2015 Non-Crows AFL Discussion - Pt. 1

[crowsup]

No, he back flipped on the help required. Sando cost Sando in the end.

True. But I meant that another 6 months with Bailey beside him, would have thought Sando a bit more, and help him make fewer mistakes.

 

[Red mist]

More it makes me think Essendon are gonna get the Six months backdated but also the first team docked points, say six months worth?

 

[GROTTO]

More it makes me think Essendon are gonna get the Six months backdated but also the first team docked points, say six months worth?

They need and deserve to be rubbed out. One year is fair and I think everyone will feel the penalty is appropriate. 6 months is farcical. One year backdated is fine with me.

 

[Red mist]

They need and deserve to be rubbed out. One year is fair and I think everyone will feel the penalty is appropriate. 6 months is farcical. One year backdated is fine with me.

Points could enter this for the first time I reckon.

 

[Pdub]

I wonder if they are given the option to play with their full list but forfeit all premiership points for that match or play for premiership points with VFL players what they would choose?

 

[GROTTO]

I wonder if they are given the option to play with their full list but forfeit all premiership points for that match or play for premiership points with VFL players what they would choose?

Better to forfeit the points and play at least they get games into their players. Waste of time fielding a soft starting 22.

 

[Geoffa32]

More it makes me think Essendon are gonna get the Six months backdated but also the first team docked points, say six months worth?

Can't see how points can be part of the penalty.

I could be wrong (NikkiNoo ) but I isn't this current hearing only about finding if the players are subject to a penalty and sentencing that penalty.

The club has served its penalty in the AFL's eyes, and ASADA are not mandated to penalise clubs. Just athletes.

 

[Red mist]

Can't see how points can be part of the penalty.

I could be wrong (NikkiNoo ) but I isn't this current hearing only about finding if the players are subject to a penalty and sentencing that penalty.

The club has served its penalty in the AFL's eyes, and ASADA are not mandated to penalise clubs. Just athletes.

I can see points. It will appease the clubs.

 

[alex_is_on_fire]

The players need to receive 15 games as a minimum.

 

[Geoffa32]

The players need to receive 15 games as a minimum.

Yes.

That was Tippets sanction and he had the exact same defence as these player have had. All he did was follow direction from the club and his manager to sign a contract which was deemed illegal.

These players all followed direction from the club and medical staff to administer an illegal substance into their body.

In both instances it is the players overall responsibility to ensure their bodies are clean from illegal substances and that any player contract they signed is legal in accordance to AFL rules. Regardless of advice they receive from agents and their club these are their responsibilities as athletes.


The real issue is whether the AFL/ASADA want to suggest that systematic drug cheating is less/more of an offence than having one player on an illegal contract. That is where the bar is set from my standpoint.


I would suggest that 99.99% of the population would suggest that systematic doping is far worse.

 

[Red mist]

The players need to receive 15 games as a minimum.

And points off Essendons premiership season.

 

[alex_is_on_fire]

And points off Essendons premiership season.

Disagree - IMO the club have served their penalty already.

 

[Geoffa32]

And points off Essendons premiership season.

If Essendon have 20 players out for at least 15 games they wont be getting too many points anyway.

In terms of the club it essentially means this season would be a write off.

 

[alex_is_on_fire]

If Essendon have 20 players out for at least 15 games they wont be getting too many points anyway.

In terms of the club it essentially means this season would be a write off.

Saying that, the club can not be rewarded by having a high draft pick in return of a bad season.

 

[Red mist]

If Essendon have 20 players out for at least 15 games they wont be getting too many points anyway.

In terms of the club it essentially means this season would be a write off.

They can still shape the make up of the 8 in spite. Could be very interesting viewing.

 

[Red mist]

Disagree - IMO the club have served their penalty already.

Nope hit them harder. Points mean everything.

 

[Geoffa32]

Saying that, the club can not be rewarded by having a high draft pick in return of a bad season.

Maybe a better sanction would be loss of first round draft pick, not points. That is if the club was to be penalised out of this, and i don't think they will be as the AFL have already sanctioned em.

 

[alex_is_on_fire]

Nope hit them harder. Points mean everything.

But they have already had points taken from them by missing the finals in 2013.

 

[Red mist]

But they have already had points taken from them by missing the finals in 2013.

Likewise the aftermath should include the same.

 

[alex_is_on_fire]

Likewise the aftermath should include the same.

Playing the devils advocate role - why should they be penalised twice.

 

[Kane McGoodwin]

Saying that, the club can not be rewarded by having a high draft pick in return of a bad season.

Correct.

Give the players a year, which means essendon finish bottom - no need to deduct points.

But then they forfeit their 1st rounder.

 

[Red mist]

Playing the devils advocate role - why should they be penalised twice.

Drawing it out and denial by the admin and coaching sector.

 

[GROTTO]

The players need to receive 15 games as a minimum.

I want a year personally. Games makes it feel likes its just a on field misdemeanor like striking etc.

 

[GROTTO]

Correct.

Give the players a year, which means essendon finish bottom - no need to deduct points.

But then they forfeit their 1st rounder.

Thats the double kick to the balls.

 

[alex_is_on_fire]

Drawing it out and denial by the admin and coaching sector.

Innocent until proven guilty is a civil right.

I know i'm contracticting myself by saying they should not be rewarded with a first round pick next year, thats why the AFL are in a massive pickle over this.