News Thomas and Keefe - 2 year ban - Trade, De-List, Rookie

[soreplums]

Any worth in placing Keeffe and JT on the rookie list at year's end instead of delisting them?

I doubt the club will do this though as it seems that their actions were against the club's set of agreed values

 

[didaksrightfoot]

Any worth in placing Keeffe and JT on the rookie list at year's end instead of delisting them?

I doubt the club will do this though as it seems that their actions were against the club's set of agreed values

Not IMO. More than happy for the club to cut ties and use those spots for 2 others

 

[FIGJAM]

Umm... I just heard on the radio here in Perth that Crowley tested +ve for Methadone. If true that changes my opinion considerably and think he was very lucky to only get 12 months... Methadone is not something you can just accidentaly come across.
(but the presenter couldve just been misquoting)

It's definitely been methadone and has been reported as such for some time.

http://www.theage.com.au/afl/freman...-methadone-for-back-pain-20150519-gh5a9q.html

 

[Baltimore Jack]

Methadone based pain killer given to him by a Health Professional

 

[Kirby]

I guess the hearing for our 2 players will happen over the course of the next few weeks.

 

[Somebody]

How is methadone/heroine performance-enhancing?? It would be the opposite. Can't imagine a junkie being able to play in the B's in suburban league let alone AFL, whereas you could see a speed freak doing so.
IT's a bs decision.

 

[PepperFace]

Not sure if anyone heard Gary Pert on Triple M radio before the game. But he said the boys know the B sample results and they are obviously positive otherwise they would be back playing now. I know its something we have all known. But he all but confirmed the positive B sample. He also said that they expect a 2 year ban

 

[Baltimore Jack]

Pies expect Lachlan Keeffe and Josh Thomas to get two-year bans
Date
June 14, 2015 - 6:14PM

• • 
    
    
    
    Lachlan Keeffe and Josh Thomas.
    
    Collingwood chief executive Gary Pert says it appears likely Lachlan Keeffe and Josh Thomas will be suspended for two years on anti-doping breaches, but stressed the club had deliberately stayed at arm's length from the legal process that will decide their fate
    
    Pert said he did not believe such a heavy ban would necessarily end the two players' careers, but admitted a two-year absence from the game "appears the likely outcome".
    
    Keeffe and Thomas are provisionally suspended, having tested positive for the banned performance-enhancing drug Clenbuterol earlier this year.
    
    "I wouldn't say their careers are over," Pert said on Triple M on Sunday, answering a direct question.
    
    "What I would say is that they are in a process where it appears the likely outcome is a two-year suspension, from everything that we are hearing. Now that's serious, but they're still young guys."
    
    Pert confirmed the two players – 25-year-old key defender Keeffe and 23-year-old midfielder Thomas – had received the results of the B sample tested by anti-doping authorities on April 14.
    
    However he said the two players had yet to notify the club of the results. "I know a lot of people think Collingwood should get involved and … start dictating," Pert said.
    
    "But it is too serious a process and the outcomes are too serious and substantial. So right up front, we said to their legal representation and to the two boys, 'you need to advise us and we'll come along and support you where we can but we're not going to be forcing you into timelines or giving us information that could compromise the process you're involved in'.
    
    "So we're literally sitting like the rest of the football world waiting to be advised by their legal representatives on these B samples."
    
    While admitting that the lack of direct information from the players about the legal process was frustrating, Pert said he understood why that was the case.
    
    "Speaking to their legal representatives – if we had that information, whether it is positive or negative, we asked 'could Collingwood do anything to help those guys?' And the answer is no," he said.
    
    "That's why we need to take their advice, rather than getting in the way. For example, if we were to make some public comment, or have an opinion on it, that might compromise their strategies."
    
    Pert said he and other key officials at the club, as well as the players, remained in contact with Keeffe and Thomas.
    
    "But we talk to them about 'how are you going?' How can we support you?' What we don't do is get caught up in the legal process and that's the most critical part at the moment," he said.

 

[Snag Breac]

Their careers may not be over, but they will stall at a time when so many of our players are going forward in leaps and bounds. Rotten luck for them if it was a rare transgression.

 

[TradeDraft]

One option is that both would be delisted and redrafted as rookies in November, enabling the Pies to open up two spots on the 2016 senior list.

Backdated bans would allow them to return for the 2017 pre-season competition.

The scenarios were presented to Keeffe, 25, and Thomas, 23, at a meeting at the Toorak home of Collingwood president Eddie McGuire three weeks ago.

