premiership. As the former coach of Geelong, Mark Thompson was in an excellent
position to compare and contrast Essendons players with Geelongs players, and in his view,
the Bombers were a long way off the pace. It was agreed that Essendon needed to adopt a
more scientific approach to training to compete with the competition heavyweights.


Coincidentally, at the same time, high performance coach Stuart Cormack decided to resign
and left of his own accord on 16 June 2011. About 100 people applied for the vacant job.
Dean Robinson was not one of the applicants. Twelve were short-listed and it was decided to
approach three of the candidates. The preferred candidate, Darren Burgess, subsequently
accepted a contract at Port Adelaide. About the same time Gold Coast Suns high performance
manager, Dean Robinson, phoned Mark Thompson and said he was keen to return to
Melbourne and asked if there were any vacancies at Essendon. Robinson was granted an
interview and was subsequently employed. Robinson had worked for Thompson at Geelong
during two premiership wins. Robinson commenced on 25 August 2011.
On 19 October 2011, the first day of 2012 pre-season training, Dr Reid discovered that
Robinson had given some players different peptides without his permission. Dr Reid
immediately phoned the AFL and reported the matter. Neither the Essendon board nor
Hamilton nor Hird was informed of the matter by the AFL. According to clause 4.6 of the
AFLs Anti-Doping Code, the AFL should have immediately informed ASADA. The AFL
also had an obligation to inform Robson or Evans. Most, if not everyone, would argue that
the AFL should have run down to Essendon an audited the club. The AFL failed to inform
ASADA, and did not conduct an audit at Essendon. Hird left the next day for a five-week
overseas holiday and was never made aware of the situation.
When Robinson was interviewed he expressed a strong desire to bring Stephen Dank, Suki
Hobson and Jonah Oliver with him. Dank commenced his consultancy work at Essendon on 4
November 2011. Initially, it was expected that Dank would sign a one-year employment
contract. However, it transpired that Danks company Applied Orthopaedic Science Pty Ltd
was engaged as a consultant. Dank was the companys representative who serviced the
consultancy agreement. He was required to make recommendations on the fitness program,
which included the recovery and supplement programs. Dank recommended various
supplements to Robinson. If Robinson were convinced the substances would be beneficial, he
had to obtain Dr Reids permission to include them in the program.
During the week commencing 9 January 2012, Dr Reid once again discovered that some of
the players had been given substances without his knowledge. As his department head, Paul
Hamilton, was absent, Dr Reid expressed his concern to James Hird. Hird told Dr Reid that
he had to go through the correct channels and report the matter to his department head, Paul
Hamilton, and if necessary, both should speak to chief executive Robson.


Dr Reid spoke to Hamilton the same afternoon and Hamilton spoke to Robson the following
day. Hamilton also severely chastised Dean Robinson and told him he had to control those
who reported to him. In his report, Ziggy Switkowski said: Following concerns about the
program in January, the Senior Coach reasserted the principles about the supplement program
that:

any supplement must be WADA and ASADA compliant;

it must not be harmful to players health;

players must be properly informed about anything entering their bodies, and

every product was to be cleared for use by the doctor.

