Rumour Harley Bennell

Remove this Banner Ad

Komrade_Tiger said:
Whilst all of that is true, this is the AFL we're talking about here. No-one on this forum would be surprised if it came out that they covered it up. They tried to sweep Essendon's 34 under the carpet but ASADA/WADA got wind of it, and the fact that it was PED and not just Illicit (which ASADA/WADA only test for on Gameday). Bennell only been accused of what he's been caught out of season for. And yet, none of the known facts categorically disprove the rumours, until he runs out there onto the field
Click to expand...
While I will agree with you on the lengths the AFL will go to cover stuff up at times, I cant see it with Bennell
 
Komrade_Tiger said:
i despise the AFL and their ways of running things.

When it comes to the campaigners down at AFL House, i'll believe something when i see it.
Click to expand...
don't worry, i also believe them to believe corrupt but there has to be proof. there is proof in the essendon drugs saga, proof that they imposed drafting penalties on sydney for drafting within the rules (ie, fitzpatrick wanted buddy to go to gws). i simply don't see the proof or logic with bennell?
 

Log in to remove this ad.

6yearsold said:
don't worry, i also believe them to believe corrupt but there has to be proof. there is proof in the essendon drugs saga, proof that they imposed drafting penalties on sydney for drafting within the rules (ie, fitzpatrick wanted buddy to go to gws). i simply don't see the proof or logic with bennell?
Click to expand...
The best thing sydney ever done to help there little brother, there is no way they would have all that talent on the list if they were paying buddy's wages
 
estibador said:
So Freo are so committed to the cover-up they sent Bennell on a holiday to Germany to reward him for all this good behaviour?
Click to expand...
Were going to send him to France,but there is pregnant girl looking for an aussie footballer over there.
 
Komrade_Tiger said:
Known to be a 'party-boy'

kept flouting the AFL's hush hush agreement so they kept extending the ban, the fact is that no player has publicly recorded a strike across ~800 odd listed players. If it sounds like bullshit, looks like bullshit and smells like bullshit (which the fact of 0 out of 800 is) then it IS Bullshit.

My whole point is, I would not be surprised if the AFL is covering his indiscretions because thats what the AFL does.

Whether he has had some issues with his calves is up in the air. Yet for it to suddenly turn from an ~8 week injury or whatever it was being reported as to Season ending, and as it stands, he's still rumoured to be a while off debuting for Freo. Need i re-iterative my point about bullshit to do with his calf injuries?
Click to expand...

IMG_0446.JPG

This is Ludicrous, it's completely lacking in logic!!
 
Bennell is no angel but he has serious calf issues. He obviously had a drug issue for a while but since he got to Freo his major problem has been his calves. When I was told what had happened I asked whether he would play again, shrug of the shoulders was the response.
 
Apparently round three Fremantle are planning to have him debut against the western bulldogs, next week he ramps up his training and starts to join the main group, won't play any of the jlt series but could play the first two games for peel thunder. That is what is being reported on the radio this morning here in the west. Also freo may not choose to play him at peel which could be interesting but I would just be happy to see him make his debut for freo.
 
Komrade_Tiger said:
kept flouting the AFL's hush hush agreement so they kept extending the ban, the fact is that no player has publicly recorded a strike across ~800 odd listed players. If it sounds like bullshit, looks like bullshit and smells like bullshit (which the fact of 0 out of 800 is) then it IS Bullshit.
Click to expand...

Well this is blatantly wrong.
 
Bradesmaen said:
That was 2 years ago. People change and reform. To slug him instantly with a work ethic question is nothing more than a pot shot from a commentator who has his own indiscretion 12 months ago to deal with. Everytime you see Garry Lyon with a friends wife, are you going to accuse him of cheating?
Click to expand...

Of course not, cheaters always stop after they've been caught the first time.
 
I personally don't know much about Bennell's situation so cannot make any kind of judgement regarding the legitimacy of his calf injury (or, "calf injury" as others put it). But what I do know is that the AFL does, in fact, cover up players that should be exposed under the illicit drugs policy. Specifically, I know of 2 through close friends, and 1 first hand - none of which have ever been named. So whilst this doesn't mean that Bennell is in the same boat, it means that it isn't preposterous.

