Jake Carlisle Updates

Remove this Banner Ad

Log in to remove this ad.

Joffaboy said:
Still trying to get cleared on a technicality. Not what was presented as evidence but by tricky legal posturing.

They will NEVER clear their names
Click to expand...
That was my thought as I listened to the news this morning.

They still lose their year and they still get found to be drug cheats. Who cares if they get to say "yeah but CAS should never have had the chance to look at the evidence and find out we drug cheated"?

Another absolute waste of time and money by these denialists.

Let's hope their insurance premiums now rise by 1,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000% :mad:
 
The way things are going, he's going to get more than a movie. This is going to turn into a mini-series...

... the next season of Underbelly...
 
I heard somewhere that if/when the players fail in their appeal, their ban may increase to 24 months. Is there any truth to that?
 
St Mark said:
I heard somewhere that if/when the players fail in their appeal, their ban may increase to 24 months. Is there any truth to that?
Click to expand...
No truth to that. The players are all serving their bans no matter what the outcome of the appeal - they just want to say that they did not knowingly cheat - and have a legal finding to support their claim
 
St Mark said:
I heard somewhere that if/when the players fail in their appeal, their ban may increase to 24 months. Is there any truth to that?
Click to expand...
Not by he sounds of it. That would have been the case had they applied for and been given an injunction.

This is essentially an insurance move to move liability for the programme. It's the insurance company trying to have somebody to sue should they have to pay out. The players have been told it's important to clear their names so that the insurance company can proceed (assuming subrogation was removed).
 
sauce_head said:
Not by he sounds of it. That would have been the case had they applied for and been given an injunction.

This is essentially an insurance move to move liability for the programme. It's the insurance company trying to have somebody to sue should they have to pay out. The players have been told it's important to clear their names so that the insurance company can proceed (assuming subrogation was removed).
Click to expand...


So the players have been duped into following through with this appeal so that Essendon can reduce its liability in the case of one of the players wanting to sue them?
 
SaintsSeptember said:
So the players have been duped into following through with this appeal so that Essendon can reduce its liability in the case of one of the players wanting to sue them?
Click to expand...
Maybe! Insurance isn't my strong point. I'd say more likely the opposite and that if they players sued for lost earnings the insurance company could cite the suspension as unreasonable given they were cleared on appeal. Not sure who you can sue in that instance, not WADA as I'd assume its assets are abroad and it doesn't owe a duty of care in that respect. Maybe the AFL for signing up to the WADA code?
 
SaintsSeptember said:
So the players have been duped into following through with this appeal so that Essendon can reduce its liability in the case of one of the players wanting to sue them?
Click to expand...

Pretty much, minus the duping part.

Hal Hunter aside, no one involved has motioned to want to take Essendon to court over it to claim anything by way of damages, loss of earnings or etc, the majority of players would be in because this has labeled them drug cheats, on a global scale their name is effectively mud in the sporting world and when your name is your image this is killer, so they are in effect attempting to clear that name whilst accepting that yes, they doped, they did not do so willingly, they were gazumped, hoodwinked, they walked the golden road, chanced upon the wicked witch, helped her avoid that pesky house, Jobe and her danced the cha cha all the way to Emerald city and they were similarly hoodwinked when she and the growing amount of monkey's that could fly, sacked the city and killed women and children alike, because the wicked witch wasn't wicked, she was misunderstood and if you asked Spike McVeigh aka the cowardly punk kid, her sister was the bitch all along.

Essendon and the AFL also do not want the players to then turn around and claim anything negative against them, because that would mean that they failed in governance and they've just spent 3 and a bit years saying that isn't the case and laying it at the feet of 3 people total, period, who being the rat bastards that they are, took down the mighty juggernaut that is the Essendon football club and smeared the AFL Commission.

So tldr; players would be doing it for one reason, the other entities would be doing it for another, the collective result is a fair amount of attempt to cover ones arse for future possibilities.
 
Ah, Essendon... still doped up on something... :D

Ca68XUUUYAA_aHs.jpg
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

Sir Skid said:
That sash looks like a syringe.
I bet if they yurn around there is a needle on one end.
Click to expand...

What to wear when you have trashed your guernsey. trying to distance themselves from their past?
 
I wonder if they lose the appeal as expected can the appeal court alter the penalty eg criminal court. Would be comical for all involved if they lost and then got the full 2 year penalty - which IMO they deserve in any respect.
 
No, that will not happen.
 
Winners Only said:
I wonder if they lose the appeal as expected can the appeal court alter the penalty eg criminal court. Would be comical for all involved if they lost and then got the full 2 year penalty - which IMO they deserve in any respect.
Click to expand...
feel free to delete this, but fwiw, the full two years is what was received - backdated ~12 months.
 
Mercuri Rising said:
feel free to delete this, but fwiw, the full two years is what was received - backdated ~12 months.
Click to expand...

That is like having a suspended sentence, I would be surprised if the appeal court cant alter that determination? People are suggesting they cant but I doubt any of the posters are International Law experts. Getting an extra penalty is generally the expectation of a failed appeal - wasting the courts time etc....

Heres hoping the Swiss smack the smug Bombers back to the land of Oz with their corrupt tails between their legs!

Two years out of football would nearly be the end of the guilted player careers and thats what they and the club deserve. As far as Carlisle is concerned I have made my feelings known, our club should not have gone anywhere near him! Everyway I see it his trade was an extremely desperate and poor decision.The absolute worst decision Trout and Ameet have made in their time at our club!
 
Last edited:
Yes indeed. Lets hope a bunch of guys duped by their superiors are drawn and quartered, especially for daring to utilize an appeals system designed to ensure fair and even judgement.

Im actually pretty amazed at the complete lack of empathy some people on here have and I have no doubt that every single one of you would have toed the line just like those players did because that is what the culture is. To trust your ******* coach and administration when you ask them and then sign documents that actually say everything is approved.

Everyone is patting themselves on the back from their nice comfy desk chairs about how these guys have been banned and their careers potentially ruined whilst the people who actually did it get away scot free because WADA are a bunch of morons who somehow cant even manage to get Dank to answer for the s**t he has pulled.

Oh thats right, because theyre not an ACTUAL court and arent held to the same standards as one.

Winners Only said:
Two years out of football would nearly be the end of the guilted player careers and thats what they and the club deserve. As far as Carlisle is concerned I have made my feelings known, our club should not have gone anywhere near him! Everyway I see it his trade was an extremely desperate and poor decision.The absolute worst decision Trout and Ameet have made in their time at our club!
Click to expand...

Actually It was a pretty good decision. Sorry you cant understand that.
 
Winners Only said:
That is like having a suspended sentence, I would be surprised if the appeal court cant alter that determination? People are suggesting they cant but I doubt any of the posters are International Law experts. Getting an extra penalty is generally the expectation of a failed appeal - wasting the courts time etc....

Heres hoping the Swiss smack the smug Bombers back to the land of Oz with their corrupt tails between their legs!

Two years out of football would nearly be the end of the guilted player careers and thats what they and the club deserve. As far as Carlisle is concerned I have made my feelings known, our club should not have gone anywhere near him! Everyway I see it his trade was an extremely desperate and poor decision.The absolute worst decision Trout and Ameet have made in their time at our club!
Click to expand...
Probs dont post and edit at 3 in the morning :p
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top