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

[HFF]

It's an pretty decision for the club to make with a positive B sample- they will sacked or cut loose from their contracts with no chance of renewal.
They will most likely be banned so the decision will be made for us in some respect.

 

[frizzle]

Well done mods on deleting some of the tripe that was posted on here earlier.

 

[eddiebankbalance]

If they popped a pill at a night club [whatever...] but if they popped pills and attended a gay orgy, then i want all the juicy details,stats etc etc

 

[DAWESOME!!]

Yeah, with the stuff that was deleted, I think there were two options re doing the "right" thing for the poster in question. Neither of those options included posting about it on Big Footy.

 

[TradeDraft]

Well done mods on deleting some of the tripe that was posted on here earlier.

What bad things?

 

[pablo disco bar]

Well done mods on deleting some of the tripe that was posted on here earlier.

Disagree

 

[Good_Old]

Well done mods on deleting some of the tripe that was posted on here earlier.

What's all this? I miss all the fun.

 

[gutsroy]

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.

Thanks very much for the detailed response, when that context is put around it, it makes a bit more sense in terms of the way it has played out.

 

[Reykjavik]

If they popped a pill at a night club [whatever...] but if they popped pills and attended a gay orgy, then i want all the juicy details,stats etc etc

 

[DNine]

I have been thinking about this since it was announced, and at first I hoped that there was a mistake or it was the steak, but the truth is most likely they dabbled in some recreational drugs, tainted by something on the banned list. And to me, I can't understand why they lose their careers, while others that do exactly the same according to them, get a strike.

I think the fault lies in the system. To tell 18-22 year old's that you can weaken to the pressures of having recreational drugs, and just get a warning, is and always will be the wrong message. The truth is, and Keeffe and Thomas are finding out the hard way, that the risks were a lot higher than just getting a strike, and damaging your body that little bit.

The AFL SHOULD say that obviously these guys, both struggling to put ON weight, rather than struggle to take it off, which is what the drug Clenbuterol does, and it can be believed that it was not intentional that they ended up with that in their system. Their explanation will no doubt be that it was due to a bad judgement to dabble in recreational drugs, and that is punishable by a strike.

Fair enough the risk resulted in having the wrong thing in their system, and I think that the punishment should be to miss ONE season, and that penalty is half way done.

It won't be, and I think that is wrong. Some of our supporters didn't rate Keeffe and Thomas anyway, so it was easy for them to say sack them, but I seen good things in both, and both could well of been the next Presti and Swan.

 

[Good_Old]

I have been thinking about this since it was announced, and at first I hoped that there was a mistake or it was the steak, but the truth is most likely they dabbled in some recreational drugs, tainted by something on the banned list. And to me, I can't understand why they lose their careers, while others that do exactly the same according to them, get a strike.

I think the fault lies in the system. To tell 18-22 year old's that you can weaken to the pressures of having recreational drugs, and just get a warning, is and always will be the wrong message. The truth is, and Keeffe and Thomas are finding out the hard way, that the risks were a lot higher than just getting a strike, and damaging your body that little bit.

The AFL SHOULD say that obviously these guys, both struggling to put ON weight, rather than struggle to take it off, which is what the drug Clenbuterol does, and it can be believed that it was not intentional that they ended up with that in their system. Their explanation will no doubt be that it was due to a bad judgement to dabble in recreational drugs, and that is punishable by a strike.

Fair enough the risk resulted in having the wrong thing in their system, and I think that the punishment should be to miss ONE season, and that penalty is half way done.

It won't be, and I think that is wrong. Some of our supporters didn't rate Keeffe and Thomas anyway, so it was easy for them to say sack them, but I seen good things in both, and both could well of been the next Presti and Swan.

Ahmed Saad received an 18month(?) ban for ingesting something found on the shelf of a supermarket.
It's tough, but a fair punishment. They can't escape punishment by pleading ignorance.
I'm not in the 'not rate them' camp but even I think it's the right and only choice by the AFL.

 

[mattys123]

BUMP;

Crowley given 12 months.

@AFL_PKeane: AFL Anti-Doping Tribunal has found Fremantle FC player Ryan Crowley has breached the AFL Anti-Doping Code & imposed a sanction of 12 months.

@AFL_PKeane: Suspension on player Crowley is backdated to commence from 25 September 2014, the date Crowley accepted a voluntary provisional suspension.

That would be the minimum for Keeffe and JT, probably worse though considering the circumstances.

 

[THATSGOLD]

We all know Keeffe and JT are finished with us. Crowley has nothing to do with them.

 

[Kirby]

our fellas will get 2 years and I wouldn't even bother imagining any other outcome.

