Don't want, (or need) to start a new thread - still want to post it though

Remove this Banner Ad

Status
Not open for further replies.

Log in to remove this ad.

News...

CARLTON'S worst fears have been realised, with co-captain Sam Docherty suffering another ACL injury.

Crows be happy with this... pick 1 coming up 2019
 
News...

CARLTON'S worst fears have been realised, with co-captain Sam Docherty suffering another ACL injury.

Crows be happy with this... pick 1 coming up 2019
I was thinking the same thing.
While FoxFooty trumpeted the Bloooze trading triumph with an “inside” video of the event as it happened, taking the viewpoint that they had pulled off a master stroke, I’d be more than happy with the Crows decisions if I was a supporter.
 
Why are all players allowed to wear any colour of boot in games?

If jumpers, shorts, socks are all same same why are boots allowed to be multi coloured?

(Nb:
I’m just asking the question not advocating the one colour boot but an genuinely interested why it’s alliwed?)
 
Why are all players allowed to wear any colour of boot in games?

If jumpers, shorts, socks are all same same why are boots allowed to be multi coloured?

(Nb:
I’m just asking the question not advocating the one colour boot but an genuinely interested why it’s alliwed?)

Michael Jordan rule
 
Why are all players allowed to wear any colour of boot in games?

If jumpers, shorts, socks are all same same why are boots allowed to be multi coloured?

(Nb:
I’m just asking the question not advocating the one colour boot but an genuinely interested why it’s alliwed?)
Been an issue in the past with clubs taking big dollars from boot manufacturers, only to have players pull on competitors products.
Not sure if players have exclusions put into their contracts today that allow them to break the clubs contracts. Or maybe the AFLPA have stepped in.
Lucrative income stream for players outside the salary cap.
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

Flog Goddard to Flog Carlton.
Flog heaven.
 
For those interested in such things 3 persons have been left off the so called informal “cabinet” group of the Vatican.

One of those is George Pell.

Can’t add anything more.
 
For those interested in such things 3 persons have been left off the so called informal “cabinet” group of the Vatican.

One of those is George Pell.

Can’t add anything more.

If George Pell is what a man of God is supposed to look like then please introduce me to Satan.
 
Humans can never represent really.
Too fatally flawed.
Too prone to error.
Too many bad decisions.
Unfortunately in the church or any religious group or any human group that should do good works, some people go down bad paths and ruin the good previously done. Often the bad apples cause terrible trouble.
No excuse ofcourse but the few spoil so much.
Same at a football club, a few bad apples can ruin lives eg WCE the 90s team.
 
For those interested in such things 3 persons have been left off the so called informal “cabinet” group of the Vatican.

One of those is George Pell.

Can’t add anything more.
Maybe a posting to North Sentinel Island is on the cards?
 
Now they are stopping the media in Australia from reporting that he is a convicted criminal.

https://www.businessinsider.com.au/...riminal-conviction-but-cant-heres-why-2018-12


As infuriating as it may seem we have to remember their are other victims of this person that have yet to have their day in court. Publicly naming this convicted individual only serves to benefit him at this point and weaken the successful odds of a fair trial, something his other victims are entitled too.
 
As infuriating as it may seem we have to remember their are other victims of this person that have yet to have their day in court. Publicly naming this convicted individual only serves to benefit him at this point and weaken the successful odds of a fair trial, something his other victims are entitled too.
I actually think that naming him would harm him rather than help him. Either way, I very much doubt that they can find 12 jurors that are not aware of allegations and news stories and they would be instructed/asked whether they can deliver a verdict based on the evidence.

I would have thought that suppression orders would be more to protect minors, witnesses etc. Also in some instances the accused before and during trial not after decision has been reached.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top