- Mar 21, 2014
- 13,679
- 10,332
- AFL Club
- Adelaide
- Other Teams
- Norwood, Canadiens, Maroons.
- Banned
- #776
Career ending retirement.What did Jack Watts get for the Covid breach, hit and run and evading police?
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
LIVE: St Kilda v Western Bulldogs - 7:30PM Thu
Squiggle tips Saints at 51% chance -- What's your tip? -- Team line-ups »
Career ending retirement.What did Jack Watts get for the Covid breach, hit and run and evading police?
Yep, conduct unbecoming in the military is a nice catch-all for courts martial. Same here.4 week is normally Strike 2 offence, Unless the AFL using bring the Game into disrepute
Yea AFL used "The players have committed a breach of AFL Rule 2.3(a); A Person must not engage in conduct which is unbecoming or likely to prejudice the interests or reputation of the AFL or to bring the game of football into disrepute.
The club made the AFL give the sanction because they knew Crouch is gone.. If the club gave the sanction he wouldn’t have to serve it..
Sent from my iPhone using BigFooty.com
Because they only gave Stengle 4, who is stayingThat doesn't really make much sense, why would the club care if he's leaving anyway?
I'd assume they made the AFL give the sanction because whatever the decision, people are going to criticise it and better for the club that the AFL gets criticised rather than the club.The club made the AFL give the sanction because they knew Crouch is gone.. If the club gave the sanction he wouldn’t have to serve it..
Sent from my iPhone using BigFooty.com
That doesn't really make much sense, why would the club care if he's leaving anyway?
No The AFL they did the same to Jake Carlise. and the difference was Stengle and that was due to his late reporting of his DUII'd assume they made the AFL give the sanction because whatever the decision, people are going to criticise it and better for the club that the AFL gets criticised rather than the club.
More to with the involvement of the Po Po.The club made the AFL give the sanction because they knew Crouch is gone.. If the club gave the sanction he wouldn’t have to serve it..
Sent from my iPhone using BigFooty.com
That doesn't really make much sense, why would the club care if he's leaving anyway?
Because there's no real grounds for the club to suspend them.I really have no understanding why this is an AFL matter.... It's a club matter.
Had nothing to do with the club, but that doesn't suit your narrativebecause our admin has a serious thirst for punishing players.
Had nothing to do with the club, but that doesn't suit your narrative
Stengle gets 4 for being stupid twice in 5 months, it's not hard to follow. He copped 4 for a worse offence and followed it up with showing he didn't learn.They handed it to AFL, which is not the norm. Wanted Brad's penalty to stick. Until a day ago we were working on the penalty, someone writes an article how Brad's penalty won't follow him, so we allow the AFL to step in to make sure that happened. These are club penalties handled via AFL. How else does Stengle get 4. The gymnastics in trying to qualify that is hilarious.
Of course the AFL know it couldn‘t suspend the Crows under the drugs policy. In fact if the drug use was picked up in testing only the club doctors would know, and a penalty couldn’t be considered until the 3rd strike.
What was Gil’s excuse for DeGoey? Some comparisons to NRL player or something. Like wtaf.Considering DeGoey was arrested and charged with indecent assault in July, and neither the club (pies) nor the AFL undertook any suspension, the charge of conduct unbecoming is AFL hypocrisy of the highest degree.
Of course the AFL know it couldn‘t suspend the Crows under the drugs policy. In fact if the drug use was picked up in testing only the club doctors would know, and a penalty couldn’t be considered until the 3rd strike.
when you look at it in this context you know its a stitch up