As the existing protocols were inadequate, Robinson drew up a new set of procedures and
protocols. At senior player Mark McVeighs request, Robinson called a meeting of all players
and explained the new protocols. Dank also was present.
On 2 February 2012, Hamilton sent a memo informing his staff that all matters concerning
the supplement program had to come across his desk. The following week 38 players signed
Patient Information/Informed Consent forms agreeing to be administered AOD-9604,
Thymosin, Colostrum and Tribulus. As it transpired, the vast majority of the players were not
administered all four substances. Four only remembered being administered Thymosin and
one remembered being administered Thymomodulin.
On three occasions Thompson discovered that Dank was not complying with the new
protocols. Although Thompson was not in Hamilton and Robinsons football department, and
although Dank was only a consultant, which meant the assistant coach had no authority to
interfere, Thompson severely reprimanded Dank. In May 2012, Thompson told Dank he had
to cease injecting players. Hird was aware of Danks transgressions on two occasions, and
despite having no authority, spoke to Dank immediately.
In July 2012, Evans, Robson, Hird, Corcoran and Dr Reid met at Hirds home. Dr Reid,
supported by Hird and Corcoran, asked Evans and Robson to terminate Robinsons services
because he was not following the correct procedures and because he couldnt control Dank.
Evans and Robson refused on the grounds that the club could not afford the pay-out. The
board supported Evans and Robsons decision at the August board meeting.
On 21 August 2012, Hamilton delivered the key findings of the clubs internal review into
soft tissue injuries. Robson headed up the committee. Inter alia, the report said Stop going
for magic cures Stop supplementation that is not medically based Stop injection
mentality.


On 1 February 2013, David Evans told Dr Reid that Andrew Demetriou and Gillon
McLachlan had told him that Essendon players had been taking WADA banned substances.
Dr Reid denied that the players had taken banned substances.
On, or before 5 February 2013, the AFL demanded Essendon not only suspend Dean
Robinson but insisted that the club employ Liz Lukin as a media consultant. Lukins job was
to control the media and minimise the fallout for Essendon. Although Lukin hadnt looked at
the Essendon organisation structure, nor Hirds job description, her solution to the problem
was to persuade Hird to take full responsibility. This solution conveniently got Evans,
Robson and the Essendon board off the hook. That meant potentially only Hird and the
players were liable for punishment.
As Hird wasnt a member of the football department, and as he had no direct input into the
supplement program, he refused to take responsibility. Lukin claimed that she was hired to
clean the mess and eventually badgered Hird into accepting full responsibility for the
supplements program.
Shortly after going ten rounds with Lukin, AFL deputy chief executive, Gillon McLachlan,
stepped into the ring with Hird, prior to the clubs media conference on 5 February 2015.
McLachlan and Hird fought over what Hird wanted to say at the media conference.
McLachlan told Hird in no uncertain terms what he had to say and what he couldnt say. This
was very surprising behaviour by McLachlan because the battle lines had already been drawn
on 1 February 2013, when ASADA and the AFL had agreed to conduct a joint investigation
into Essendon. Hird was unaware that the joint investigation had commenced and thought
McLachlan was offering friendly advice. He didnt know that McLachlan was one of the key
people prosecuting the case against him and the club.
On 7 February 2013, The Australian Crime Commission, ASADA, the Australian Federal
Police, Federal Labor Ministers Jason Clare and Kate Lundy held a media conference which
was later described as the blackest day in Australias sporting history. The Gillard
Government made it very clear that metaphorically speaking a life sentence behind bars
wasnt enough, it wanted a hanging.
On 19 February 2013, ASADA told the Essendon players that if they co-operated with the
investigators they wouldnt be suspended. This deal had been worked out with the AFL.
Thus, four days after the first witness was interviewed, Evans, Robson, the Essendon board
and the players were all cleared. That left James Hird as the last man standing.
James Hird has been the target for over two years of arguably the most vicious, unwarranted,
personal attacks in Australian sporting history. Inter alia, Lukin had badgered him into
accepting responsibility, McLachlan had told him what to say, and the media found him
guilty of not only orchestrating the supplement program, but has also found him guilty of
failing to fulfil his legal responsibilities to the players. Nothing could be further from the
truth.
4


In the old days, the senior coach was responsible for everything, and he had to wear the
blame for anything that went wrong. As has been explained above, the supplement program
was run by the football department and Hird was on a different branch of the organisation
structure. He therefore had no legal responsibility for the program and had no authority to
interfere.
Hird was aware of the general aspects of the supplement program and Dank even informed
him when he administered vitamins and some of the substances the players consented to
taking. He was never told by Dank that he had administered Thymosin to the players. When
Dr Reid expressed concern to him that Dank and Robinson had strayed from the agreed
supplements program, Hird told Dr Reid to report it to his department head, Paul Hamilton.
At no stage did Hird ever believe that the players were given banned or unsafe substances.
The Essendon board and the AFL Commission must accept responsibility for the failure to
provide a safe work place:

