Especially when the substance that the entire cronulla team are supposed to have taken was given to them by club officials and wasn't even banned at the time.

Seems a bizarre way to pursue justice, if there is proof consumption of illegal substances has taken place then go ahead and ban for the full two years, if there isn’t then on what grounds can the ARL force someone to admit to something by offering a reduced ban for something they may not have done. They might as well chuck them in the river to see if they float.

Would a ban in Australia be enforceable in the UK, as it’s the ARL and not WADA?

Yes - and confirmed by the RFL - if banned it would apply here. Long way to go on this yet!

I heard Steve Menzies is also involved in this but I thought he has been playing in the UK and France for about 5 years now ?

That'll be them all off to Shudds then!!

Manly are expected to be the next team to be exposed in the ARL scandal.

a player is responsible for anything taken, given by the club or not. although the players may have been injected by a horse drug that wasn't banned at the time, there is a "catch-all" in the list of drugs that adds something like "and anything else that may promote muscle growth" although referring to illegal drugs rather than "normal" muscle growth drugs.

however....

if anyone is a twitter expert - look at the tweet by Mark Geyer - he said something along the lines of "the cronulla board asked wada for names of the individuals who had taken drugs so they could ban them, wada said there isn't any"

or words to that effect

as stated by TRB - there is plenty more to come out about this, and a couple more aussie clubs to be implicated.

I'd guess without a whistleblower (and I don't mean a referee) they'll have a real job proving anything.

If they try to ban anyone on another persons testimony then its very thin and likely to back fire so wouldn't be worried about this.

How are they going to prove a player took those things 2 year ago unless film footage is around of them doing so.It cant go on "I saw J.Bloggs injected with or take" as that would not stand up in any court here,Oz or NZ.

No other evidence at all but one persons word against several others? A lawyer would have a field day with that!

Double negative, so he has done something? Either that or you are speaking perverse American English?