News Thomas and Keefe - 2 year ban - Trade, De-List, Rookie

Joined
May 25, 2006
Posts
51,621
Likes
25,821
Location
Beach
AFL Club
Collingwood
I dont have a problem with the rules as they stand. You get a few chances with illicit drugs (maybe two strikes is better than three though) and theres no second chance with PEDs.

If these guys have been busted with PEDs accidently cut into their illicit drugs, well thats their stinking bad luck. A good way to avoid this happening in the future is to avoid illicit drugs. Which are illegal. Pretty simple.
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

DAWESOME!!

Norm Smith Medallist
Joined
Sep 7, 2008
Posts
6,618
Likes
8,735
Location
Melbourne
AFL Club
Collingwood
I dont have a problem with the rules as they stand. You get a few chances with illicit drugs (maybe two strikes is better than three though) and theres no second chance with PEDs.

If these guys have been busted with PEDs accidently cut into their illicit drugs, well thats their stinking bad luck. A good way to avoid this happening in the future is to avoid illicit drugs. Which are illegal. Pretty simple.
Summarizes it perfectly.
 

PepperFace

Premium Platinum
Joined
Dec 13, 2012
Posts
4,672
Likes
7,494
AFL Club
Collingwood
Other Teams
The Exers
I dont have a problem with the rules as they stand. You get a few chances with illicit drugs (maybe two strikes is better than three though) and theres no second chance with PEDs.

If these guys have been busted with PEDs accidently cut into their illicit drugs, well thats their stinking bad luck. A good way to avoid this happening in the future is to avoid illicit drugs. Which are illegal. Pretty simple.

Summarizes it perfectly.
Yes it does. I would like to remove the term recreational drugs some people use and replace it completely with illegal or illicit drugs
 

Lefthanded

Club Legend
Joined
Sep 9, 2013
Posts
2,908
Likes
1,834
AFL Club
Collingwood
yes I would assume they remain paid until proven guilty to which their contracts would get ripped up due to a breach of contract. if this does occur the silver lining for mine is that perhaps we can forward pay Pendles or Cloke assumed $400K say between JT and Keefe. giving us greater scope going into 2016/17 to go harder at a Dangerfield.
I'm not sure how much of their contracts would be match day vs base or when the line in the sand would be drawn for stopping payments (if found in breach of contract). Obviously for CFC the earlier the better but even a Feb 10 (date of original testing) cut off could be seen as having fulfilled 4 months of contract (I believe contracts start November each year) so very unlikely we'd have their full contract values ($400k or otherwise) available. Whilst I do see bringing forward payments to other players a valid option, we could also say, what the heck lets use it on Peter Moore as a ruck coach even if AFL says it's included in player payments because of Darcy. (I read somewhere on BF that we didn't go with this because of inclusion in TPP).
 

Obese Arachnid

Supercoach Board Enthusiast
Joined
Jan 11, 2008
Posts
16,954
Likes
47,546
Location
Dirty Boulevard
AFL Club
Collingwood
Other Teams
There are no other teams.
Yes it does. I would like to remove the term recreational drugs some people use and replace it completely with illegal or illicit drugs
I would like to replace Essendon with Drug Cheating Shredder Users.

&

Alcohol with The Big Australian Killer (I'll drink to that!)
 

MyManLynch

Norm Smith Medallist
Joined
Oct 4, 2012
Posts
7,478
Likes
9,715
Location
Singapore
AFL Club
Collingwood
I would like to replace Essendon with Drug Cheating Shredder Users.

&

Alcohol with The Big Australian Killer (I'll drink to that!)
The irony is that their drug use probably enabled them to shred faster than normal, hence the act of taking drugs actually provided the means of escaping penalties for taking drugs.
 

Good_Old

Brownlow Medallist
Joined
May 27, 2010
Posts
17,474
Likes
22,696
AFL Club
Collingwood
Good point, MML and one I thought about when the Ben Cousins saga was in full swing. How are illicit or 'recreational' drugs not considered performance enhancing when they suppress appetite and aid in weight loss?
 

