Gil and Fitzpatrick Named in Writ -- the saga

[citizen-erased]

Funny you should ask. How is Bomber going?

We all know which card Hird will use again to get out of this one...

Eagles fans.
pure class.

 

[Bunk Moreland]

FFS they were trying to protect Essendon.

This is completely incorrect regarding the topic at hand

The AFL wanted to boot Essendon from the 2013 season.

That’s their right and is not being challenged.

But what they did is have their cake and eat it too. Boot them out, but carry on a season-long charade suggesting they hadn’t yet decided to do so.

Ask yourself, why did they do this?

The NRL did the same to the Melbourne Storm, but they simply had them play the season without accruing points.

The allegation is that the AFL misled consumers.

It’s very basic consumer law. As usual FigBooty can’t get it’s collective head around it.

 

[citizen-erased]

Slightly off topic but the afl really needs to be seperated from the governance of the sport and just manage the league like the FA/Premier League model

thats not a bad thought

Separate governance and administration.
An AFL board, appointed by the membership holders of both the AFL and clubs, with dismissal powers of the CEO, etc. would bring a bit of accountability.

Back on topic though
This has nothing to do with Essendon, so the club and players will be largely immune to this action, other than the spotlight for a bit.
Fitzpatrick and AD are gone, however Gil may just have to resign if unlawful behaviour is found. Especially after some of the precedent he has set around higher standards of expectation (lethlean, etc).

Richmond might be able to strike from the record being the only team to lose a final to a team that didn't qualify in the first place...

 

[Bunk Moreland]

Slightly off topic but the afl really needs to be seperated from the governance of the sport and just manage the league like the FA/Premier League model

It’s not off topic at all - it’s the very heart of the topic.

The AFL put their commercial interests first and in doing so, deceived their consumers.

A seperate governance body making this decision, who weren’t responsible for the financial performance of the company, may well have not done it.

You’re almost the first person here to say something vaguely relevant.

 

[MaddAdam]

It’s not a case brought by the club or any current or past employees.

The basic gist of the case is that the AFL knew all throughout 2013 that they were going to boot Essendon from the finals.

Which, of course, they did. They openly spoke of “protecting the integrity of the finals series” in their perfectly timed findings just a week before the finals, based on an “interim” report they demanded from ASADA.

The allegation is that in allowing Essendon to compete in 22 “premiership” matches in 2013, that they knew were anything but, the AFL acted deceptively toward the consumers of those matches.

The case has been brought by a lawyer. If he’s successful in proving it, he’ll bring a class action on behalf of 2013 EFC members for compensation of membership fees. That’s where he’ll make his money.

Good post.

That said, I think those Essendon members will get their money back at the cost of having any delusion they may still harbor about the "supplements saga" being anything other than a team wide doping program run from the very top by James Hird shattered in open court.

 

[kranky al]

They absolutely tried to control the narrative, That's what ****** us, They should've let ASADA run it's investigation independently, And the outcome would've been whatever it was but nope they needed to control everything which turned it into a s**t fight.

Had they stepped back and let us open it's doors to a full investigation whereby we cooperated fully like we agreed to do this whole saga would've ended in 2013.

Mmmmm

 

[Ron The Bear]

It’s not even challenging what the AFL did - only that they knew they were going to do it a good 6 months before their “announcement” and the big song and dance they put on around it.

Nobody really cares if that's the case. The AFL gave Essendon every chance - Demetriou on the batphone to stately Evans Manor screaming "Burn it! Burn it all!" But the Bombers couldn't even do that right. Even after they became adversarial, the AFL tried to protect them from themselves.

 

[Grogg]

FFS they were trying to protect Essendon.

They were protecting their product.

 

[master bate]

It’s not a case brought by the club or any current or past employees.

The basic gist of the case is that the AFL knew all throughout 2013 that they were going to boot Essendon from the finals.

Which, of course, they did. They openly spoke of “protecting the integrity of the finals series” in their perfectly timed findings just a week before the finals, based on an “interim” report they demanded from ASADA.

The allegation is that in allowing Essendon to compete in 22 “premiership” matches in 2013, that they knew were anything but, the AFL acted deceptively toward the consumers of those matches.

The case has been brought by a lawyer. If he’s successful in proving it, he’ll bring a class action on behalf of 2013 EFC members for compensation of membership fees. That’s where he’ll make his money.

If that's successful he should sue Melbourne for 2007-2013. Especially 2012/2013 when members paid good money to go and see games of football and didn't get anything that resembled a football team.

If Essendon were eventually cleared of wrong doing I think he'd have a case. Surely given both the AFL and WADA ended up winning it seems to me to be a long shot. Imagine if the AFL didn't 'protect the integrity of the finals series' and Essendon somehow won some finals in a year when they were later proven to be using PED's.

Edit: I see your point about consumer law, but I'd like to know what percentage of aggrieved members bought memberships in 2014 or in 2016 when they were effectively wiped for the whole year. Both Essendon and the AFL certainly didn't hide that they were under investigation, they threw a press conference to announce it! There was a convenience to the timing of the announcement but it wasn't going to happen in March before round 1. Even without the mess of the join investigation it would've taken at least a few months to get to a point of kicking a team out of the finals. Oh well, always opportunistic lawyers clogging up our courts and ruining the reputations of a once noble profession for a few bucks.

 

[Bunk Moreland]

Nobody really cares if that's the case.

It’s the very subject of the case currently before court.

The AFL applied to have it derailed to a preliminary hearing. This morning they were denied and told to pay the plaintiff’s costs for doing so.

It’s the very topic of what is being talked about. Try to keep up.

