James Hird resolute as tide runs against Essendon

JAMES Hird will stand down only if Dons chairman Paul Little asks him to. Despite another unforgettable day, the Bombers coach remains resolute.

JAMES Hird will stand down only if Essendon chairman Paul Little asks him to.

Despite another unforgettable day in the footy drugs saga, the Bombers coach remained resolute.

And, at this stage, he has the support of Little and his co-directors.

Little is a tough negotiator, but he's not stupid. He would've emerged from the presidents' meeting knowing a resolution with the AFL was paramount.

Bombers on their own as clubs back AFL

Hird's drug-free court complaint

This would be welcomed by everyone in football - but the question is, how?

The AFL went for the throat with its penalties, which included Hird's accepting a suspension for 12 months.

But Little flatly rejected them.

There is a suggestion that an independent mediator step in, but that would happen only if the AFL Commission agreed, and there's no sign of that.

Clearly, the Hird v Demetriou/AFL stoush, amped up when Hird's legal team took Supreme Court action amid claims the AFL tipped off Essendon about the Australian Crime Commission report, can't be rectified.

It's a vicious standoff.

Demetriou wants a transparent hearing. So does Hird - without Demetriou sitting in judgment.

The PR battle has swung towards the AFL in the past 48 hours.

The summary of charges released on Wednesday shocked the football world, and the overwhelming response on forums and talkback radio was that Hird should immediately stand down.

Even Tim Watson, a friend, said it should be a consideration - only, he argued, because the pressure on Hird would have to affect his ability to coach.

Hird won't hear of it.

In his passionate response on Wednesday, Hird was self-centred. He did not mention the players and if he had his time again, you'd think that oversight would be rectified.

The problem is, we all want answers, and Essendon and Hird have yet to give them.

Seriously, could someone say something about the claims the players were injected with a drug sourced from Mexico?

Perhaps they can't because they don't know what happened - and that's at the heart of the AFL's argument.

Amid all the fighting words and court action, the greatest wound for Hird and Essendon came from a woman named "Sarah".

Claiming to be the mother of an Essendon player, she broke down on Triple M radio in the morning as she unleashed a tirade of fear and despair.

Of everything we've read and heard through the Essendon drugs scandal, nothing has been as harrowing as listening to her sobbing words.

She attacked Hird and the club, and said her son wanted to give football away.

The written word does not do justice to her agony.

It was in stark contrast to Watson's calm demeanour when he spoke after Tuesday's parents' meeting with club officials and medical experts, who told the parents their boys would not have long-term health risks from the substances they were injected with.

Unquestionably, the parents do not have a united front.

Naturally, the radio interview upset the players and club officials. "We have as much concern for the players as their parents," one official said yesterday.

As of late Thursday, the club did not know who "Sarah" was.

The players on Friday will be called to a meeting and told that if they or their parents have grievances, the club would enter into private consultations.

Other damaging claims in the past 24 hours included a claim that club doctor Bruce Reid had broken down at his offices at Epworth Hospital on Wednesday.

Reid told the club it was nothing of the sort. He wasn't crying; in fact, he was laughing, and a woman in the waiting room who leaked the story was horribly wrong.

For Hird, the battle continues.

For what it's worth, his lawyers believe the AFL case won't stack up in a court of law.

The court of public opinion, however, seems to have already made up its mind.