Maggie5

Spec Moderator
Joined
Apr 3, 2010
Posts
35,110
Likes
31,767
Location
Victoria
AFL Club
Collingwood
Moderator #2,235
The irony is that their drug use probably enabled them to shred faster than normal, hence the act of taking drugs actually provided the means of escaping penalties for taking drugs.
That is what I can't understand with pain killers and the Brisbane GF era, many were on this, how are these type of drugs not performance enhancing.
Remember seeing a number of players going down to the dressing room during a game for a jab.
In pain, can't play, pain killers can play.
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

The Royal Sampler

Floreat Pica, Bitch!
Joined
Nov 26, 2006
Posts
25,063
Likes
15,484
Location
Hooray For Science, Woo!
AFL Club
Collingwood
Other Teams
VFL Magpies
Hoping the boys can pull off 12 months suspensions with possible backdating. I will be pretty disappointed if they 2 years for something as mild as Clen.
Clenbuterol is hardly mild in the performance enhancing sense. Sure it's not creating a nation of addicts like meth, but it's cheating if deliberately ingested, no doubt.
 

Hysteria25

All Australian
Joined
May 25, 2009
Posts
622
Likes
1,028
Location
Anti-Clique HQ
AFL Club
Brisbane Lions
Clenbuterol is hardly mild in the performance enhancing sense. Sure it's not creating a nation of addicts like meth, but it's cheating if deliberately ingested, no doubt.
You're right, it is certainly deliberate cheating. However, I'm not convinced that Clen would have the same caliber of perceivable benefits as a traditional anabolic steroid.
 
Joined
May 25, 2006
Posts
51,621
Likes
25,821
Location
Beach
AFL Club
Collingwood
Clenbuterol is hardly mild in the performance enhancing sense. Sure it's not creating a nation of addicts like meth, but it's cheating if deliberately ingested, no doubt.
Or accidentally if it was cut into an illegal substance you shoudlnt have been taking in the first place. Thems the rules.
 
Joined
May 25, 2006
Posts
51,621
Likes
25,821
Location
Beach
AFL Club
Collingwood
If they get 12 months I'd keep them on the list.
Agree but thats unlikely I'd say. 18 months or less and you'd consider keeping them. Beyond that well the game and the list moves on, best you could offer them is to consider redrafting them onto the rookie list on a best endeavours basis.

For a reduced penalty to occur I'd reckon theyd have to come clean about how the stuff got in their system. Maybe thats happening behind the scenes, who knows
 

1892

Club Legend
Joined
Nov 25, 2006
Posts
2,389
Likes
2,956
Location
Melbourne
AFL Club
Collingwood
Agree but thats unlikely I'd say. 18 months or less and you'd consider keeping them. Beyond that well the game and the list moves on, best you could offer them is to consider redrafting them onto the rookie list on a best endeavours basis.

For a reduced penalty to occur I'd reckon theyd have to come clean about how the stuff got in their system. Maybe thats happening behind the scenes, who knows
I don't think list management will determine their futures at the club, but it's an interesting one, 12 months = Feb 2016 return, 18 months = August 2016 return, 2 years = Feb 2017 return. If you were just looking at it on a player vs player basis would you prefer Keeffe and Thomas on the list and not playing in 2016 or 2 recruits who also may not play? That might come down to who's available both inside or outside of our list to fill their spots. As you suggested a Saad scenario is likely the best bet if they are suspended for greater than 12 months and deemed still to have a future at the club.
 
Joined
Sep 23, 2013
Posts
3,671
Likes
11,531
AFL Club
Collingwood
Moderator #2,247
Agree but thats unlikely I'd say. 18 months or less and you'd consider keeping them. Beyond that well the game and the list moves on, best you could offer them is to consider redrafting them onto the rookie list on a best endeavours basis.

For a reduced penalty to occur I'd reckon theyd have to come clean about how the stuff got in their system. Maybe thats happening behind the scenes, who knows
What if they show they have an addiction to PED's and were using them as coping mechanisms for whatever struggles they face in daily life. Under current rules, not only would they not be banned, they would be given whatever assistance they need to beat their addiction and probably be made ambassadors of the AFL.
 
Joined
May 25, 2006
Posts
51,621
Likes
25,821
Location
Beach
AFL Club
Collingwood
What if they show they have an addiction to PED's and were using them as coping mechanisms for whatever struggles they face in daily life. Under current rules, not only would they not be banned, they would be given whatever assistance they need to beat their addiction and probably be made ambassadors of the AFL.
Try and stay focussed and keep it realistic.
 
Top Bottom