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

[Sillygit]

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.

You honestly think thats how this shit works?

 

[Mcarcherey]

wasn't the verdict suppose to be early this week.....

 

[Del191229]

You honestly think thats how this s**t works?

I honestly think there's a very real chance this is exactly what's happening here.

 

[gokangas]

Justice delayed is justice denied.

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

Originally told the delay (last week) was about the legals being sorted around what was to be a serious suspension. Not sure why it takes this long. Not good for any of the parties.

 

[blackshadow]

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.

 

[Tiberius]

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?

But he wouldn't be de-registered for 3 or 4 incidents. He would be de-registered for "Bringing the Game into disrepute", which is a blanket term used to justify suspensions for any number of incidents. How many instances there were would be something for a court to decide based on charges. Let's be clear, Tarryn isn't getting potentially de-registered for nicking stuff from the stationery cupboard or turning up hungover, if he get's de-registered it's because he's allegedly done something which is against the law.

 

[gokangas]

But he wouldn't be de-registered for 3 or 4 incidents. He would be de-registered for "Bringing the Game into disrepute", which is a blanket term used to justify suspensions for any number of incidents. How many instances there were would be something for a court to decide based on charges. Let's be clear, Tarryn isn't getting potentially de-registered for nicking stuff from the stationery cupboard or turning up hungover, if he get's de-registered it's because he's allegedly done something which is against the law.

Kudos for spelling stationery correctly.

 

[KiwiRoo]

View attachment 1905676

haha I love that movie !

 

[KiwiRoo]

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)

agreed. Lets see what comes out

 

[Lavy_Panther]

But he wouldn't be de-registered for 3 or 4 incidents. He would be de-registered for "Bringing the Game into disrepute", which is a blanket term used to justify suspensions for any number of incidents. How many instances there were would be something for a court to decide based on charges. Let's be clear, Tarryn isn't getting potentially de-registered for nicking stuff from the stationery cupboard or turning up hungover, if he get's de-registered it's because he's allegedly done something which is against the law.

The objective seriousness of the transgression(s) is absolutely aggravated by the number of instances.

 

[gustaaf]

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?

He missed the first 11 rounds of last season as a direct result of having been stood down last year. That would have been an extremely long suspension even if he had been formally charged and suspended by the AFL, which he wasn't. Furthermore, North dropped him to the VFL for the latter part of the 2022 season, with the educated speculation at the time suggesting that it was for behavioural rather than performance reasons. I'd say TT has already copped very significant punishments for his behavioural issues, particularly when you consider what other boofheads at some of the big clubs have gotten away with in more recent times without AFL intervention. If there is a major suspension for past sins (if that is the case) that hadn't previously come to light and therefore hadn't been taken into account for any possible official sanctions, surely the previous unofficial suspensions need to be factored in to ensure the total number of games TT will miss is proportional and fair? If for instance the upcoming suspension is 14 games, that would mean that he has missed 25 games + quite possibly about 6 games when he was banished to the VFL. That is longer than a season! The AFL would never have suspended him for anywhere near that number of games if they had dealt with this in full at the start of 2023. I'm all for appropriate punishment but am strongly against draconian punishment. If they go with a very lengthy suspension it will look as though they have set out to destroy TT's career, which is why North and the AFLPA need to vigorously fight it.

 

[year of the roo]

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?

Yes. I was repeatedly late to work and even after being asked to be on time, I was still tardy. I'm now doing 25 to life.

 

[Colby Cheer Squad]

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'm assuming it's because everyone making this comment is either too young, too dumb, or too demented to remember 2002.

 

[Del191229]

Originally told the delay (last week) was about the legals being sorted around what was to be a serious suspension. Not sure why it takes this long. Not good for any of the parties.

If I'm Tarryn's lawyers and the AFL are saying they want to hand out what will be effectively a career killing (in the short to medium term) suspension on the grounds of optics then eff you, we're going to court.

And let's see how you like the optics of a LOOOOOOOOONG lawsuit about ruining the career of an indigenous player over non criminal matters while you've still got the whole Hawthorn shitshow hanging over you.

Its the old thing about never taking a knife to a gun fight. If the AFL want to put a gun to Tarryn's head, well you go and kidnap their children and send Dillon a video of your accomplices dousing them in petrol and playing with a Bic lighter.

 

[Tiberius]

I'm assuming it's because everyone making this comment is either too young, too dumb, or too demented to remember 2002.

Wayne quit the club and was traded to Adelaide. Nobody got suspended or sanctioned as I recall. Or were you referring to something else?