Essendon never undertook a risk assessment;

Essendon never gave the players OH&S training;

Essendon didnt have the required procedure and protocols to ensure it complied with
all its OH&S responsibilities;

The AFL never checked compliance with clause 7.4 of the AFLs anti-doping code at
any club. Clause 7.4 required every player, at every club, to table a document with the
club doctor listing every substance and every medication taken by the player at the
club and away from the club in the previous 12 months. If the AFL had checked
compliance just once at one club in 2010, 2011 and 2012, the whole saga would not
have occurred;

The AFL never enquired whether Essendon had conducted a risk assessment

The AFL allowed an unregistered consultant, Steve Dank, to work with the Essendon
players for 10 months.

The AFL made no attempt to fulfil its responsibilities under Clause 12.0 of the AFL /
Essendon / Player Agreement.

The AFL did nothing when Dr Reid expressed concern on 19 October 2011 that he
had been marginalised and that the players had taken peptides;

The AFL breached Clause 4.6 of the AFLs Anti-Doping Code

The AFL did nothing despite receiving alarming information during its research
project in April 2012;

The AFL did nothing in 2012 to stop the players taking what it believed to be banned,
dangerous drugs;

The AFL didnt fulfil its obligations under the bi-lateral agreement the AFL had with
the Australia Sports Commission in its capacity as a national sporting organisation
(NSO). Those responsibilities are set out in the Australian Sports Commission Policy
Statement: NSOs Governance Mandatory Requirements for ASC large partner
NSOs. The AFL breached clause 2.3 of the Australian Sports Commission NSO
Governance mandatory requirements, which states: An effective organisation must
have a thorough system of audit and risk management, including internal and
external processes. This committee must ensure there are adequate controls and
systems in place to alert management and the Board to potential risks associated with
the operation of the sport. The AFL made no attempt to either ascertain whether
Essendon had adequate OH&S systems in place or whether it was complying with the
law.

During Dr Harcourts Zurich presentation he implied that the AFL knew that there
was a possible risk to the Essendon players health and safety:
It was a bit disturbing to be quite honest with you and it was shocking to the
extent to which experimental drugs were given to young athletes and
highlighted the craziness and the madness of certain individuals who were in
the support staff who really didnt come to grips with what they were doing.
But they involved Human Growth Hormone releasing substances, sections of
HGH molecules which are which are quite available and manufactured out of
China, a dementia therapy drug to improve who knows, a number of
veterinary products and unknown substances, substances like a Mexican drug
for the treatment of muscular dystrophy was given to the players without
knowing what it was. So it was all a little bit crazy. Most of this did not have
the Australian regulatory approval or the therapeutic goods authority. And
most of the substances where either just recently on to the WADA list or in the
related substances sections of the list. So the individuals who were going
about this were trying to exploit the nuances of the WADA list and probably
also had some understanding that some of these substances were so new that
the laboratories didnt have the capability of dealing with them.

In Zurich, Dr Harcourt said: Coincidentally, we did have some wind of this

during the course of the year, it was 2012, and so we did arrange through
ASADA to have a number of specimens of these players sent to the Cologne
laboratory rather than the Sydney laboratory but nothing came out of it.

