Incensed by the handling of the Australian Sports Anti-Doping Authority's contentious interim report on Essendon's 2012 supplements program, David Galbally, the Queen's Counsel representing ex-Bomber high performance manager Dean Robinson, has lambasted the AFL and questioned the objectivity of the entire exercise.
While Essendon, the AFL Players Association and James Hird's legal team have read the report that was delivered to the AFL last Friday night, key figures implicated in the investigation - sports scientist Stephen Dank, who directed the supplements program, and Robinson - have been denied the same information despite requests.
With moves already under way to challenge the legal validity of the 400-page document tabled by ASADA, Mr Galbally said he wrote to the AFL on Tuesday to request a copy of the report but was told on Wednesday that it would not be provided.
After subsequent requests he was furious by Thursday night as he was yet to see a copy despite other parties receiving the privileged information. As Mr Galbally spoke to Fairfax Media, the AFLPA's chief executive, Matt Finnis, was discussing the report - provided to the players' union in full - on Melbourne radio .
''The AFL embarks upon a very selective process,'' Mr Galbally said. ''I don't know who they think they are - gods or something. It's disgraceful. The AFL and Essendon, both.
''Not giving Dean a copy of the report, or even notifying him that they've received it, is appalling. It really shows that some people are treated specially above others.
''And it is un-Australian, it's not what this country is about, and the community would be horrified by it.
''I'm very concerned about the objectivity of it when they select who they want to give the report to. How can it ever be said that there's objectivity in this? It ultimately makes me question how this can ever be dealt with openly, transparently and fairly. There's a big question mark on all of that. There really is.
''Essendon keep saying that James Hird will be given and afforded natural justice, and he's got a copy of the report … but the one person that Essendon says is totally and utterly responsible for all of this - Dean - hasn't got a copy of the report.''
While Mr Galbally said he believed the interim report was a ''narrative'', rather than a document that draws conclusions, Fairfax Media understands that it reflects poorly on individuals, Mr Dank in particular. Fairfax Media is also aware of at least one party who has read the report and disputes information.
Mr Dank's lawyer, Greg Stanton, who requested a copy of the report through ASADA, is concerned that his client is ''allegedly adversely named'' in the report and has flagged legal action against ASADA.
The legal teams acting for Essendon and Hird are also well aware of the issues relating to the ASADA Act and the National Anti-Doping Scheme - laws to protect athletes and a ''support person'' like a coach or sports scientist - and the potential for launching action on these grounds.
ASADA did not respond to specific questions from Fairfax Media on Thursday about myriad legal concerns about the interim report.