Jake Carlisle Updates

[SaintsSeptember]

After sitting back and seeing Milne vilified for most of his career.
After seeing Nick Riewoldt humiliated and taunted for something which was quite innocent and not of his making.
After years of ridicule because our club dared to release a promotional video in 2004 (or 5?)

I will not be putting it to rest.
I don't care what the AFL do, i will be happily calling Essendon "drug cheating scum" well into the future. The fact that most of their supporters seem to be arrogant delusional idiots ( and their management too for that matter ).

It seems that most people have already forgotten that they have a history of cheating. I'm pretty sure that the largest fine ever for rorting the Salary cap goes to them.

 

[bird_man]

After sitting back and seeing Milne vilified for most of his career.
After seeing Nick Riewoldt humiliated and taunted for something which was quite innocent and not of his making.
After years of ridicule because our club dared to release a promotional video in 2004 (or 5?)

I will not be putting it to rest.
I don't care what the AFL do, i will be happily calling Essendon "drug cheating scum" well into the future. The fact that most of their supporters seem to be arrogant delusional idiots ( and their management too for that matter ).

It seems that most people have already forgotten that they have a history of cheating. I'm pretty sure that the largest fine ever for rorting the Salary cap goes to them.

What promotional video?

 

[Joffaboy]

Dont think anybody has forgotten anything. 4 corners showed the club are a bunch of lying scum.
" Oh its all about the players". They pay Robinson a mill, pay Hird multiple mills, then chase costs from a kid whom they have used as a guinea pig because he wants to know what was put into him.

Their last vestige of credibility was blown out of the water.

But what hood does it do for this vindictive witchhunt.

Oh and please stop with the victim mentality. Milne is getting on with his life, Roo and Gilbo have moved on, but you are still carrying around all this angst.

We cant continue to penalise Essendon. The penalties are ongoing both on and off field.

As I said just enjoy the result of the Messiah Hird and his regime.
It will be continued pain for them. What more do yoy want?

 

[Kildonan]

Deregistration, winding up of the commercial entity and burning Windy Hill to the ground and salting the earth there.

**** Essenscum.

This is not exactly what I advocated very early in the piece which was a 2 year deregistration - would have sent the message that the AFL were serious, other clubs would be on notice (many other clubs would not survive such a penalty) all the club's players' contracts should have been cancelled and those not cited as receiving unknown substances should have been allowed to enter the draft immediately, those serving penalties would have to wait until the two years was up before being allowed in the draft.

 

[St Kilda Death]

Deregistration, winding up of the commercial entity and burning Windy Hill to the ground and salting the earth there.

**** Essenscum.

Best post.

 

[Barrels]

As I said just enjoy the result of the Messiah Hird and his regime.
It will be continued pain for them. What more do yoy want?

Complete and utter destruction.

The en masse extermination of every signed up member and non-ironic user of the #StandByHird hashtag might be nice too.

 

[dougiemac]

So what punishment is enough for you to make them 'accountable'?

Stick 'em in the VFL.

 

[SaintsSeptember]

What promotional video?

You need to get out more.

 

[Saintos The ITK]

You're soft Barrels.

 

[StFly]

As for St Fly saying its the governance of the AFL that is at fault well I cant come at that at all. It clearly only one clubs fault and that us Essendon. Don't let them off by blaming others.

You know nothing Jon Snow.

The AFL commission have access and accredited medicos as well as agreements with ASADA in order to canvas most every instance of drug or operation that can be undertaken by a club, who, by the very nature of being a club, are a wholly licensee of the AFL with all but about 2 who do not own their own club. It's a pyramid with the Commission close enough to the very top. it's why Bruce Reid should have gone down with them, because he had recourse with the AFL to do something about it, but instead chose to remain in house with his own hierarchy failing their checks and balances then sat on his hands.

Read the drug policy, it's in there.
Read the CBA, it's in there.