The AFLs integrity officer, Brett Clothier, was aware it was his responsibility to
protect the integrity of the competition, but he did nothing. If Clothier had
conducted an audit of Essendon on, or just after, 5 August 2011, the problem
would not have occurred;

If the above is not enough, the AFLs three most senior officials during the period
informed the world how important the players safety was to the AFL. Their
response to the Victorian WorkSafe Authoritys investigation will tell us whether
these three are honest, genuine, caring men, or whether their comments were just
propaganda:

On 27 August 2013, Mike Fitzpatrick said: On behalf of the AFL

Commission I want to send a clear message to everybody that nothing and no
one comes ahead of the duty of care owed to the players.
On 21 August 2013, Andrew Demetriou said: The duty of care to players is a
fundamental responsibility of the AFL Commission and all AFL clubs.
On 28 August 2013, Gillon McLachlan told SEN radio: The AFL dropped
the ball by not monitoring the Essendon supplement program after advising
coach James Hird to steer clear of using peptides in August 2011; The fact
potentially though that we werent out there regularly monitoring is potentially
a failing of the AFL. I dont think that we can shirk it in every instance, Im
happy to take that on the chin in the sense that if we had gone out there every
month and monitored it, then maybe we wouldnt be in this situation. People
need to take various forms of accountability and Ill take that.
Just as bad as the failure of the AFL and Essendon to provide a safe work place was the
unconscionable behaviour of the AFL and ASADA to manipulate the investigation to achieve
a pre-arranged result:

On 4 June 2013, ASADA chief executive Aurora Andruska and M/s Perdikogiannis of
ASADA spoke to M/s Glenys Beauchamp, deputy secretary, Department of Sport. The
handwritten notes recorded by Ms Perdikogiannis record the following:
9am conversation with M/s Glenys Beauchamp [Secretary, Department of Regional
Australia, Local Government, Arts and Sport] with AA [Aurora Andruska].Clear
instructions from Min [Minister Lundy]. Min [Lundy] her colleagues at her, or
accusing her of hampering chances of re-election you need an outcome. Heightened
levels of anxiety by AA [Aurora Andruska], an Elen gets emotional as well. Big
business sponsors, Australias reputation, etc. Min [Lundy] has put it on Glenys etc


M/s Andruska also took a note of the meeting. Her notes recorded:
Lundy: needs something; Deal with AFL: support

staff sacked, points off

[Essendon], players [let]off [my emphasis]

On 1 July 2013 Ms Perdikogiannis (ASADA) emailed Bill Rowe of PM & C [Prime

Minister & Cabinet] and provided him with a Table of Outcomes documents authored by
ASADA

On 5 June, John Nolan of ASADA expressed concern the CEO of ASADA, Ms Andruska
was serving the political agenda of others [my emphasis].
At various stages during the investigation AFL officials Demetriou, McLachlan and
Clothier told ASADA officials what had to be included in the Interim Report and what
had to be omitted.

A meeting was held on 4 June 2013 between McLachlan, Essendon chairman David
Evans [who was he respresenting?], Eccles, Andruska, Simonsson, Perdikogiannis.
McLachlan was concerned about $1 million worth of ticket sales for the first two weeks
of the finals. He wanted to maximize the opportunity for the best outcome for the players.
Simonsson made notes and noted that certain persons have to go [my
emphasis] followed by a reference to a restructure of whole department. There is no
doubt that Hird had to go and that the football department had to be restructured.

On 13 June 2013, Ms Perdikogiannis recorded a strategy meeting. She had been told of
an AFL Board Meeting where the AFL wished to keep the pressure on ASADA to be the

AFL had stated in respect of the

player support staff, such as Hird, that the AFL will go them

bad guy. It was reported that the

It was also noted that if the evidence stacks up, take points off them. McLachlan of [my
emphasis]. the AFL reported there was board pressure and that prior to the [AFL] finals
how can this be resolved?

