Daily Telegraph rugby league writer Josh Massoud reveals the details of the meeting between the NRL, ASADA and 17 past and present Cronulla Sharks in Sydney on Wednesday morning.
James Hird, Xavier Campbell and Paul Little outside at the end of their Federal Court hearing. Picture: Hamish Blair Source: News Corp Australia
A SWEETHEART deal offered by ASADA to Cronulla players on Wednesday remains a live option for 34 past and present Essendon players.
ASADA boss Ben McDevitt signed off on 17 drugs notices for current and former Sharks players on Tuesday night, over the alleged use of prohibited peptides CJC-1295 and GHRP-6 as part of the club's 2011 supplements program.
But all 17 NRL players have been offered the option of a one-year ban backdated to November last year, meaning they could miss as few as three matches this season.
SHARKS V BOMBERS: HOW ASADA PROBE UNFOLDED
A similar deal could be struck in the Essendon players' case, which is on hold until Justice John Middleton delivers his findings in the club's Federal Court fight with the anti-doping agency.
The catch for players in each code is that they must admit guilt for discounts and backdating provisions to become available.
Essendon chairman Paul Little has repeatedly stated that no Bombers player would admit to an anti-doping offence.
Essendon captain Jobe Watson says the Bombers would benefit from having Mark Thompson remain involved with the club in 2015.
The Bombers players, hit with show-cause notices in June this year over the alleged use of thymosin beta-4 in 2012, have asked ASADA repeatedly to put up any evidence it has to support its case against them.
They have not been shown any evidence.
If ASADA can convince the Bombers that they have used banned drugs, they could be eligible for discounted or backdated penalties under the code's "timely admission" provisions.
Separately, Section 14.7 (a) of the AFL Anti-Doping Code states: "Where there have been substantial delays in the hearing process or other aspects of doping control not attributable to the player, the tribunal determining the sanction may start the period of ineligibility at an earlier date commencing as early as the date … (an) anti-doping rule violation last occurred".
Hird and little outside Federal Court. Picture: Hamish Blair Source: News Corp Australia
The code also states at least one half of the sanction must be served after the punishment has been accepted.
In the AFL case, that could be as little as three months.
It is understood that if ASADA, the AFL and the players all agreed to a sanction, the AFL Anti-Doping Tribunal would not have to hear the matter.
But the Bombers remain steadfast that not player was given anything harmful or prohibited under the supplements program, and therefore no player would accept the stain of a doping conviction.
"To get that relief (of no fault or negligence reductions) you need to have been found to have taken a substance and our players don't think they have,'' Little told the Herald Sun in May.
Hand written notes released by the Federal Court claim Essendon players had a high level of likelihood of taking banned substances. More than 250 documents have been made available in the aftermath of the Essendon-ASADA hearing.
"They are not going to use that clause, I promise you.''
ASADA has agreed to put on hold its case against the 34 current and former Bombers players while the Federal Court decides if the anti-doping body's joint investigation with the AFL was lawful.
Only five of the 17 Cronulla players remain at the club, and they have been asked to make a call on the backdating deal before this weekend.
The NRL anti-doping code has provisions which allow for the backdating of bans under certain circumstances.,
It reads in part: "The commencement of the period of Ineligibility could be started as early as the date the anti-doping rule violation was committed, provided that at least half of that period would have to be served after the date of the hearing decision."
Originally published as Dons could strike similar deal to Cronulla
