Past #26: Tarryn Thomas [Part III] - [C.Twomey] AFL rules TT is eligible to play in all competitions as of 14 October

[Roostorm]

Sorta fits with what I was told. AFL wants blood but NM want it to be more realistic. AFL talking deregister - NM saying a substantial suspension.

Geez GK sounds like it’s been a bit of a Mexican standoff ….glad to hear NM being realistic ….
wow….de registration…….seriously….. when one goes back over past player shenanigans at other clubs ….one mr JDG at pies Mr Harley B, who’s the Dees guy That’s been busted for white lines….heck even Benny and his eagles mates comes to mind if we keep going …..nothing to see all good pat pat on back…. guess what lm saying is they have allowed a heck of a lot under the bridge but want to be shining knights on this……..

And look rightly so it should be being discussed and disciplinary action applied after discussions…..but don’t act all high and mighty when your track record as an organisation is shonky at best…


I wait to see the outcome…but appreciate the info you’ve posted..

 

[JGreezy]

Did they say "eighteen" or "A team"?

They were making a Mr T(T) reference.

 

[Merlin007]

I find it genuinely outrageous that deregistration could be on the cards, but I don't doubt the AFL is trying it on.

It now looks like a strategic decision by the AFL to not involve the police. Once a player is charged, the AFL's preferred sanction is held to account by the result of the court case, by handling the case internally the AFL can retain control of the penalty.

sorry, I know I said I wouldn't be back on this thread, but this is simply not correct. The AFL does not have a 'strategic decision' to make about the police - referral to police is decision for the complainant.

I'll say it again - the AFL is not involved in criminal proceedings but investigating whether a registered player has breached a policy that said player agreed to when he signed his $750,000 pa contract.

what's involved is a policy - not a criminal - breach

 

[Samsquanch]

INT. NAB Bank Docklands
GoKangas' source (Lip Reading) with binoculars through office window

The fatal flaw in this speculation...

 

[Samsquanch]

My case with AFL integrity never got leaked.

GK is a fraud

The one about bringing the game into disrepute or the "other" case that cannot be mentioned?

 

[Del191229]

Gunna be quite something when the AFL go all heavy handed on Tarryn to set an example.

And then late in the season a golden boy white player from a club the AFL really wants playing finals does exactly the same if not worse.

 

[Ligma]

The one about bringing the game into disrepute or the "other" case that cannot be mentioned?

Bringing the game into disrepute!!!!

My case got resolved in like 5 days lol

 

[Del191229]

100%. He’s not off the rails (or on the rails) like Harley Bennell. Another club will pick him up for * all and he’ll dominate and we’ll have to swallow the garbage that club has turned him around, and the commentators will champion him as a redemption story, but he’s still the same bloke.

Hmmm, not so sure there, if he get a big suspension and we sack him, he's going to have to do a few years of WAFL/SANFL penance before anyone touches him

 

[Del191229]

I find it genuinely outrageous that deregistration could be on the cards, but I don't doubt the AFL is trying it on.

It now looks like a strategic decision by the AFL to not involve the police. Once a player is charged, the AFL's preferred sanction is held to account by the result of the court case, by handling the case internally the AFL can retain control of the penalty.

If he's committed criminal offences, the cops will get involved whether the AFL like it or not.

 

[Conundrum]

42 pages since I last checked this thread in late Jan... so from what I read in the previous few pages, the allegations haven't been revealed, nor any punishments?

And if the AFL wanted to deregister him, I would think NMFC wouldn't have much sway in it, I thought the player contracts are signed with the league?

Two years in a row now that this is happening with TT, surely it can't be the previous incident(s) reheated and trotted out again, right? Must be a point where a complaint can be considered closed. If it is new allegations, boy, TT is a real idiot

 

[Amicalola]

Fwiw, I've largely gone over to team "TT isn't worth the hassle and questionable ethics of keeping him" over the past few days, if anything untoward has happened. Seems like the club have given him enough chances at redemption.

But it is fascinating watching the two polar opposite camps in this thread.

 

[DrZaius]

Bringing the game into disrepute!!!!

My case got resolved in like 5 days lol

Sack Ligmas

 

[shinboner magic]

heck the AFL and their dodgy ways.
The club should leak this BS to someone in media - **** defence , time for offence.
Whats aflpa doing with their silence

 

[Val Keating]

Hmmm, not so sure there, if he get a big suspension and we sack him, he's going to have to do a few years of WAFL/SANFL penance before anyone touches him

Unless hes de-registered, someone will pick him up. Can just imagine Collingwood chomping at the bit

 

[Samsquanch]

Bringing the game into disrepute!!!!

My case got resolved in like 5 days lol

About the same time it takes for sunburn to heal.

 

[gustaaf]

Just what was said. Spoke to him again and he said he thinks it was 18 'charges' likely to result in an 18 week penalty. Then said AFL wanted more but NM and TT pushed back so 18 was a compromise.

I find it very hard to believe that there could be 18 charges involved, unless they are making a separate charge out of every single problematic text he may have sent to the complainant. The normal thing to do is to roll all of those into one charge as they are essentially the same offence.

The police is not involved and the complainant is not privy to deliberations or decisions that have been made, so they cant be the source of the leak as you suggested could be the case in another post.

I'm still hoping that the BF member who posted that this complaint dates back to events from 18 months ago (there is that number 18 again) has a reliable source. That timeframe would open the door to an appeal if the punishment is excessive as that was prior to his earlier stand down and the completion of the respectful behaviour education course. Rehabilitation has to count for something.

I don't agree with those who claim TT had a responsibility to disclose any previous disrespectful behaviour to the AFL. Since when is someone required to incriminate themselves for old sins? The AFL is not a church confessional. Can you imagine the likes of Dusty and JDG fronting the AFL and saying" do you have a spare hour? There are a few things I need to get off my chest".

 

[Samsquanch]

I don't agree with those who claim TT had a responsibility to disclose any previous disrespectful behaviour to the AFL. Since when is someone required to incriminate themselves for old sins? The AFL is not a church confessional. Can you imagine the likes of Dusty and JDG fronting the AFL and saying" do you have a spare hour? There are a few things I need to get of my chest".

Imagine if Dusty let them check the glovebox of the Rangie?

 

[gokangas]

I find it very hard to believe that there could be 18 charges involved, unless they are making a separate charge out of every single problematic text he may have sent to the complainant.

Thats what I understand.

 

[shinboner magic]

I’m with GK - I can confirm the #18 will be mentioned in the press release , it’ll be released at 10.18

 

[DesertRoo]

Imagine if Dusty let them check the glovebox of the Rangie?

Imagine if the afl went this hard on didak, when he was caught driving around with Christopher Wayne Hudsen, as he was firing shots off at the po po.

 

[DunderHead]

What a heckin'g quagmire this thread is.

 

[Tas]

It's very close. I'm told discussions are happening today to finalise the outcome. One suggestion is that NM are resisting the AFL's decision as too heavy handed.

Would they give TT a harsher punishment than Chopsticks or DeGoey given those were assaults?

 

[Tas]

What a *ingg quagmire this thread is.

 

[Deepthroat]

Am I right in understanding that the story is along the lines of;

Allegations have been brought up by the female he recently ceased having a relationship with?

The allegations relate to events from 18 months ago?

The female involved is the same female who raised allegations 12-18 months ago?

 

[Outtatym]

There is no evidence. * that Girl. You ever met her? Than perhaps you should consider your position

Have you?