The document, included as part of an affidavit lodged by ASADA's national operations manager, Trevor Burgess, – who stood for former ASADA chief Aurora Andruska while she was on leave in July last year – indicated the level of detail the players gave about the controversial injecting program run by sports scientist Stephen Dank.

Through these interviews, the proposed contents report stated how difficult it would be for the players to argue a "no fault defence".

In what could be a salient point to the 34 current and former Essendon players issued with show-cause notices, it says: "While different players will have different prospects of being able to make out the defences, based on the players' own admissions, it will be extremely difficult for most of them to establish that they exercised utmost caution, to justify the application of the no fault defence. This defence will draw on the provisions of the code and interview transcripts."

Under the subhead "prohibited substances", the report says there is "player knowledge of the storage of WADA-prohibited substances at the club based on interview transcripts and quoting examples".

It adds: "Advice from EFC personnel to individual players about WADA-prohibited substances injected, and players seeing vials based on interview transcripts and quoting examples.

"Circumstances in which players were administered substances (whether prohibited or not) at EFC and away from the club based on interview transcripts and quoting examples.

"Evidence of possible player and others use of prohibited substances based on interview transcripts and quoting examples."

Under the subhead "potential application of the World Anti-Doping Code", one of the proposed discussion points would be "discussion of sanction reduction provisions (timely admission; substantial assistance) and defence (no fault, no negligence; no significant fault or negligence; specified substances defence) and the difficulty in general of making out the defences".

Burgess flew to Melbourne on July 16 last year to show Clothier the proposed contents report as part of discussions about what to include in ASADA's interim report, eventually released on August 2.

Essendon and coach James Hird have argued in the Federal Court that the interviews were conducted as part of an unlawful investigation and should be scrapped – therefore leading to the revoking of the 34 show-cause notices alleging the use of Thymosin beta 4. They also allege the interim report was unlawfully used for purposes other than an anti-doping investigation: that being to punish Hird and the club for governance breaches.

Lawyers for the 34 players also want the show-cause notices dismissed as part of the case Hird and the Bombers have before Justice John Middleton. The players and Hird believe they were not given the right to silence under the ASADA legislation, having been compelled to tell the truth under the AFL's contractual powers.

While ASADA says it gathered more evidence after the interim report was lodged in August last year, which would include interviews with drug dealer Shane Charter and compound pharmacist Nima Alavi, the interviews with players are seen as crucial to its case against the players and the Bombers.

However, ASADA lawyers maintain that if Middleton does void the interviews, ASADA could still reacquire the transcripts from the AFL under its powers.

In that July 16 meeting, Burgess said Clothier told him the AFL already had its own transcripts of interviews, and "said words to the effect that ASADA's summary report would be one part of what the AFL Commission would consider (in penalising Essendon) and the AFL would not be making a decision on the summary report alone".