Bryce Gibbs and his personal issues

[JeffDunne]

If the AFL had prosecuted Carlton further once the Williams/ATO verdict was known, Carlton would have been in the hands of liquidators and the then current Sports Minister for Victoria would have been shown to have participated in a fraud. As it was the opposition were calling for an inquiry.

The AFL have swept things under the carpet with a lot less on the line.

Reality is in 50 years we'll still have Essendon supporters arguing they didn't dope their players and Carlton supporters arguing they didn't cheat when they won their last premiership in 1995.

The rest of us will just continue to roll our eyes.

 

[Thrawn]

Assuming that's a serious question - I got a new computer in 2009, forgot my password and didn't have the email address I used when I signen up originally in 2001 so added a 2 to my old username and signed up again.

Or do you think I am also someone else?

Nah, I remember a MarkT, just wondered if you were one and the same.

 

[Thrawn]

Reality is in 50 years we'll still have Essendon supporters still arguing they didn't dope their players and Carlton supporters arguing they didn't cheat when they won their last premiership in 1995.

That you can even compare the two, may it in evidence or seriousness, is laughable.

Well done for derailing this thread, btw.

 

[The Old Dark Navy's]

If the AFL had prosecuted Carlton further once the Williams/ATO verdict was known, Carlton would have been in the hands of liquidators and the then current Sports Minister for Victoria would have been shown to have participated in a fraud. As it was the opposition were calling for an inquiry.

The AFL have swept things under the carpet with a lot less on the line.

Right so you're speculating based on what makes sense to you and being critical of those that don't buy into your speculation.

We were done for breaches in 2002 and penalised. I accept that.

We had no case to answer over the Williams case. I accept that too.

 

[The Old Dark Navy's]

That you can even compare the two, may it in evidence or seriousness, is laughable.

Well done for derailing this thread, btw.

Given the amount paid was $49k in 1995, it is probably a stretch that it won us a flag.

 

[JeffDunne]

That you can even compare the two, may it in evidence or seriousness, is laughable.

I'm comparing the delusion of the the two supporter bases.

No amount of evidence will ever convince them.

 

[The Old Dark Navy's]

I'm comparing the delusion of the the two supporter bases.

No amount of evidence will ever convince them.

An investigation and a guilty verdict might. We accepted the 2002 penalties.

 

[peppy la pew]

So about this Bryce Gibbs fellow ...............................

 

[The Old Dark Navy's]

So about this Bryce Gibbs fellow ...............................

Who?

Crows player right?

 

[peppy la pew]

Who?

Crows player right?

Coulda been, shoulda been, but they dropped the ball

Big time

 

[JVseven]

Is the personal issue his man bun?

 

[armpit]

That you can even compare the two, may it in evidence or seriousness, is laughable.

Well done for derailing this thread, btw.

Not to derail the thread or anything but he was saying there's cheaters and then there's drug cheaters and it's the perception of most towards those teams and so shall it be, but I see he already clarified it with you so it doesn't matter.

 

[Harro59]

Is the personal issue his man bun?

Yes.

 

[Rimmer]

COST OF BABYSITTERS ALLOWANCE next on AFL's agenda ?

This could work for the NSW clubs ... out COLA in COBA

All those 18 year old draftees need nannies

 

[MarkT2]

An investigation and a guilty verdict might. We accepted the 2002 penalties.

Do you know what an amnestry is? I'm sure yuo actually do but for the sake of it, it is an opportunity to admit GUILT wihtout sanction to clear the air. Carlton admitted guilt re 1995 and Essendon didn't re 1993. That's the difference in the two situations. Jesus, even when the club ADMITS guilt you can't accept it.

 

[MarkT2]

Nah, I remember a MarkT, just wondered if you were one and the same.

That was me.

 

[JeffDunne]

Right so you're speculating based on what makes sense to you and being critical of those that don't buy into your speculation.

We were done for breaches in 2002 and penalised. I accept that.

We had no case to answer over the Williams case. I accept that too.

Speculating?

Do you normally classify findings in the Supreme Court as 'speculation'?

 

[Harro59]

Whilst having a child does change your perspective in life, if you sign a contract and make a commitment to a club fr a period of time you will still need to honour that.

