Email the club...

[Life Long Saint]

I did...

Here is my e-mail to Archie Fraser sent last night...

[quote="Life Long Saint"]
Dear Archie,

As a long time St Kilda Football Club member I implore the club to take the Steven Baker decision to the highest possible appeal process. If that means taking a legal option outside the AFL then so be it.

This is the second time the AFL have been less than fair on our football club. The abhorrent decision last year to award Fremantle the four points in a drawn game should have been challenged by the club. I understand and admire the stand taken by the club at that time given that it could have won a court case. I assumed at the time that it was to “buyâ€

[St Chris]

The reply sounds encouraging.

Fight the good fight Archie!!!!!

[True Blue Sainter]

Good news by the big Scot Archie...

I AM STILL SO FUMING. I AM ABSOLUTELY LIVID. Let's take this ALL THE WAY.

[n1ck]

Livid. Thats a great word to describe the feeling.

Something must be done.

[matrix]

so if the club appeals whats the most likely outcome that could occur in our favour?
they aint going to over turn a seven week ban, would they drop it down to 3 or 4?......very VERY unlikely?.
it wouldnt surprise me if they upped the ban to 9 weeks.

[Mr X from the West]

I think this decision has ramifications which extend well beyond Baker and the St Kilda FC.

Theis decision shows that the system for penalising players is so flawed as to be unworkable. The tribunal seems willing and able to ignore any form of legal precedent and hand out penalties on a whim. This effectively means that the Clubs can NOT have any FAITH in the tribunal giving their players a FAIR HEARING. The laws of natural justice demand that this be the case.

I don't know who provides guidance on legal principles to these monkeys but the system is clearly a rabble and a laughing stock. It also raises the question- what is best practice in this area? What system is employed in the Premier League/NFL, etc? What can we learn from those tribunal systems?

[True Blue Sainter]

Livid. Thats a great word to describe the feeling.

Something must be done.

Any other time you're stuck for words Nickyyyy, don't hesitate to come this way....

[Brewer]

so if the club appeals whats the most likely outcome that could occur in our favour?
they aint going to over turn a seven week ban, would they drop it down to 3 or 4?......very VERY unlikely?.
it wouldnt surprise me if they upped the ban to 9 weeks.

I don't think an appeal in itself will achieve much, but it is probably necessary if we plan to take subsequent legal action.

The bulk of the 7 weeks was due to carried-over points and a bad record. The penalty itself was worth about 2-3 weeks apparently, which means that even if the penalty itself was reduced to 1 week he would still be on the receiving end of about 5 weeks.

The issue here (as I understand it) is how the bloke can be found guilty of rough conduct, when no evidence or reliable testimony exists supporting it, and the more reliable eyewitness accounts suggest that Baker was simply doing what all players do in a contact sport and it was Farmer's carelessness that got him hurt. The fact that Farmer received more injuries does not in itself 'prove' that Baker was guilty of negligence.

Nevertheless the tribunal has decided that Baker should be suspended for something and so he cops all those carry-over penalties too.

If my understanding of the process is correct, we need to first appeal the decision (give the AFL the CHANCE to correct their mistake), but get the lawyers laced up ready for a serious challenge because this has been a serious injustice where a guy has been convicted of bad behaviour DESPITE all the available evidence pointing to his innocence.

We need to get the verdict overturned, not the sentence reduced.

[CURLY]

The thing that shytes me the most is that they wasted 4 hours of everyones life when clearly ther desision was made before hand. How can Baker have no case to answer before the Freo snitch came forward and after his evidence is dismissed for the shyte it was Bakes still gets royally fingered. I cannot beleive the AFL can allow there corruption to be so transperant.

[kalsaint]

Below is the transcript I sent. I only wish I had your skills "Life Long Saint".



Corporate leaders,

If what I read on the Saintsational forum from feed back from SEN there appears to be no evidence to support the tribunal’s ruling that Baker was reckless or taken with intent to maim.

If this decision rests, this will set a new precedent that deems the standard shepherd illegal in future and players acting accordingly prone to future hearings. This is effectively killing the game and bringing the tribunal decision against Baker into disrepute.

As I believe there are several incidents in recent years that serve as precedents that include players from all clubs. These have had discounted cases due to lack of supporting evidence. I urge the club to show passion for the name of this game and challenge this recent decision with all their might.

If no action is taken I will be supporting the action being postulated by the very large number of disgruntled supporters writing in to the Saintsational forum.

Marcel Brooks



Membership number 23099

Laila Brooks 14074

Kareena Brooks 43241