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

[disco_cowboy]

Unsighted today in the intra, expected more if im honest.

 

[Lomas]

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?

Now I don't know you, and do not intend any offence at all, but this is how I picture you as I read the post:

 

[Daniltchenko You Beauty]

I don't think we would be utilising Thomas properly if he had to run himself ragged at every single contest then win the ball like as if it's not going to get him injured.

His role is to extract the ball, break lines and kick goals. If we are using him to just run all day then he won't have much tank left to get away from the pack. Which is his biggest asset. Two way running and then being that explosive player isn't compatible.

Thomas is an exciting player and should be treated as such. Utilise his strengths instead of trying to correct weaknesses that aren't really that bad anyway. He can still apply heaps of pressure and has good closing speed. His tackling is also so much better than his teammates.

If Thomas is stuck at the back of the contest because he has to be defensively minded instead of being that lethal offensive type we may as well trade the bloke because his best work is up the ground closer to goal.

His opponent will get separation just as the same as all the other 21 blokes his teammates are looking after. There's no such thing as 4 quarter two-way running.

If we take our chances and kick heaps of goals, that's what hurts opposition ultimately. Making them more defensively accountable as opposed to trying all day just to have no energy to pinch it.

He plays football?

 

[Keith Ape]

Now I don't know you, and do not intend any offence at all, but this is how I picture you as I read the post:

I'm sorry. I thought you was corn.

 

[Colby Cheer Squad]

Unsighted today in the intra, expected more if im honest.

Seeing as he's been ordered to stay away from the group, I don't know if he can stay away more than he did today.

 

[desie]

This is a point worth discussing.

As far as I know (correct me if I'm wrong), the AFL doesn't have the equivalent of the NRL 'no fault stand down' policy. This was introduced to deal with the steady stream of NRL players charged with violent sexual assault and rape, and sees the player charged with such crimes stood down until the charge is heard (although the player can continue to train, be at the club etc, so its not a 'suspension' in the way it applies in the AFL).

If the AFL had such a policy, Marlion Pickett would be stood down (I think he's back in court in March), but lacking one, it cannot conduct its own integrity investigation without contaminating the criminal process (and hence it has taken no action to date).

So I think you make a good point that something like the NRL 'no fault stand down' should reasonably find a home in the AFL, to avoid the situation where Pickett is at work and Thomas has been suspended (formally or informally)

To fall under the No Fault stand down policy in the NRL a player must be charged with a serious offence that brings with it a maximum of at least 11 years jail.

I’m not sure whether that’s the case with Pickett.

 

[Karanicolas]

Agree, punishment needs to fit the "crime" whatever that may be, if not you would have to think TT's legal representatives have been spending the the last couple of weeks digging up precedents. Either that or this will create one hell of a precedent which could come back to haunt the AFL.

The AFL does not believe in precedent ... unless it allows one of their star players to play in a final or win a Brownlow.

But if I was TT's lawyers, I would be arguing that it is not reasonable to be punished a second time for behaviour of a similar nature and for the same period for which he has already been punished - if that is what is happening in this instance. Maybe why this is taking longer than expected. Also, the AFL would know that the more severe the penalty, the more likely that TT will challenge it.

 

[krakouers]

Now I don't know you, and do not intend any offence at all, but this is how I picture you as I read the post:

 

[The Northerner]

Probably late to the party on this one, but given the allegations aren't yet public knowledge, and how much the modern day media love to crucify someone before any outcome is available, I am mildly confident that will be yet another fizzler.

All we know is that there has been an allegation and it's not yet a police matter. If the allegations are not serious enough for a Police matter and that the media haven't gotten their hands on the allegations, put some mustard on them and posted them as fact, also hints to there not being much weight to this.

My understanding is that, if something should be a police matter, it generally needs to be reported as soon as the allegation comes to light. The fact that this is now something like a month old and that Tarryn is still permitted to train with representatives of North Melbourne's coaching staff (albeit away from the playing group), mean the club are still invested in him with the hope and support that he can return once the investigation has finalised.

I trust Dr Hood and the way she handles these sensitive matters. She was amazing for Clarko last year and I sense the same will come of Tarryn's situation.

If not, and if I am wrong, lets put our own emotions and personal feelings aside and support the club and the AFL in whatever direction they take and just remember we are all human and some of us need more support and guidance than others to get our souls aligned to goodness.

 

[Merlin007]

To fall under the No Fault stand down policy in the NRL a player must be charged with a serious offence that brings with it a maximum of at least 11 years jail.

I’m not sure whether that’s the case with Pickett.

Aggravated burglary would satisfy the threshold?

 

[North Viking]

Probably late to the party on this one, but given the allegations aren't yet public knowledge, and how much the modern day media love to crucify someone before any outcome is available, I am mildly confident that will be yet another fizzler.

All we know is that there has been an allegation and it's not yet a police matter. If the allegations are not serious enough for a Police matter and that the media haven't gotten their hands on the allegations, put some mustard on them and posted them as fact, also hints to there not being much weight to this.