On 19 June 2013, Ms Andruska met with Malcolm Holmes QC; Burgess (ASADA);
Dillon (AFL); Clothier (AFL); McLachlan (AFL). McLachlan asked for a high level
report and disclosed that such report was required to resolve matters and preserve the
integrity of the 2013 season. There was talk of governance failure issues as well. There
were some outcomes recorded by Andruska as follows:
Outcome report: purpose of meeting is to understand what AFL required from ASADA
and to reach agreement on what could be provided by when. Agreed ASADA would
provide investigators report drawing together the outcome of the interview of the EFC
players. McLachlan spoke of board pressures and prior to the finals.
Andruska summarised [McLachlans request]: [Interim Report] Use as a basis of
decision making; Table to commission.
8

On 26 June 2013, Andruska spoke to McLachlan. She noted McLachlans comments as

follows:
Take points off Essendon; We need all the detail to get through that; Problematic if not
full report; Get outcome we need;

Take bits out that might compromise

what we need [my emphasis].

Andruska attended a further meeting with the AFL on 24 July 2013. Demetriou, Dillon
and Clothier were there. Demetriou did not want any redactions in the report.

Demetriou stated that 2 or three things cannot afford to be

made public [my emphasis]. Andruska noted that Demetriou further stated: On track
for 17 August; Deal with club before finals; Allows one month to deal with club; I can
deal with individuals; Charge Essendon in 2 3 weeks; AFL Commission know the
matter; Decision cannot be appealed.

On 15 July, John Nolan (ASADA) asked Abraham Haddad of the AFL to prepare an
injections table based on assumptions and a formula. Not really what we are looking for.

If
we add the Multi vitamin aspect then it is a little more
convincing [my emphasis].
14 out of 58 persons at EFC remember injections being referred to as Amino Acids.

McLachlan spoke to Andruska on 25 June 2013 and made it clear the AFL required a
full report from ASADA. Andruska file note: ASADA / AFL Table of Outcomes;
Under heading Outcome; Purpose - AFL to advise it needed a report on all aspects of
the Aperio investigation, ie not just players, but also support personnel and ancillary
persons of interest.

On 2 July 2013, a further phone conference occurred between ASADA and the AFL
concerning the contents of the interim report. ASADA recorded the outcomes of the
conference as follows: ASADA / AFL Table of Outcomes; Under heading Outcome;
Purpose - ASADA will provide a report to the AFL with as much information as is
lawfully possible and which does not prejudice ongoing investigations; the report to the
AFL will include; a) Conclusions on the environment at Essendon that goes to the
behaviour of its support personnel [my emphasis];

On 4 July 2013, Ms Andruska wrote to the AFL and declined to provide the complete
AASADA investigation report. She stated: ASADA cannot disclose the internal
investigation report based on advice of counsel would disclose information which
ASADA cannot lawfully disclose

On 8 July 2013, a teleconference took place between ASADA and the AFL. The AFL
expressed concern about any limitation on contents of the report ASADA was to provide
9


to it. The AFL wanted the report for its own decision-making purposes: Outcomes; Under
heading Outcome; Acknowledged; 2. The AFL raised concerns about the
comprehensiveness of the report and the ability to rely on it for the purpose of the
decision-making

On 16 July 2013, ASADA and the AFL discussed the impending interim report Under the
heading Outcome: Uncontrolled environment at Essendon Clothier wrote: The AFL is
not looking for conclusions or commentary on the uncontrolled environment. The AFL
required the information/evidence collected through the interview to be assembled in a
way that paints a picture of the controlled EFC environment to a large extent provide
information [evidence to support] the Ziggy report which is all conclusions.

The AFL also wants the report to include any evidence that the EFC was duped
notwithstanding its incompetence to protect themselves [the AFL] and

the EFC against such threats [my emphasis].