 

[Adelaide Hawk]

Please let it be true. I've waited 5 years for this. It's pretty obvious the AFL were implicated in some way, and it's about time they were held to account.

 

[Ron The Bear]

It’s the very subject of the case currently before court.

The AFL applied to have it derailed to a preliminary hearing. This morning they were denied and told to pay the plaintiff’s costs for doing so.

It’s the very topic of what is being talked about. Try to keep up.

But so what? The public won't care if Demetriou burns in hell.

Same if Fitzpatrick said Hird was banished forever. So what? That's how it should be.

 

[DrEvil_]

They absolutely tried to control the narrative, That's what ****** us, They should've let ASADA run it's investigation independently, And the outcome would've been whatever it was but nope they needed to control everything which turned it into a s**t fight.

Had they stepped back and let us open it's doors to a full investigation whereby we cooperated fully like we agreed to do this whole saga would've ended in 2013.

That is what **** you? That? Not your club having a sanctioned illegal drug program? And lol at Essendon cooperating fully, yeah man whatever you say old pal.

 

[Bunk Moreland]

But so what? The public won't care if Demetriou burns in hell.

Same if Fitzpatrick said Hird was banished forever. So what? That's how it should be.

I don’t even know what you’re talking about or why you’re asking me. The case is not about public opinion.

You should probably just read the basics of the case and who’s bringing it if you want to discuss it.

 

[AcuteWhistle]

 

[Milanista28]

That is what **** you? That? Not your club having a sanctioned illegal drug program? And lol at Essendon cooperating fully, yeah man whatever you say old pal.

I worded that bit wrong, I mean it screwed the whole saga, It's the reason it lasted as long as it did.

I will edit my post.

 

[Bunk Moreland]

If that's successful he should sue Melbourne for 2007-2013. Especially 2012/2013 when members paid good money to go and see games of football and didn't get anything that resembled a football team.

If Essendon were eventually cleared of wrong doing I think he'd have a case. Surely given both the AFL and WADA ended up winning it seems to me to be a long shot. Imagine if the AFL didn't 'protect the integrity of the finals series' and Essendon somehow won some finals in a year when they were later proven to be using PED's.

Edit: I see your point about consumer law, but I'd like to know what percentage of aggrieved members bought memberships in 2014 or in 2016 when they were effectively wiped for the whole year. Both Essendon and the AFL certainly didn't hide that they were under investigation, they threw a press conference to announce it! There was a convenience to the timing of the announcement but it wasn't going to happen in March before round 1. Even without the mess of the join investigation it would've taken at least a few months to get to a point of kicking a team out of the finals. Oh well, always opportunistic lawyers clogging up our courts and ruining the reputations of a once noble profession for a few bucks.

When was the decision made?

That’s the question.

I’d suggest it was rather early on, and was kept quiet for one reason - to seperate supporters from their money.

 

[Ron The Bear]

I don’t even know what you’re talking about or why you’re asking me. The case is not about public opinion.

You should probably just read the basics of the case and who’s bringing it if you want to discuss it.

Even if Demetriou's found guilty of breaching some commercial imperative, I don't see what's in it for anyone, other than some schadenfreude for Essendon supporters who think he crucified the club.

 

[Chuckie357]

VINDICATION IS COMING

Is Essendons afl license being revoked?

 

[PenfoldsFan]

Essendon were the sacrificial lamb and the AFL attempted to shield them from as much fallout as it could without making it obvious...
Apart from the cheating aspect, they were guilty of poor timing.

There was much more at stake than a season of Premiership points and anyone who thinks otherwise is kidding themselves.

 

[Bunk Moreland]

Even if Demetriou's found guilty of breaching some commercial imperative, I don't see what's in it for anyone, other than some schadenfreude for Essendon supporters who think he crucified the club.

Is it really that hard to read a two page thread?

It’s not a case brought by the club or any current or past employees.

The basic gist of the case is that the AFL knew all throughout 2013 that they were going to boot Essendon from the finals.

Which, of course, they did. They openly spoke of “protecting the integrity of the finals series” in their perfectly timed findings just a week before the finals, based on an “interim” report they demanded from ASADA.

The allegation is that in allowing Essendon to compete in 22 “premiership” matches in 2013, that they knew were anything but, the AFL acted deceptively toward the consumers of those matches.

The case has been brought by a lawyer. If he’s successful in proving it, he’ll bring a class action on behalf of 2013 EFC members for compensation of membership fees. That’s where he’ll make his money.

 

[Ron The Bear]

Is it really that hard to read a two page thread?

Pffft, the report only consolidated the findings to that point. There were plenty of rumours around that Essendon was going to be kicked out, well before the report was handed down. Not even Essendon raised a public fuss after limping to the end of August. Your mob had no hope in Hades of winning a final.

If anyone has reason to be pissed off, it's Richmond supporters who should by rights have played your broken down and dispirited mob instead of losing to a reinvigorated Carlton.

I guess if the AFL is forced to reimburse you ~$300, it's a reason to be invested. Then again, if the club had self-reported earlier, it might all have been avoided...

 

[Satan]

What can happen to the Bombers that hasn't already happened?

Records show up?

 

[Oscarman]

The AFL put their commercial interests first and in doing so, deceived their consumers.

Not just Essendon members though. You could argue everyone who bought a ticket to a Bombers game in 2013 was similarly affected.

I think this bloke should get $1 million.

 

[Sir_Loin]

I’m all for it. Given what we know about tip offs, trying to control the narrative and all the meddling it will be good if they got examined under the threat of perjury. Just for that.

Doesn’t change anything else though.