Apex36
Hall of Famer
- Mar 26, 2014
- 39,041
- 81,503
- AFL Club
- Collingwood
I said bent, not smashed in to a thousand pieces.
-
LIVE: Richmond v Melbourne - 7:25PM Wed
Squiggle tips Demons at 77% chance -- What's your tip? -- Team line-ups »
News Thomas and Keefe - 2 year ban - Trade, De-List, Rookie
- Thread starter Snell1234
- Start date
- Tagged users None
76woodenspooners
Brownlow Medallist
No.
It doesn't necessarily mean that anybody is lying.
Keeffe and Thomas visit the club. The the club say "Look, our lawyers have advised us not to discuss your case" (which we know to b true) "we just want to know how you're doing. Are you keeping your fitness up? Are you keeping busy?" They the players leave.
Channel 7 ring Keeffe and Thomas and ask "Hey, you fellas got your a a samples back yet". They answer "yeah, they're positive"
Channel 9 ring the club and ask they same question, the club answer "Dunno, haven't got the results as far as we know".
Channel 7 reports their stuff
Channel 9 reports their stuff
Nobody has lied.
76woodenspooners
Brownlow Medallist
ps TradeDraft sometimes it's better to not know things ... Google "plausible deniability"
TradeDraft
Premium Platinum
Okay - Then how would the Club feel that they told Channel 7 before the Club?
TradeDraft
Premium Platinum
They still could have a Relationsip with people at the Club and the Club still might want to help them from away from Footy
ipswichpies
Premiership Player
Collingwood handled this as well as a club could do,correct decision to not let Thomas and Keeffe train at the club it could and probably would have sent our season to hell before it started.
Keeffe and Thomas were gone from the time they were tested and found positive,fortunately the club has kept the rest of the group quarantined from the fallout.
Keeffe and Thomas were gone from the time they were tested and found positive,fortunately the club has kept the rest of the group quarantined from the fallout.
Kirby
Executive GM of Europe
Veteran
Collingwood - Beau McCreery Player Sponsor 2023
10k Posts
Collingwood - Caleb Poulter Player Sponsor 2022
Collingwood - Josh Daicos Player Sponsor 2021
Collingwood - Tyler Brown Player Sponsor 2020
Collingwood Magpies - Brayden Sier 2019 Player Sponsor
Collingwood - Jaidyn Stephenson Player Sponsor 2018
You know I'm like......................shocked
- Jul 11, 2013
- 867
- 752
- AFL Club
- Collingwood
- Other Teams
- Flyers, 76ers, Eagles, Phillies
We Break their legs.
- Jan 22, 2011
- 10,792
- 20,990
- AFL Club
- Collingwood
- Other Teams
- Collingwood VFL, #TeamBatman
- Jan 22, 2011
- 10,792
- 20,990
- AFL Club
- Collingwood
- Other Teams
- Collingwood VFL, #TeamBatman
If only they had done the same with the...
...no, I won't go there. Especially since it might still have been the steak wot did it...
- Jan 12, 2011
- 25,401
- 35,580
- AFL Club
- Collingwood
I am Jack's Complete Lack of Surprise.
didaksrightfoot
Premiership Player
- Sep 12, 2013
- 4,902
- 5,555
- AFL Club
- Collingwood
- Other Teams
- SA Spurs, Juventus
And Bucks basically set that out right at the start of this.
Said that the club was only aware of a some very general details (basically just the players telling them the result) but other than that they had been mostly kept in the dark by the AFL and the players (which is the players right), and that although the club will support the players through this, they won't (and shouldn't) overstep their bounds and will leave it up to the players lawyers and ASADA... basically said that they probably didn't want to know anymore details because it might incriminate the players and it could put the club in the comprimising position. (eg. if Bucks was called to give evidence against his players)
didaksrightfoot
Premiership Player
- Sep 12, 2013
- 4,902
- 5,555
- AFL Club
- Collingwood
- Other Teams
- SA Spurs, Juventus
well its basically what Bucks said at the start... and it is exactly what Ross Lyon has said about Crowley.
This is a legal process between the players/lawyers and AFL/ASADA. The club really doesn't have a role, and unless they thought they could get the players off (which is incredibly unlikely) then I don't think the club would want much of a role in their hearings... the clubs will "support" the players, but at the end of the line the club will look after the club... if these guys are gone for 2 years (the likely outcome) and the club realised this on day 1, then probably better for the club to just cut ties immediately and avoid as much attention on the club as possible.
And the other side of this is the question of illicit substances (though it's almost entirely a moot point, because the rumoured substance in question would only have shown up on the test if taking very soon after the ingestion)... and according the AFL's own code, the club cannot be told the results by the AFL until it is a 3rd strike (which I doubt).
---
And from the players side - they should be doing everything their lawyers tell them: and I am sure that would include talking to absolutely no-one about this case unless advised to by their lawyer... which is why I take with a grain of salt the report by Channel 7 that the players said it was a positive B sample.
gutsroy
Brownlow Medallist
Don't have access to the same level of information over here, so this may be way off base, but are the club and the two players estranged (which some in the media have said)? If they really told the media and not the club, the relationship can't be good.
has happened before
didaksrightfoot
Premiership Player
- Sep 12, 2013
- 4,902
- 5,555
- AFL Club
- Collingwood
- Other Teams
- SA Spurs, Juventus
It depends what you mean by "estranged".
The boys are still employed by the club, and I'm sure are still getting some sort of support by, or through, the club.
But - I don't think they have been physically around the club since the original story broke... the club put them on an indefinite suspension until the final verdict was known, and I would assume that also keeps them from training with the rest of the team. I don't think any of us would know how much contact they have had with the club since then... but there would be some limitations on what could or couldn't be said, for the legal protection of both the boys and the club. The club was also clear at the start that their primary responsibility is to the other 42 guys on the list, to the club and to the members.
And we are in no way unique with our approach to this.
The Dockers have done the exact same thing with Ryan Crowley.
- May 7, 2011
- 54,331
- 13,151
- AFL Club
- Collingwood
- Other Teams
- Celtics, Tottenham, Oakland Raiders
LMAO!
- Dec 16, 2013
- 8,888
- 8,662
- AFL Club
- Collingwood
There gone move on
TradeDraft
Premium Platinum
I did that when it was 1st Reported
- Jul 11, 2013
- 867
- 752
- AFL Club
- Collingwood
- Other Teams
- Flyers, 76ers, Eagles, Phillies
I absolutely do not know what you mean
I think he means less players are in danger of being delisted. i.e doing our delist list a favour
But now we have have less players to use as potential trades. i.e doing our trade list no favour
thats the way I interpreted it anyway. I am sure he will correct me if I am wrong