Clothier spoke to Mr Burgess on 19 July 2013 and provided commentary on the draft
report. Clothier was keen to emphasise the AFL requirements:

Now to the allegations that have arisen, despite that cosy deal that the players would not be
charged. ASADA has issued 34 players with Show Cause Notices claiming they administered
Thymosin Beta-4. The players and their supporters are entitled to be, and are, outraged by
this. First, what about the assurance they wouldnt be charged. What happened to that?
Second where is the evidence? Simply there is no evidence Thymosin Beta-4 was supplied to
the club, and as Dank has testified under oath to the Australian Crime Commission that he
didnt use Thymosin Beta-4 on the players, the players should never have been placed in the
position they now find themselves hanging out for a decision to be made by David Jones
and his Anti-Doping Tribunal on 31st March. Surely if there were evidence to the contrary
about Danks testimony to the Australian Crime Commission, it would have charged him
with perjury. Tellingly, ASADA didnt invoke its powers to force Dank to appear before it
because it knew he had told the ACC he didnt use Thymosin Beta-4 at Essendon.
Even if Dank purchased Thymosin Beta-4, of which there is no evidence, ASADA would
have to prove it was used at Essendon on specific players and not at Danks aging clinics.
Furthermore, ASADA had the impossible task of proving that player 1 was administered
Thymosin Beta-4. It made no effort to do so. ASADA had to prove that players 2, 3, 4, 5
34 were administered Thymosin Beta-4. It made no effort to do so.
The players must be cleared and will appeal if they are not cleared. The case of the cyclist
Mark French at the Court of Arbitration for Sport, which incidentally can be found on the
ASADA website, contains all the reasons why the players will win on appeal in that
jurisdiction.

10


Rather than the players, a lot of other people should have been fronting up to various
tribunals and hearings, or being subjected to penalties, or at least forensic analysis of their
various roles and obligations. As a member of the AFL, the Essendon board had
responsibilities to the AFL; the commissioners; the 17 clubs; and the wider football
community. However, as the Essendon board is elected by the Essendon members its first and
overriding responsibility is to the Essendon members, players and supporters. If the Essendon
board has to point out mistakes by the AFL to fulfil its responsibility to its members and
players, so be it. To that end, the Essendon board should be appalled that the AFL
commissioners never pulled Andrew Demetriou into line when he pronounced the club guilty
on countless occasions before the investigators had even interviewed the players. The club
should have been even more appalled that Gillon McLachlan recently stated that: The
football public now accepted the possibility Essendon would be forced to field a team that
included top-up players in premiership matches. This was an outrageous comment
obviously made in an attempt to influence the tribunal members. The only thing more
outrageous is that the commissioners havent denounced McLachlans unacceptable
behaviour. Thankfully a number of important are concerned and are ready to take the
necessary steps to affect change.
There is no doubt that at the outset, it was agreed to make James Hird the scapegoat for the
supplements saga. He was all that was left after the AFL and ASADA/Federal Labor
Government did a deal that the players would not be suspended. So Hirds reputation was to
be trashed and his resignation forced.
The hopelessly flawed Switkowskis Report didnt even canvass the AFL and Essendon
boards responsibilities under the tripartite agreement between the AFL / Essendon and the
Player. Nor did it discuss the AFL and Essendon boards responsibilities under the Victorian
Occupational Health and Safety Act. Switkowski only spoke to three players and didnt
interview Dank, nor according to the newspapers, Dean Robinson. If that wasnt bad enough,
Switkowski said he didnt know anything about drugs and said he wouldnt comment about
them, and then went on a long-winded diatribe about them. The AFL promised James Hird
that sections of the Switkowski Report that he knew to be wrong would be changed. That
promise was never honoured.
Hundreds of mistakes have been made during the saga but one of the worst was Evans /
Robson giving the AFL the Switkowski Report to use against Hird and the club. It was an
internal report initiated to identify governance problems that had to be fixed. The report was
used by the AFL to help:

fine the club $2 million dollars;

take away draft picks;

kick the club out of the finals; and

11

force the club to stand down the coach for 12 months.

The board had a fiduciary duty to act in the members interests, not the AFLs. I have no idea
why the members didnt try and sue the board.
The AFL and ASADA worked together on nailing Hird. There is considerable evidence of
this and the following is just one example, albeit a very damning one. There are three very
important extracts from ASADAs interim report. Two of them were used to make the case to
force Hird to stand aside for 12 months.