 

[Apex36]

BUMP;

Crowley given 12 months.



That would be the minimum for Keeffe and JT, probably worse though considering the circumstances.

Definitely worse. It's not like they took a Panadol that happened to have a banned steroid in it...

 

[Lefthanded]

Ahmed Saad received an 18month(?) ban for ingesting something found on the shelf of a supermarket.
It's tough, but a fair punishment. They can't escape punishment by pleading ignorance.
I'm not in the 'not rate them' camp but even I think it's the right and only choice by the AFL.

I'm not overly familiar with Saad's case or Crowley's. Can someone briefly explain why Saad would have got longer for something from the supermarket (a drink I believe) than Crowley for painkiller with banned substance?

 

[TradeDraft]

How they left the Club out of this.

Makes me think they rubbed the club the wrong way and will get De-Listed at years end. What ever the Cop would not stop it

 

[Bard]

I'm not overly familiar with Saad's case or Crowley's. Can someone briefly explain why Saad would have got longer for something from the supermarket (a drink I believe) than Crowley for painkiller with banned substance?

Saad was promoting a sports drink of his friends and got 18 months.

Crowley took painkillers from a supermarket/pharmacy, not sanctioned by the club and got 2 years backdated to last year.

 

[frizzle]

Saad was promoting a sports drink of his friends and got 18 months.

Crowley took painkillers from a supermarket/pharmacy, not sanctioned by the club and got 2 years backdated to last year.

Crowley got 12 months backdated to last September.
So technically he can play in this years prelim if Freo wanted him to.

Also with Saad, I'm pretty sure Asada appealed the decision against him & the penalty was lengthened.
May still happen to Crowley if Asada think it's too low a penalty.

 

[PIEWITHSAUCE]

Reading this about Saad/Crowley and thinking about Hirdy's million dollar holiday package and study trip makes the farken blood boil.

 

[Countrypie]

Reading this about Saad/Crowley and thinking about Hirdy's million dollar holiday package and study trip makes the farken blood boil.

BIg difference between innocent stupidity and systematic doping program that's for sure

 

[didaksrightfoot]

Saad was promoting a sports drink of his friends and got 18 months.

Crowley took painkillers from a supermarket/pharmacy, not sanctioned by the club and got 2 years backdated to last year.

I dont think the fact he was promoting it had anything to do with it. (if anything that was a positive to show he had no idea it was banned)
I think it was the actual substance involved and what benifit it may/may not have.

With Crowley if the public story is true (which you never know) then whatever he took wouldve been something regulated and very easy to account for - 2 simple possibilities would be a painkiller containing codeine or a cold/flu tablet containing pseudoephedrine... Neither of which should be seen as a "simple mistake" for a proffesional athlete who should know better, but you could understand why it was only 12 months.

For Saad, unfortunately he took, and got involved with, something from the sports/gym/energy drinks/supplements industry which are notoriously bad for having ingredients that are either questionable or downright illegal...and yet they try to market themselves as a safe and reputable industry. Given the possibilities of what couldve been in his system (either steroid or stimulant, or both), balanced with him taking it as part of a "sports drink" which he wasnt hiding at all (a pretty good indication he had no idea it was banned) and the fact that he self-reported it (from memory) then 18 months was probably fair.

 

[Maggie5]

Saad was promoting a sports drink of his friends and got 18 months.

Crowley took painkillers from a supermarket/pharmacy, not sanctioned by the club and got 2 years backdated to last year.

My understanding was he took a 'painkiller' from a friend.

 

[Bard]

I dont think the fact he was promoting it had anything to do with it. (if anything that was a positive to show he had no idea it was banned)
I think it was the actual substance involved and what benifit it may/may not have.

With Crowley if the public story is true (which you never know) then whatever he took wouldve been something regulated and very easy to account for - 2 simple possibilities would be a painkiller containing codeine or a cold/flu tablet containing pseudoephedrine... Neither of which should be seen as a "simple mistake" for a proffesional athlete who should know better, but you could understand why it was only 12 months.

For Saad, unfortunately he took, and got involved with, something from the sports/gym/energy drinks/supplements industry which are notoriously bad for having ingredients that are either questionable or downright illegal...and yet they try to market themselves as a safe and reputable industry. Given the possibilities of what couldve been in his system (either steroid or stimulant, or both), balanced with him taking it as part of a "sports drink" which he wasnt hiding at all (a pretty good indication he had no idea it was banned) and the fact that he self-reported it (from memory) then 18 months was probably fair.

I just meant that he only took that sports drink /because/ he was promoting it.

 

[didaksrightfoot]

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)