My understanding is that, if something should be a police matter, it generally needs to be reported as soon as the allegation comes to light. The fact that this is now something like a month old and that Tarryn is still permitted to train with representatives of North Melbourne's coaching staff (albeit away from the playing group), mean the club are still invested in him with the hope and support that he can return once the investigation has finalised.

I trust Dr Hood and the way she handles these sensitive matters. She was amazing for Clarko last year and I sense the same will come of Tarryn's situation.

If not, and if I am wrong, lets put our own emotions and personal feelings aside and support the club and the AFL in whatever direction they take and just remember we are all human and some of us need more support and guidance than others to get our souls aligned to goodness.

Great post!
Now leave - sensibility is not tolerated around here.

 

[Sillygit]

Probably late to the party on this one, but given the allegations aren't yet public knowledge, and how much the modern day media love to crucify someone before any outcome is available, I am mildly confident that will be yet another fizzler.

All we know is that there has been an allegation and it's not yet a police matter. If the allegations are not serious enough for a Police matter and that the media haven't gotten their hands on the allegations, put some mustard on them and posted them as fact, also hints to there not being much weight to this.

My understanding is that, if something should be a police matter, it generally needs to be reported as soon as the allegation comes to light. The fact that this is now something like a month old and that Tarryn is still permitted to train with representatives of North Melbourne's coaching staff (albeit away from the playing group), mean the club are still invested in him with the hope and support that he can return once the investigation has finalised.

I trust Dr Hood and the way she handles these sensitive matters. She was amazing for Clarko last year and I sense the same will come of Tarryn's situation.

If not, and if I am wrong, lets put our own emotions and personal feelings aside and support the club and the AFL in whatever direction they take and just remember we are all human and some of us need more support and guidance than others to get our souls aligned to goodness.

it does not have to be a police matter to be a breach of contract/code of conduct and result in sanctions. assumptions resulting from this conclusion are flawed.

 

[Mcarcherey]

Probably late to the party on this one, but given the allegations aren't yet public knowledge, and how much the modern day media love to crucify someone before any outcome is available, I am mildly confident that will be yet another fizzler.

All we know is that there has been an allegation and it's not yet a police matter. If the allegations are not serious enough for a Police matter and that the media haven't gotten their hands on the allegations, put some mustard on them and posted them as fact, also hints to there not being much weight to this.

My understanding is that, if something should be a police matter, it generally needs to be reported as soon as the allegation comes to light. The fact that this is now something like a month old and that Tarryn is still permitted to train with representatives of North Melbourne's coaching staff (albeit away from the playing group), mean the club are still invested in him with the hope and support that he can return once the investigation has finalised.

I trust Dr Hood and the way she handles these sensitive matters. She was amazing for Clarko last year and I sense the same will come of Tarryn's situation.

If not, and if I am wrong, lets put our own emotions and personal feelings aside and support the club and the AFL in whatever direction they take and just remember we are all human and some of us need more support and guidance than others to get our souls aligned to goodness.

Prepare to be told that the supposed integrity unit doesn't have to report it to the police even if it's a criminal matter... Yet the same posters believe the integrity unit has the capacity of a district court and can determine the guilt of a suspect on said criminal matter [emoji23]

On Pixel 6 using BigFooty.com mobile app

 

[speedy]

Prepare to be told that the supposed integrity unit doesn't have to report it to the police even if it's a criminal matter... Yet the same posters believe the integrity unit has the capacity of a district court and can determine the guilt of a suspect on said criminal matter [emoji23]

On Pixel 6 using BigFooty.com mobile app

The whole process was one ”interview” with Tarryn. Probably didn’t even know what the accusations were before then. Don’t care what policy’s the AFL have, even arseholes have rights.

 

[Frank Thring]

So the AFL want to go hard on Thomas yet swept more serious allegations by indigenous players against Hawthorn under the carpet

The AFL Integrity unit:

 

[KiwiRoo]

Let's not get too caught up in the level of criminality here

This is a reputational issue for the AFL.
50 % of the population and fan base is woman.They want to keep sponsors and the fan base on board.
They pay very very good money to players. In return for that money they expect players to toe the line and not tarnish that reputation.

if certain players repeatedly harm that reputation,whether it reaches certain levels of criminality or not, then do they have a right to cry spilt milk when its been made abundantly clear to them since day dot what the consequences may be ?

Like what happens if Santa Claus got 700k a year from the AFL for keeping a white beard and wearing red clothes, then decides to
drop his dacks on the xmas parade. Who would complain if the AFL deregistered him

the players know what's expected of them behaviour wise..they need to deal with it

 

[Tiberius]

Let's not get too caught up in the level of criminality here

This is a reputational issue for the AFL.
50 % of the population and fan base is woman.They want to keep sponsors and the fan base on board.
They pay very very good money to players. In return for that money they expect players to toe the line and not tarnish that reputation.

if certain players repeatedly harm that reputation,whether it reaches certain levels of criminality or not, then do they have a right to cry spilt milk when its been made abundantly clear to them since day dot what the consequences may be ?