12


Extract One Page 99 of the Interim Report
Management Controls - Sports Science Team
Mr Robson [Essendon CEO] stated that Mr Robinson had supervisory responsibility
of the Sports Science Team, which included Mr Dank and the Club Doctors. In turn,
Mr Robinson reported to Mr Hamilton who was accountable to both Mr Robson and
the Clubs executive. Mr Dank was part of the Sports Science Team and therefore
reported to Mr Robinson. (303 Robson interview ASADA 15 February 2013.
This was factually correct and gelled with the Essendon organisation structure and Hirds job
description. Hird had nothing to do with the supplement program according to the chief
executive.
Extract Two Page 114 of the Interim Report
Robson said the supplementation protocols required Dank to outline his intended
course to Robinson and that would be put to the club doctors and then that would
have had visibility and sightlines from both [Mr Corcoran] and Mr Hamilton and
ultimately [Mr Hird].
Square brackets are used to add something by the non-speaker. In this instance, ASADA has
added [Mr Hird]. By this sleight of hand, ASADA has changed the evidence so that the
reader, and the AFLs general council, would believe Hird was in charge. This helped the
AFL to force Hird to stand aside for 12 months. This cost Essendon about $1 million. Im not
sure what the appropriate legal term is for ASADAs action, but it should include Do not
pass Go, do not collect 200 quid.
Extract three Page 62 of the Interim Report.
Robinson claims to have understood the responsibilities of his role to include the
management of the High Performance Department and the oversight of medical staff
(doctors and physiotherapists), but not ever take away from their [professional
medical] decision making. Stephen Dank, the Clubs Sports Scientist, also reported to
Robinson. Robinson in turn reported to Hird and Hamilton.
ASADAs statement that Robinson in turn reported to Hird and Hamilton is untrue. It is
false evidence submitted by ASADA. ASADA was the investigator, not a witness. ASADA
should not have tendered evidence, whether true or false.
ASADA changing the evidence in extract two, and ASADA giving untrue evidence in extract
three, gave the AFL ammunition it so desperately needed to charge Hird.
In summary, Lukin, McLachlan, Demetriou, Evans, Robson, Switkowski, ASADA, and lets
not forget the media, all ensured, through strange behaviour, or to give them the benefit of the
doubt, possible incompetence, that Hird would be the fall-guy.

13


The AFL administration remains livid that Hird wouldnt play its game, although he did for a
little while when he foolishly capitulated to bullying and withdrew his Supreme Court action,
and then accepted a 12 months suspension. There is no doubt that Hirds refusal to leave the
game has left the AFL not only deeply embarrassed, but open to all sorts of penalties. If the
Victorian WorkSafe Authority finds against the AFL Commissioners, as it must, then the
next Governor of Victoria will be one of those subject to a fine or other penalty.
The AFL took what it thought was the cheapest and most convenient route by singling out
James Hird as the person to be guilty of something he wasnt responsible for. It is little
wonder that people in Australian football at all levels are absolutely aghast at the current
AFLs failures.
In time, if it isnt already, it will emerge that by standing his ground, James Hird has done his
game a service as great as any he achieved as a player, or will achieve as a coach. Bullying,
chicanery, immoral and perhaps in some instances even illegal activities are slowly being
exposed and that can only be a good thing.
Minister, it is now time for you to say enough is enough. This chicanery must stop and must
never happen again. To that end, you must set up a government investigation into the way the
Gillard Government, ASADA and the AFL handled the investigation. My dad used to say
standing back and letting something illegal happen is the same as pulling the trigger.
You have a choice, do nothing and become a target, or do a great service to not just the game
of Australian football, but Australian sport overall, helping it re-build its hard-earned
reputation for honesty and goodwill so mercilessly trashed by too many of those self-servers
who stood on that stage in Canberra on February 2013.
Yours faithfully

Bruce Francis

14