This is entirely a governance issue, because the AFL did nothing, then moved to protect its interests (Essendon; a licensee) when the proverbial hit the fan and has since crashed back to realising that this was the wrong call to make. They assisted the clubs in creating a situation whereby clubs poured rather large sums into said departments, which when you deal with modes of recovery, medical operations, medications and the landscape that is modern day medicine, blind Freddy could see that someone was going to screw the pooch the question was who, and when. It's why WADA has a S0 which is a catch all "if it's not registered for humans, it's illegal" and we have sport bannings still occurring from 5-10years ago since advancement and alterations moves that fast.

The AFl failed to govern by allowing and purporting this to occur at a club, as much as the club failed in allowing it to progress to the point that it did.

I'm not going to sit here and compare this with a completely different scenario from 15 years ago let alone one from a different code.

Comparison was made in reference to how each code affected by this "darkest day in sport" reacted to the instances, largely NRL which has an issue with alcoholism mixed with the scum of society into bestiality saw this and pretty much immediately went GTFO to those instances. the AFL by comparison joined the chorus of nothing to see here and we will fight you if you say differently in denial of the problem.

The Carlton aspect was more to show that the Commission during that time was much more hardline than Andy D and Gill combined.

You pointed the exact reason why people need to move on, Dank, Hird ect ect aren't there anymore. It's been done. Move on and stop being so dramatic.

Only if you blame these people and only these people as opposed to it being a governance issue which has potentially ruined people lives. It's gone close to ruining Hal's life where his chosen profession of an AFL player and key point in his life for income wise, ahs turned into visits with psychologists and court hearings, but you want to move on because he's irrelevant to you as the AFL is no longer at fault despite being the one trying to bend him over. The parents who were informed by Essendon & the AFL to zip it and tow the line, who later came out in tears stating their fears, you disregard, because it's time to move on.

The Commission who allowed this to prosper under their watch is largely still there.
The hierarchy of Essendon who allowed this to occur are still around the AFL, we saw Prismall joining the Dogs for instance.

This is a governance issue by the Commission and by Essendon charged with, in effect providing a safe environment for these boys and men to ply their trade to therefore generate the monies to make the circle spin, they failed in this charge and you're happy to accept 10 people losing their jobs whilst 100 odd (player+family+friends) get disillusioned with the AFL one of them deals with possible health issues in the future?

But it's time to move on.

It's dramatic because people like you have stopped giving a damn.

 

[sipossational2]

Stick 'em in the VFL.

merge them with melbourne then **** em off to tasmania

 

[joop]

You know nothing Jon Snow.

The AFL commission have access and accredited medicos as well as agreements with ASADA in order to canvas most every instance of drug or operation that can be undertaken by a club, who, by the very nature of being a club, are a wholly licensee of the AFL with all but about 2 who do not own their own club. It's a pyramid with the Commission close enough to the very top. it's why Bruce Reid should have gone down with them, because he had recourse with the AFL to do something about it, but instead chose to remain in house with his own hierarchy failing their checks and balances then sat on his hands.

Read the drug policy, it's in there.
Read the CBA, it's in there.

This is entirely a governance issue, because the AFL did nothing, then moved to protect its interests (Essendon; a licensee) when the proverbial hit the fan and has since crashed back to realising that this was the wrong call to make. They assisted the clubs in creating a situation whereby clubs poured rather large sums into said departments, which when you deal with modes of recovery, medical operations, medications and the landscape that is modern day medicine, blind Freddy could see that someone was going to screw the pooch the question was who, and when. It's why WADA has a S0 which is a catch all "if it's not registered for humans, it's illegal" and we have sport bannings still occurring from 5-10years ago since advancement and alterations moves that fast.

The AFl failed to govern by allowing and purporting this to occur at a club, as much as the club failed in allowing it to progress to the point that it did.



Comparison was made in reference to how each code affected by this "darkest day in sport" reacted to the instances, largely NRL which has an issue with alcoholism mixed with the scum of society into bestiality saw this and pretty much immediately went GTFO to those instances. the AFL by comparison joined the chorus of nothing to see here and we will fight you if you say differently in denial of the problem.