Im sure Carlton will now work through with Bryce about putting in place some strategies to assist him in this area. For example they could provide him with some additional leave throughout the year if there is a need to travel back to Adelaide or support his wife with the young child.

But in all of this he signed a contract that some people could only dream of. Honestly he could move his and her parents over to Melbourne if he needed to lol. And lets all just think of how close Adelaide and Melbourne are.

Im sure he is proffesional enough to play football and honour his contract regardless of the off season.



Sent from my SM-G900I using Tapatalk

 

[The Old Dark Navy's]

Do you know what an amnestry is? I'm sure yuo actually do but for the sake of it, it is an opportunity to admit GUILT wihtout sanction to clear the air. Carlton admitted guilt re 1995 and Essendon didn't re 1993. That's the difference in the two situations. Jesus, even when the club ADMITS guilt you can't accept it.

Hmm, find that admission for me Mark.

When was the moratorium Mark? 1993 wasn't it? We came clean about a few things during the amnesty, as did quite a few teams incidentally. It was rife.

One of the things we claimed to come clean about was that we had a legal agreement in place to pay Greg Williams an extra $250k.

Now the AFL of 10 years later would make you cut players and salaries to make good on such an arrangement. The AFL at the time were still trying to change a culture and get clubs on board with the cap. Whether they let existing agreements play out, I do not know.

Carlton were penalised for a payment to Stephen O'Reilly in the early 2000s to get him to retire a year early, and a promised extra payment to Bradley and Silvagni during their last contract negotiations.

They also alluded to the lengths we went to in order to deceive during the previous decade, some of which took in the moratorium period.

They never pinpointed 1995 or penalised us for any payment made in 1995. That is left for people to deduce given our previous behaviour.

 

[The Old Dark Navy's]

Speculating?

Do you normally classify findings in the Supreme Court as 'speculation'?

Sorry, did the Supreme Court say this?

If the AFL had prosecuted Carlton further once the Williams/ATO verdict was known, Carlton would have been in the hands of liquidators and the then current Sports Minister for Victoria would have been shown to have participated in a fraud. As it was the opposition were calling for an inquiry.

The AFL have swept things under the carpet with a lot less on the line.

 

[JeffDunne]

Sorry, did the Supreme Court say this?

Not exactly. They just provided the proof.

Ian Collins said on several occasions that Carlton were already insolvent. It's not speculation to suggest additional penalties would have put them into liquidation if you believe Ian Collins (& yes its a stretch believing anything that came out of that prick's mouth as truth). It also would have delayed the massive handouts the AFL were about to give the Blues (not least of all was not forcing the club to pay the penalty from the previous case).

The Supreme Court did show the involvement of Justin Madden in the fraud. The opposition did call for an inquiry. Neither is speculation.

As for the AFL's motives I don't need to speculate.

Did Carlton ever pay the first fine? There's your answer.

 

[The Old Dark Navy's]

Not exactly. They just provided the proof.

Ian Collins said on several occasions that Carlton were already insolvent. It's not speculation to suggest additional penalties would have put them into liquidation if you believe Ian Collins (& yes its a stretch believing anything that came out of that prick's mouth as truth). It also would have delayed the massive handouts the AFL were about to give the Blues (not least of all was not forcing the club to pay the penalty from the previous case).

The Supreme Court did show the involvement of Justin Madden in the fraud. The opposition did call for an inquiry. Neither is speculation.

As for the AFL's motives I don't need to speculate.

Did Carlton ever pay the first fine? There's your answer.

What would have happened but didn't actually happen is still speculation and supposition. All we have on record is that Carlton publicly announced it had been declared and the AFL said no case to answer. Their reasons for doing so can only be speculated on.

And yes, that fine has been paid in full.

 

[JeffDunne]

When did they pay it?

 

[The Old Dark Navy's]

When did they pay it?

Technically, very quickly as the AFL loaned them the money to pay it. The loan was interest free for a few years, then the interest kicked in and we paid interest for another few years and then started paying down the principle and that was finally paid in full about two years back for memory.

Although I have seen another account that says we paid the fine but then had to loan money from them to stay afloat.

 

[JeffDunne]

So you haven't paid it back?

You converted a fine into a debt (I presume to be written off at some point).

Typical.