A member of the Australian Football League's Anti-Doping Tribunal said that "the Australian Sports Anti-Doping Authority had told him that AOD-9604, the anti-obesity drug central to the supplements saga at Essendon, was not a banned substance," according to Brent Diamond of THE AGE. Sports medicine specialist Andrew Garnham said that on Tuesday "he had asked ASADA in February 2013 about the status of AOD-9604 in his capacity as a member of the AFL's Anti-Doping Tribunal." Asked if AOD-9604 was a prohibited substance according to ASADA when he inquired in February, Garnham said, "At that point in time, no" (THE AGE, 8/20). In Melbourne, Warner, Robinson & Baker wrote meanwhile, Essendon Chair Paul Little on Tuesday night briefed Bombers players' parents and partners on the latest ASADA findings "as the Bombers prepare to take on the AFL over the supplements scandal." Little: "This parents meeting is the fifth in a series of meetings we've had with parents. The club takes the task of briefing parents very seriously" (HERALD SUN, 8/20). In Sydney, Le Grand & Denham wrote Essendon "will appear before the AFL Commission on Monday to formally request it appoint a retired judge to hear serious charges against the club and four of its most senior officials over its 2012 supplement program" (THE AUSTRALIAN, 8/21). In Melbourne, Wilson, Hawthorne & Niall wrote a pre-finals settlement between Essendon and the AFL remained on the table on Tuesday night, "despite the Bombers seeking and receiving an adjournment from the AFL Commission hearing on Monday." The AFL Commission held secret talks in Melbourne on Monday "as it sought to clarify key elements of the Essendon charges and the club's situation." Little has remained in talks with AFL Exec Gillon McLachlan over the past two days, "with Little taking a measured approach to the club's predicament" (THE AGE, 8/21).