The Carlton aspect was more to show that the Commission during that time was much more hardline than Andy D and Gill combined.



Only if you blame these people and only these people as opposed to it being a governance issue which has potentially ruined people lives. It's gone close to ruining Hal's life where his chosen profession of an AFL player and key point in his life for income wise, ahs turned into visits with psychologists and court hearings, but you want to move on because he's irrelevant to you as the AFL is no longer at fault despite being the one trying to bend him over. The parents who were informed by Essendon & the AFL to zip it and tow the line, who later came out in tears stating their fears, you disregard, because it's time to move on.

The Commission who allowed this to prosper under their watch is largely still there.
The hierarchy of Essendon who allowed this to occur are still around the AFL, we saw Prismall joining the Dogs for instance.

This is a governance issue by the Commission and by Essendon charged with, in effect providing a safe environment for these boys and men to ply their trade to therefore generate the monies to make the circle spin, they failed in this charge and you're happy to accept 10 people losing their jobs whilst 100 odd (player+family+friends) get disillusioned with the AFL one of them deals with possible health issues in the future?

But it's time to move on.

It's dramatic because people like you have stopped giving a damn.

People like me? I'm sorry that I'd rather move on and concentrate on football instead of this crap hogging the back pages for a 4th year running.
Tell me why I should still give a damm? What exactly does it achieve?

 

[SaintsSeptember]

IF the AFL were smart they would gather a bunch of consultants and determine what supplements players and athletes would want to take and are allowed to take.
They would then approach suppliers of such supplements with a deal where permissible supplements get the AFL logo on the package.
IE they get paid to make it easier for AFL players and all other sports players.

 

[sauce_head]

So what punishment is enough for you to make them 'accountable'?

Not profiting from their penalty (i.e. No early or priority draft picks in their punishment year). That's abysmal.

 

[sonnywalters]

What more do you want?

1. Chris Heffernan and Paul Brashner banned for life from AFL administration of any kind
2. Players to publicly admit they have no idea what they took and that the club misled them
3. Jobe to hand back his Brownlow
4. Full disclosure about who knew what and who was signing off on the bills to Charter, Alavi etc
5. Full disclosure on the exact nature of the agreement of the payment to the Weapon

That would be a good first step.

 

[sonnywalters]

IF the AFL were smart they would gather a bunch of consultants and determine what supplements players and athletes would want to take and are allowed to take.
They would then approach suppliers of such supplements with a deal where permissible supplements get the AFL logo on the package.
IE they get paid to make it easier for AFL players and all other sports players.

I have said this from day one.
The AFL could make money on it.
Rather than have a list of 'banned' supplements, just say everything is banned unless it is 'AFL approved'.
Then have 5-10 supplements with the 'AFL approved' logo. They would make a fortune.

 

[joop]

Not profiting from their penalty (i.e. No early or priority draft picks in their punishment year). That's abysmal.

So you think getting a number 1 draft pick this year is profiting from their penalty?

 

[sauce_head]

So you think getting a number 1 draft pick this year is profiting from their penalty?

Do you not? They have had players taken away as punishment. It's meant to impact their on field success. To gain an advantage over other clubs based on this punitive measure is not just, in my opinion. The prevention principle comes to mind, although it's not a perfect fit. I'm sure some lawyer out there can give us the Latin term for restricting gaining a benefit from a breach.

So Essendon should get a pick at the end of the first round or not at all. And certainly not a priority pick. They can get that, if they need it, once their main list post penalty requires it.

 

[Persevering Saint]

Do you not? They have had players taken away as punishment. It's meant to impact their on field success. To gain an advantage over other clubs based on this punitive measure is not just, in my opinion. The prevention principle comes to mind, although it's not a perfect fit. I'm sure some lawyer out there can give us the Latin term for restricting gaining a benefit from a breach.

So Essendon should get a pick at the end of the first round or not at all. And certainly not a priority pick. They can get that, if they need it, once their main list post penalty requires it.