Like what happens if Santa Claus got 700k a year from the AFL for keeping a white beard and wearing red clothes, then decides to
drop his dacks on the xmas parade. Who would complain if the AFL deregistered him

the players know what's expected of them behaviour wise..they need to deal with it

Which brings back the question of when the offences in question were allegedly committed. Nobody knows. If they were after Tarryn had already been through the AFL education and awareness programs last time then sure, throw the book at him. If they are historical events dating from pre the previous suspension then they'd have to be pretty serious (ie a police matter) to warrant further lengthy suspensions. (In my opinion, and keeping in mind that I know very little about the law, AFL integrity, or women)

 

[gokangas]

Which brings back the question of when the offences in question were allegedly committed. Nobody knows. If they were after Tarryn had already been through the AFL education and awareness programs last time then sure, throw the book at him. If they are historical events dating from pre the previous suspension then they'd have to be pretty serious (ie a police matter) to warrant further lengthy suspensions. (In my opinion, and keeping in mind that I know very little about the law, AFL integrity, or women)

Fair call. I suspect they are after but don't know. The delay in the AFL announcing the outcome raises a lot of questions.

 

[Lavy_Panther]

Which brings back the question of when the offences in question were allegedly committed. Nobody knows. If they were after Tarryn had already been through the AFL education and awareness programs last time then sure, throw the book at him. If they are historical events dating from pre the previous suspension then they'd have to be pretty serious (ie a police matter) to warrant further lengthy suspensions. (In my opinion, and keeping in mind that I know very little about the law, AFL integrity, or women)

Fair call. I suspect they are after but don't know. The delay in the AFL announcing the outcome raises a lot of questions.

No, that isn’t a fair call.

It’s a simple concept: The sanctions handed out, or not handed out, were based on available information. If new information comes to light, you don’t just disregard on the basis of reformed character.

And for heavens sake, why is everyone obsessed with it being a criminal matter or not? Do people actually think the only way you can get sanctioned by your employer is if you break the law?

 

[Del191229]

Justice delayed is justice denied.

If he's ****ed up and needs a whack, hand it out ffs.

 

[Tiberius]

No, that isn’t a fair call.

It’s a simple concept: The sanctions handed out, or not handed out, were based on available information. If new information comes to light, you don’t just disregard on the basis of reformed character.

And for heavens sake, why is everyone obsessed with it being a criminal matter or not? Do people actually think the only way you can get sanctioned by your employer is if you break the law?

I don't disagree with anything you're saying, but I think you're arguing against something I didn't say. Of course you can't discount new information if it comes to light, but given that he has already served a lengthy suspension for past indiscretions, any new historical indiscretions would have to be of a pretty serious nature to warrant further long suspensions. And if they were that serious they probably should be a police matter.
Or if the new allegations are post his previous supensions and re-education classes then he is a tool and deserves whatever he gets.

 

[shinboner magic]

 

[durkadurka]

I don't feel sorry for Thomas. He's not a victim regardless of the penalty or the question of when the offence occurred.

I agree that the woman in question is seemingly acting from a jealous/vindictive position now but her being trashy doesn't excuse Thomas supposed (not supposed to those adjudicating) actions. If his penalty is 10 games he's not a victim, nor are North Melbourne. It might be unfortunate it wasn't dealt with previously/made public by the accuser but ultimately the offence is his and if it is serious it should be treated as such
.
My opinion is that a penalty of 6-10 games is probably right all things considered and based on the reports but if it's more then so be it.

The club has been incredibly supportive of Thomas over previous seasons despite his behavioural issues and the fact that each of the last two seasons there has been talk about him wanting to leave is pretty reflective of his commitment to this club. He'll be gone at seasons end. He owes the club but he's too stupid and arrogant to realise this (imo of course). His manager is also a ******* snake.

I wonder if this bloke still feels this way…

 

[durkadurka]

No, that isn’t a fair call.

It’s a simple concept: The sanctions handed out, or not handed out, were based on available information. If new information comes to light, you don’t just disregard on the basis of reformed character.

And for heavens sake, why is everyone obsessed with it being a criminal matter or not? Do people actually think the only way you can get sanctioned by your employer is if you break the law?

So, this accuser can just drip feed more allegations as he tries to restart his career? So when he’s on the verge of playing she can pluck something out and he has to sit out X amount of weeks?

Turn it up.

 

[Lavy_Panther]

I don't disagree with anything you're saying, but I think you're arguing against something I didn't say. Of course you can't discount new information if it comes to light, but given that he has already served a lengthy suspension for past indiscretions, any new historical indiscretions would have to be of a pretty serious nature to warrant further long suspensions. And if they were that serious they probably should be a police matter.
Or if the new allegations are post his previous supensions and re-education classes then he is a tool and deserves whatever he gets.

Out of curiosity, what would you say if, hypothetically speaking, TT was spared de-registration because there were say 3 known incidents of wrongdoing as opposed to 4, and then later on the 4th came to light? Or what if he was afforded leaniency on the basis of “owning up to everything”, and then it came to light he didn’t?