AFL in ASADA split threat
THE AFL has threatened to cut ties with Australian Sports Anti-Doping Authority drug testers if key documents in the Essendon supplements saga are made public.
The bombshell move, which could jeopardise millions of dollars in federal government funding for the league, was signalled in an affidavit filed by AFL integrity unit chief Tony Keane in the Administrative Appeals Tribunal last Friday.
The AFL has joined ASADA in fighting a freedom-of-information request by a member of the public seeking access to doping control forms signed by Bombers players between August 2011 and September 2012.
“If the application is successful ... I anticipate that the AFL would give serious consideration to engaging an alternative supplier for the conduct of the testing required in connection with the AFL’s anti-doping program,” Keane told the tribunal, citing ASADA’s strict confidentiality obligations.
But News Corp Australia can reveal banned Bomber Nathan Lovett-Murray has joined the stoush to have the doping control forms released.
Lovett-Murray’s agent, Peter Jess, said the forms were being protected to cover up “serious flaws” in the Court of Arbitration for Sport’s findings that the Essendon players had colluded by failing to disclose use of substances administered by scientist Stephen Dank.
“It is Nathan’s understanding that the dates of the doping control tests are crucial because most of the players’ tests were conducted before Thymosin beta-4 was available from a known source in Australia,” Jess said.
The AFL was forced into a humiliating backdown 12 years ago when it threatened to walk away the World Anti-Doping Agency drug code over a dispute about penalties for the use of illicit substances.
A separate Supreme Court hearing into the five-year drugs saga will be held on the eve of the Richmond-Carlton seasonopener on March 21.
Human rights lawyer Julian Burnside is leading a case against AFL chief executive Gillon McLachlan and former commission chairman Mike Fitzpatrick alleging misleading and deceptive conduct.