Add to that, if the players leave like many expect them to, what if the AFL arbitrarily insists that must be done as RFA. Then, on top of getting ONE pick at #1 or #2, they may get another, or maybe even several others. So help me, if they end up with something like #1, #2, #3, #4 or something like that, that makes the bans feel a whole lot sweeter for the Bombers. That would suck, big time.

 

[joop]

Do you not? They have had players taken away as punishment. It's meant to impact their on field success. To gain an advantage over other clubs based on this punitive measure is not just, in my opinion. The prevention principle comes to mind, although it's not a perfect fit. I'm sure some lawyer out there can give us the Latin term for restricting gaining a benefit from a breach.

So Essendon should get a pick at the end of the first round or not at all. And certainly not a priority pick. They can get that, if they need it, once their main list post penalty requires it.

I would think all the punishments they've had would far outweighs them 'profiting' from a number one draft pick.
The club itself hasn't been penalised this year, the players have. Therefor if the club finishes bottom under what law or rule should they get stripped of the number 1 pick? You want to criticise the AFL but at the same time want them to make up a new rule for this situation?
If they have a mass exodus and finish bottom next year should they be stripped of it again? Where does it stop?

 

[joop]

Add to that, if the players leave like many expect them to, what if the AFL arbitrarily insists that must be done as RFA. Then, on top of getting ONE pick at #1 or #2, they may get another, or maybe even several others. So help me, if they end up with something like #1, #2, #3, #4 or something like that, that makes the bans feel a whole lot sweeter for the Bombers. That would suck, big time.

No different to Melbourne getting 3 for Frawley or us getting 13 for BJ.

 

[jonathons11]

Do you not? They have had players taken away as punishment. It's meant to impact their on field success.

I dont completely disagree but to be fair the players are taken away as punishment to the players. WADA didn't ban them to punish the club.

 

[Barrels]

Do you not? They have had players taken away as punishment. It's meant to impact their on field success. To gain an advantage over other clubs based on this punitive measure is not just, in my opinion. The prevention principle comes to mind, although it's not a perfect fit. I'm sure some lawyer out there can give us the Latin term for restricting gaining a benefit from a breach.

So Essendon should get a pick at the end of the first round or not at all. And certainly not a priority pick. They can get that, if they need it, once their main list post penalty requires it.

Gaining a benefit is just unjust enrichment. Arises from the maxim that "no one should be benefited at another's expense": nemo locupletari potest aliena iactura or nemo locupletari debet cum aliena iactura.

 

[StFly]

People like me? I'm sorry that I'd rather move on and concentrate on football instead of this crap hogging the back pages for a 4th year running.
Tell me why I should still give a damm? What exactly does it achieve?

Then concentrate on football, I don't see the issue.

Look at the thread title and the nature of the previous 150odd pages, you help nothing by coming in all dismissive and "who cares" mode, because clearly some of us do and it's damned insulting to effectively tell us to shut up about it, in the thread specificlaly for it.

No different to Melbourne getting 3 for Frawley or us getting 13 for BJ.

Slight difference in the nature of the reasons behind said leaving, one can assume that should Essendon experience mass walkouts ti is due to agreements made to not take parties to court, not make comment or etc, have we heard from Spike McVeigh recently given his first comments was to rubbish everyone against Essendon for the good part of the first 2-4 months? Yes these are people seeking a new club, but different reasons as to the why.

 

[Joffaboy]

1. Chris Heffernan and Paul Brashner banned for life from AFL administration of any kind
2. Players to publicly admit they have no idea what they took and that the club misled them
3. Jobe to hand back his Brownlow
4. Full disclosure about who knew what and who was signing off on the bills to Charter, Alavi etc
5. Full disclosure on the exact nature of the agreement of the payment to the Weapon

That would be a good first step.

2 and three are fair enough
Dont know if anyone knows re No 4.
Think 5 would be a legal settlement.

No 2 should happen. No3 think the players have admitted that