Nathan Lovett-Murray to Appeal

Remove this Banner Ad

Status
Not open for further replies.
Essendon sure do love throwing good money after bad.

The longer they drag this out, the longer footy fans' memories will be. Carlton are still known as salary cap cheats 15 years after the fact. I figure Essendon's name will be mud for at least 30 years.
 
JackOutback said:
Essendon sure do love throwing good money after bad.

The longer they drag this out, the longer footy fans' memories will be. Carlton are still known as salary cap cheats 15 years after the fact. I figure Essendon's name will be mud for at least 30 years.
Click to expand...
say it with me now. "Insurance company"
 

Log in to remove this ad.

JackOutback said:
I was joking, but it does continue the theme of Essendon throwing good money after bad.
Click to expand...

So Essendon should NOT use its insurance capacity to support the players because premiums will go up.

Okey mete.
 
Jade said:
So Essendon should NOT use its insurance capacity to support the players because premiums will go up.

Okey mete.
Click to expand...
No, Essendon should not use its insurance capacity on a fool's errand.

The players should consider themselves lucky they are getting a paid holiday for cheating. Continuing this pretense that everything was above board is embarrassing for all concerned.
 
Lavender Bushranger said:
Hahahah! Deliberately stupid! That's a goodie.

I suppose you're also deliberately embarrassing yourself? Deliberately being obnoxious?
Click to expand...

Do I look embarrassed?

Having the special folk that occupy this board not liking what I say doesn't embarrass me.

As for obnoxious, yeah maybe. I do very much look down my nose at the frequent contributors to this board.

Lavender Bushranger said:
Seriously, you get yourself into a hole from stating something ridiculous and can't get out of it - and resort to 'Come on guys! I was deliberately being stupid!'

You're priceless.
Click to expand...

Nothing ridiculous about stating that agitation exists surrounding this process - particularly when I can point to verification.

You on the other hand, can point to nothing, because as I stated in my earlier post, you genuinely don't know what you are doing.
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

JackOutback said:
No, Essendon should not use its insurance capacity on a fool's errand.

The players should consider themselves lucky they are getting a paid holiday for cheating. Continuing this pretense that everything was above board is embarrassing for all concerned.
Click to expand...

Essendon has agreed to AFL penalties, pleaded guilty to WorkSafe charges.

Geez... they sure like pretending everything is above board.
 
Jade said:
Do I look embarrassed?

Having the special folk that occupy this board not liking what I say doesn't embarrass me.

As for obnoxious, yeah maybe. I do very much look down my nose at the frequent contributors to this board.



Nothing ridiculous about stating that agitation exists surrounding this process - particularly when I can point to verification.

You on the other hand, can point to nothing, because as I stated in my earlier post, you genuinely don't know what you are doing.
Click to expand...
Where's the verification again?


Still can't get my head around how you know there is agitation?
 
Lavender Bushranger said:
Where's the verification again?


Still can't get my head around how you know there is agitation?
Click to expand...

Well let's see.

Multiple reports of people inside and outside the AFL industry questioning whether or not an association with the WADA code should continue.

Federal Senators requesting an inquiry in to the debacle.

Indisputable facts.

And I would firmly encourage you to do your research in to what people are actually quoted as saying before the next time you think you're on to some sort of winner.

Particularly if you're talking to me, because chances are you'll be wrong.
 
Garlic muncher said:
Western Bulldogs president and lawyer Peter Gordon recently said the reasoning behind the suspensions imposed by CAS contained "factual errors".

Read more: http://www.theage.com.au/afl/afl-ne...as-verdict-20160204-gmm8fb.html#ixzz3zH87s6sh


Decent man and decent lawyer, he has it spot on.
Click to expand...

So he claims there were 'factual errors' yet appears unable to identify any factual errors. He then changes tack and goes back to the claim (already debunked) that AFL code only allows appeals based on legal error or gross unreasonableness, yet again seems to have no understanding that this applied 'prior to the appeal' only to the AFL appeal panel. Even though the AFL Anti-Doping Code was updated 'prior' to the appeal being lodged, there were no restriction in the AFL code prior to or after the AFL Tribunal that applied to WADA or CAS.

The argument he mounts for lack of jurisdiction is fatally flawed before he has even lodged it.

The claim he made earlier about the CAS not being able to hold a hearing de novo is also demonstrably incorrect. It has been tested prior to this and substantiated. No appeal on those grounds will be accepted because its a matter previously decided.

If, and its a big if, this appeal actually proceeds and isn't a PR exercise, there is a strong likliehood it will be rejected as these matters have been previously examined and determined. This is either a PR exercise or a hail mary and in my view, the players deserve better than to be treated as pawns to pay lawyers
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

A
This is the way to treat drug cheats
2
Replies
25
Views
1K
PoppedCorn
PoppedCorn
CASEYS9420
Moved Thread James Hird - is it time to give him a second chance at coaching an AFL club? Gil says yes! - The PEDs Forum Version
2 3 4
Replies
88
Views
6K
Caligo
Caligo

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top