James Hird’s lawyer questions whether Cronulla NRL players were coerced into ASADA bans

JAMES Hird’s lawyer has questioned why Cronulla NRL players accepted suspensions if ASADA was unable to establish whether Stephen Dank had access to CJC-1295.

Stephen Dank walking through queens square Court today. After appearing in the Supreme Court after being awarded no damages following a deformation case against news Corp

JAMES Hird’s lawyer has questioned why Cronulla Sharks players accepted suspensions if ASADA was unable to establish whether sports scientist Stephen Dank had access to CJC-1295.

The anti-doping authority on Saturday moved to expand on its reasons for clearing Gold Coast player Nathan Bock more than five years after he allegedly injected himself with the banned peptide.

ASADA denied it was guilty of hypocrisy in the wake of criticism comparing the Bock case to the 34 Essendon players wiped out in January.

Twelve Cronulla players accepted an ASADA deal, triggering a 12-month ban for being duped into doping.

ASADA alleged that Cronulla players were unknowingly and unwittingly injected with CJC-1295 prior to matches during the 2011 season.

“Does this mean that ASADA misled the Cronulla players, who they coerced into making deals relating to the use of CJC-1295, since there was no positive tests and one couldn’t prove what the players were given?” Hird’s lawyer Steven Amendola said.

“Hypocrisy was the word I used and hypocrisy is the word I repeat to an ASADA that seems to be protesting way too much.

“My understanding was there was a final investigator’s report that recommended the Essendon players not be prosecuted — and they prosecuted them anyway on the basis of circumstantial evidence.

“My understanding in the case of Bock was that there was a final investigator’s report that recommended that Bock be prosecuted — and they chose not to follow that recommendation.”

But ASADA said it had no vendetta against any club or person.

“In response to articles published in the Herald Sun today, ASADA would like to make it clear that decisions about which cases to take forward are made on the basis of evidence,” it said in a statement.

“ASADA pursues those cases where there is a strong body of evidence and those cases where ASADA believes they can be proven to comfortable satisfaction.”

Originally published as James Hird’s lawyer questions whether Cronulla NRL players were coerced into ASADA bans