For what it's worth, I despise the fact that the AFL is trying to punish players for 'illicit drug use' under the guise of a player's health. It astounds me that the AFL accepts sponsorships from one of the most dangerous drugs (alcohol) and entrenches its use within the spectator culture, yet far less harmful substances must be rooted out of a player's life, despite being done in their own personal time. Some recreational drugs can translate into performance benefits but these are only minor and require a perfect regime with respect to dosage and timing. So if a player is taking something that doesn't give them an unfair advantage and is in their own personal time, then let them be. Don't make it a circus like Cousins which only exacerbates the negatives.
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

Borussia Teeth said:
My comment is based on what he can do for Fremantle in 2017 and beyond, not his past performance.
Click to expand...

Yeah that's fair enough, it was a gamble bringing him in but the potential reward far outweighs the cost

Still a massive IF though
 
peppy la pew said:
Yeah that's fair enough, it was a gamble bringing him in but the potential reward far outweighs the cost

Still a massive IF though
Click to expand...
I would have taken the chance too.

He's a gun up and running. I hope he gets back sooner rather than later, although you'd suggest given his preseason you'd think it would be until at least round 10 before you start to see him at his best.
 
I still don't understand the point of this being 'covered up'.

The AFL had these options if Bennell had reached 3 strikes
  • Announce it and suspend him, because they actually 'care'
  • Cover it up and let him play, because they don't actually care and the 3 strikes rule is just in place to look nice
  • Cover it up, but still suspend him, attracting scrutiny and controversy over why he isn't playing, but don't announce it as per the rules because they don't actually care, but they care enough to suspend him
The most obvious option for any player who the public suspects is a drug user and 'has 3 strikes' is that they are simply injured, a drug user, and have not recorded 3 strikes because the AFL does not test all that often.
Suspending a player for 6 weeks and saying they have a hamstring injury (like people say they did with Buddy), or letting them play half a game or pre-season game and then suspending them for the rest of the season (Beams, Bennell) is ******* stupid, anyone with some sort of ability to critically think would realise that this option just creates attention. The AFL would absolutely let them continue to play imo over suspending them.
 
I don't think most people claiming it's a cover up even believe that themselves. It's just the usual mean-spirited potshots.
 
SterlingArcher said:
I still don't understand the point of this being 'covered up'.

The AFL had these options if Bennell had reached 3 strikes
  • Announce it and suspend him, because they actually 'care'
  • Cover it up and let him play, because they don't actually care and the 3 strikes rule is just in place to look nice
  • Cover it up, but still suspend him, attracting scrutiny and controversy over why he isn't playing, but don't announce it as per the rules because they don't actually care, but they care enough to suspend him
The most obvious option for any player who the public suspects is a drug user and 'has 3 strikes' is that they are simply injured, a drug user, and have not recorded 3 strikes because the AFL does not test all that often.
Suspending a player for 6 weeks and saying they have a hamstring injury (like people say they did with Buddy), or letting them play half a game or pre-season game and then suspending them for the rest of the season (Beams, Bennell) is ******* stupid, anyone with some sort of ability to critically think would realise that this option just creates attention. The AFL would absolutely let them continue to play imo over suspending them.
Click to expand...

And send him to Germany under the guise of getting treatment from a specialist.

I have never heard of an illicit drug suspension that lasts over a year
 
peppy la pew said:
And send him to Germany under the guise of getting treatment from a specialist.

I have never heard of an illicit drug suspension that lasts over a year
Click to expand...

well that depends on if people think the suspension has occurred only recently or if it occurred all of last year?

for what its worth i think he's been out because of his calf, not drug issues. but there are significant off-field issues that are a concern to the dockers
 
StCicatriz said:
well that depends on if people think the suspension has occurred only recently or if it occurred all of last year?

for what its worth i think he's been out because of his calf, not drug issues. but there are significant off-field issues that are a concern to the dockers
Click to expand...

You peanuts have been screaming drugs ever since we recruited him, dont pretend it has only just happened

I know you hate freo with a passion, and fair play we nicked your coach, but if you cant see this is a LTI then there is no changing your mind
 
peppy la pew said:
You peanuts have been screaming drugs ever since we recruited him, dont pretend it has only just happened

I know you hate freo with a passion, and fair play we nicked your coach, but if you cant see this is a LTI then there is no changing your mind
Click to expand...
When did i say it wasn't an LTI? Re-read what I wrote slowly
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top