McGuire did not guarantee the pair would remain at the club, but told them there was some hope.

Player agent Tim Hazell, who manages Keeffe and Thomas, said the McGuire meeting was “really open and really honest”.

“They felt better having spoken to Eddie,” Hazell said.

Hearing Bucks and Pert and Eddie saying these guys are a Good Blokes.

Has made me think we could keep both of them.

Though would’t there Punishments need to be Back-Dated as you can’t Draft players that are Suspended for Drugs?

http://www.heraldsun.com.au/sport/afl/josh-thomas-and-lachie-keeffe-could-stay-on-collingwood-list-if-banned-for-doping/story-fnp04d70-1227408631033?from=herald sun_rss

 

[Baird]

Just delist them, they'll never be good anyway

 

[TradeDraft]

Just delist them, they'll never be good anyway

I don’t think Thomas would make it but we still need some Mature KPP’s at the moment. Both good Depth though

 

[orion21]

http://www.heraldsun.com.au/sport/a...anned-for-doping/story-fnp04d70-1227408631033#

Interesting that we thinking of delisting them then redrafting them both as rookies. What do people think? Should we do this or will this hinder our list in coming years..............

 

[TradeDraft]

Beat You

http://www.bigfooty.com/forum/threads/keeffe-and-jt-to-be-possibly-rookied.1101569/

 

[DAWESOME!!]

If they're found guilty, pass.

 

[jmac70]

Merge both threads into the existing Keeffe / Thomas thread.

 

[DAWESOME!!]

Though would’t there Punishments need to be Back-Dated as you can’t Draft players that are Suspended for Drugs?

Is this actually a thing? Ive heard you mention it a couple of times Dave.

 

[NT.Thunder]

If they're found guilty, pass.

I agree. Not sure how keeping these guys on our list sends a clear message to others but than again any other club could pick them up for nothing after being delisted.

I'd like to crystal ball it first and see who if anyone, we pick up through FA or trade.

 

[jmac70]

Get rid of them.

 

[DAWESOME!!]

One of my issues with putting them on the rookie list is that I understand it, that would mean two less spots for rookies who hadn't so spectacularly screwed the pooch and dragged their club and team mates through needless hurt and disadvantage.

Do we cut Manteit and Abbott to make room for them? A guy like Armstrong who has done his very best for the club whenever he's been asked to wear the black and white?

 

[legendstatus]

With the footy the way it is today we don't gave the luxury to carry two guys and not play them on our list, unfortunately they will be delisted with a view to pick the. Up as rookies if we get the chance.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

 

[Black_White]

For me, a guilty finding is the end of these two players at CFC.
It would be hypocritical of CFC to preach about keeping the game clean and then keep convicted players on the list.

 

[soreplums]

For me, a guilty finding is the end of these two players at CFC.
It would be hypocritical of CFC to preach about keeping the game clean and then keep convicted players on the list.

I agree. If clean, keeffe would have been good trade bait at the end of the year as would Thomas.

 

[PonsfordMagpie]

I don't know what to make of it with the possibility of retaining these players even if they are banned but I can't see it happening if they receive bans and for the greater good of the club I don't think it will happen despite what Eddie may be hinting at. I see this as a sign of giving the players some hope rather than leaving them disillusioned and bitter about the football club.

Keeffe and especially Thomas were on thin ice to perform this year had the drugs issue not arisen in the first place. I think we're better off rookie listing two younger guys with potential upside to break into the side. Losing Keeffe will hurt a little as a KPP position player and as harsh as it may sound I think Thomas will be no loss in the end for us.

 

[Jabso]

I think Keeffe has plenty of upside. Thomas is solid but so many players are past him now and similar to him (Adams, Crisp, Greenwood, De Goey), I don't see a spot for him in our top 22. Keeffe has a unique athletic profile and skillset. A ruckman sized defender with good skills. Can possibly be turned into a forward and provide a unique option for ruck.

It's a difficult situation. Even putting aside the fact they've ****ed up royally off the field, on the field they're out of the game for 2 years while others go past them. I'm bullish on Keeffe but at the moment we're not missing him in the slightest. Brown has come back and is in career best form and has become better with the ball in his hands. Frost has continued his good run. Reid is waiting in the wings. Moore and Marsh are looking the goods too. The talk is he was going to play forward this year and if he was still available I think he would need to be a forward to get in the side.

If they were definite first 22 players I would give them another chance and keep them on the list but we have to be practical about it and probably make this a football decision.