 

[Nate7]

View attachment 1905676

"You ain't gonna sh!t right for a week!" Classic movie.

 

[Lomas]

Kudos for spelling stationery correctly.

Give him a gold star.

 

[gokangas]

Give him a gold star.

Worthy of an elephant stamp at the least.

 

[Lavy_Panther]

He missed the first 11 rounds of last season as a direct result of having been stood down last year. That would have been an extremely long suspension even if he had been formally charged and suspended by the AFL, which he wasn't. Furthermore, North dropped him to the VFL for the latter part of the 2022 season, with the educated speculation at the time suggesting that it was for behavioural rather than performance reasons. I'd say TT has already copped very significant punishments for his behavioural issues, particularly when you consider what other boofheads at some of the big clubs have gotten away with in more recent times without AFL intervention. If there is a major suspension for past sins (if that is the case) that hadn't previously come to light and therefore hadn't been taken into account for any possible official sanctions, surely the previous unofficial suspensions need to be factored in to ensure the total number of games TT will miss is proportional and fair? If for instance the upcoming suspension is 14 games, that would mean that he has missed 25 games + quite possibly about 6 games when he was banished to the VFL. That is longer than a season! The AFL would never have suspended him for anywhere near that number of games if they had dealt with this in full at the start of 2023. I'm all for appropriate punishment but am strongly against draconian punishment. If they go with a very lengthy suspension it will look as though they have set out to destroy TT's career, which is why North and the AFLPA need to vigorously fight it.

It’s really impossible to know this without knowing the nature of the latest allegations and the reasons for why he was stood down for as long as he was last time.

I’ve said all along, all we can do is wait until the information comes to light. I’m not saying you are doing this, but blindly supporting TT (which can manifest itself into victim blaming) because he wears our colours doesn’t do anyone any favours.

 

[Liam Boy]

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?

kind of ridiculous to expect the accused to provide the accusations, isn't it? I don't know about you but I don't have an amazing memory of every fight i've ever been in over messenger apps and I find it painful to think about them, let alone go back through and read them. If it's true that it's another accusation of the same kind from the same time period, he should get no suspension at all.

 

[apollo_creed]

kind of ridiculous to expect the accused to provide the accusations, isn't it? I don't know about you but I don't have an amazing memory of every fight i've ever been in over messenger apps and I find it painful to think about them, let alone go back through and read them. If it's true that it's another accusation of the same kind from the same time period, he should get no suspension at all.

jeepers. you're comparing messenger fights to the stuff thomas has been accused of in the past?
what a weird equivalence. it's the words and actions suggested within them that are the problem, not the act of arguing on a social platform. you're just basically dismissing them as normal interactions.

 

[Liam Boy]

jeepers. you're comparing messenger fights to the stuff thomas has been accused of in the past?
what a weird equivalence. it's the words and actions suggested within them that are the problem, not the act of arguing on a social platform. you're just basically dismissing them as normal interactions.

Not what I'm saying at all. I've never threatened to hurt an intimate partner over messenger, and I'm not trying to say what Tarryn did was just a messenger argument in terms of the seriousness of making threats, just that I imagine it would be a very painful and embarrassing memory for him, and that he probably wasn't in a particularly stable emotional state when it happened. I think it would be ridiculous to expect him to have a perfect memory of every such incident, and then to punish him for not self-reporting based on that. I'm not trying to dismiss the seriousness of the actions, but they're actions he's already been punished before and if the initial investigation failed to turn up an additional instance of the same thing, I think that giving him an extra suspension now is unwarranted.

If it's happened again since he was disciplined, obviously throw the book at him.

 

[The Dingrel]

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.

I tried that line challenging my sons speeding fines a week after getting his P's on a maccas run. Got done for a few K/hr by 2 speed cameras in the space of 20 mins (might have even been the same speed camera). If a cop had pulled him over, or he'd seen a flash, or some indicator that he'd been speeding the first time, he'd have adjusted his behaviour and wouldn't have been done a second time. Was a bloody expensive Big Mac for a 17yo high school student without a job and half a pineapple in the bank.

 

[Ligma]

I tried that line challenging my sons speeding fines a week after getting his P's on a maccas run. Got done for a few K/hr by 2 speed cameras in the space of 20 mins (might have even been the same speed camera). If a cop had pulled him over, or he'd seen a flash, or some indicator that he'd been speeding the first time, he'd have adjusted his behaviour and wouldn't have been done a second time. Was a bloody expensive Big Mac for a 17yo high school student without a job and half a pineapple in the bank.

just don't speed lol

 

[Samsquanch]

just don't speed lol

How can you not speed?