News Crouch & Stengle Caught with Illicit Substance

Remove this Banner Ad

Isn't this Stengle's first illicit drug offence? Why is his suspension longer than Crouch's?
If I read it right I thought the Adelaide club was in discussions with the AFL re the penalties to be handed down....perhaps after investigation Stengle might be the one that made the transaction and the one found to be in possession??
 

Log in to remove this ad.

Stengle broke return to play protocols in April, what’s that? The Barossa thing?
Seems like a misquote. They're referring to his drink driving incident in April.
Typical of the AFL to find a way to screw us over
When was the last time they imposed a ban of this kind on another player?
Jake Carlisle received a 2 game ban for his snorting incident.
 
Apparently the club had no authority to hand down a sanction. From the AFC statement

"The Club has worked closely with the League and AFL Players Association during this process but it does not have grounds to determine, nor enforce, its own penalty."
 
Apparently the club had no authority to hand down a sanction. From the AFC statement

"The Club has worked closely with the League and AFL Players Association during this process but it does not have grounds to determine, nor enforce, its own penalty."


Link to the statement: https://www.afc.com.au/news/824785
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

Isn't this Stengle's first illicit drug offence? Why is his suspension longer than Crouch's?
4 week is normally Strike 2 offence, Unless the AFL using bring the Game into disrepute

Yea AFL used "The players have committed a breach of AFL Rule 2.3(a); A Person must not engage in conduct which is unbecoming or likely to prejudice the interests or reputation of the AFL or to bring the game of football into disrepute.
 
4 week is normally Strike 2 offence, Unless the AFL using bring the Game into disrepute

Yea AFL used "The players have committed a breach of AFL Rule 2.3(a); A Person must not engage in conduct which is unbecoming or likely to prejudice the interests or reputation of the AFL or to bring the game of football into disrepute.
Bringing the game of football into disrepute is a bit of a stretch...
 
I’m fine with the penalities, but really, this is a joke. The AFL are making s**t up again. They’ve used ‘bringing the game into disrepute’, yet never use it for any other incidents like Watts, Carlisle, Mumford etc...

The whole thing has been orchestrated to within an inch of its life and there is no way the club doesn’t have authority to hand out a sanction.
 
It always makes me laugh when these things happen from the AFL.. They pick and choose who they protect that's for sure.

I wonder how Mr Nose Beers Franklin is doing with his "hamstring issues".. bloke has had more strikes than any other player yet.. here we are.

Anyway I hope Brad's new team enjoys not having him for 2 games.
 
Seems like drink driving offenses are handled within the clubs (club suspensions i.e. Stengle, Hunter, etc), so he got forced retirement instead of suspension.
Bzzt. Wrong. The correct answer is it never happened because Port still haven’t released a statement about their player who was charged with a criminal offense pending a court appearance while in the AFL Covid bubble.
 
Here's Jon Ralph's article from earlier in the week, talking precedents, why Brad's suspension won't carry over to another club (wrong) and that the Crows wanted to ban Stengle for 6-10 weeks but the AFLPA would be against it.


Adelaide pair Brad Crouch and Tyson Stengle will be handed an AFL illicit drugs strike and accept fines and suspensions after they were busted with cocaine.

But the Crows are aware Crouch might never serve his internal suspension given he is likely to move as a free agent to a club expected to be Geelong.

Adelaide was hopeful of releasing the penalties for the pair on Thursday, having had to try and work through the punishments with the AFL and player union.

But this has been delayed.

It is expected to be guided by precedent that saw two AFL players suspended for a fortnight after they used illicit drugs and were caught.


Under that precedent the players could be fined as much as $25,000 and be handed multi-week suspensions.

When St Kilda’s Jake Carlisle was caught snorting an illicit substance in 2015 he accepted a two-week suspension and forfeited a $50,000 marketing component of his deal.

Shane Mumford was fined $25,000 and suspended by the club for two weeks after he was caught snorting cocaine.

Crouch and Stengle’s penalties are complicated by the circumstances, with free agent Crouch likely exiting the club and Stengle having this year served a four-week club ban for drink-driving.

If he moved to Geelong the penalty would not be transported to the Cats given it is an internal suspension.

The Crows will make clear Stengle is on his last chance at the club and under AFL rules is not allowed to sack him, with the young goalsneak also having just signed a two-season deal.

Adelaide’s wish to hand him a suspension longer than the four-week ban given he has not changed his behaviour has to be negotiated with the AFLPA.

Ideally it would suspend him for between 6-10 weeks given the severity of his transgressions but the AFLPA might not allow a penalty of that length.

Both are expected to accept illicit drugs strikes, which under AFL rules see players handed a $5000 suspended fine and mandatory counselling and education programs.
 
Here's Jon Ralph's article from earlier in the week, talking precedents, why Brad's suspension won't carry over to another club (wrong) and that the Crows wanted to ban Stengle for 6-10 weeks but the AFLPA would be against it.

He was guessing. Put in a longer sentence than expected to generate click bait.

Sent from my SM-G965F using Tapatalk
 

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top