Carlisle ban?

This unofficial St Kilda Saints fan forum is for people of all ages to chat Saints Footy and all posts must be respectful.

Moderators: Saintsational Administrators, Saintsational Moderators

Post Reply
the dome
Club Player
Posts: 346
Joined: Mon 20 Jul 2015 6:19pm
Has thanked: 1 time
Been thanked: 14 times

M A K I N G T H E M O S T O F IT

Post: # 1595655Post the dome »

First of all it was KATE (A GOOD FEW PAGES EARLIER] who mentioned that if the bumbrres are stepping forward for VFL top-up players we should be right in there doing what we can to get some player compensation (ie another player ) for JC being stood down for his previous life indescretions. I suspect that a lack of due diligence was brought to bear over the scenario of trading out pick 5 for the quick fix 200cm. backman (JC). I suspect further that our jokey corporate 'deal' with the stadium rulers that repeatedly rips us off has set up a debilitating and destabilising foundation of massive pressure on our club to simply survive. This pressure continues to keep ticking every day into the future until the 'stadium deal' is fixed. The rush to get in the big backman was I believe a reaction to our compromised position playing out of The Dome. We cannot afford to play out of the Dome- it's to do with being simply ripped off. This AFL recipe is second rate.
St Kilda Football Club is still in survival mode and hence the spectre of knee-jerk reactions raises its' ugly head. I never felt good about (1) giving up pick 5 & (2) 'dealin'g with the bummers once again. Getting so close to entrenched arrogance and blindly expecting to not get burnt is nieve. Put another way the team with the most premierships feel that actually isn't enough and so set about creating an' INJECTING' program to somehow grab another premiership (unfairly of coarse). We need a board that has boundaries ((eg) don't deal with ding-bats) and an AFL that buys back the farm (The Dome) and finally kills off a ridiculous financial stuff up that continues to strangle at least 3 of Melbourne's current AFL clubs.
Now our Saintly club has no choice but to make the best of our own questionable decision making which seems to suggest that we have to keep working with reincarnating J C into a successful and capable part of this 'developing' team from 2017 on.
Someone further up suggested that we need to be persuing as much compensation as we can from (1) the bummers & (2) the A F L.

Seconded. :idea:


Bluthy
Saintsational Legend
Posts: 4068
Joined: Wed 29 May 2013 8:05pm

Re: Carlisle ban?

Post: # 1595656Post Bluthy »

magnifisaint wrote:Why do you need to hang shyt on the guy. If he comes back in 2017 and earns AA selection will you start to embrace him. I'd rather have a druggie at our club rather than a cross dressing Brownlow medalist who likes to expose himself to school children.
I'm actually taking the piss out of those ridiculously downplaying the effect of Carlisle missing a whole year away from the club. There are people saying its a blessing - literally!. A blessing to miss a whole crucial development year of footy. Or "it doesn't matter because we won't be playing finals this year". Its so dismissive and extremely disrespectful of how hard players work at a club and the huge expensive resources that club put into the players and how important each year is at a club. Its a process and a break in the process can be a big set back. Each year they carefully lay on muscle, build up certain areas to cope with increase in mass, build up fitness in specific ways of endurance vs speed and what they want the player to have a strength in. Its a scientific pursuit. Carlisle won't have access to the sports science, fitness staff, club facilities specifically designed for AFL like gym, massage, dietary requirements, body data recording etc, on call experts for specific physical problems, recovery expertise, coaching, complex tactics specific to St Kilda, all the video review and video decision making tool etc etc etc.

What a blessing that is right? People have this Rocky fantasy that Jake can just go chasing chickens in the morning, climb library steps in the arvo, skull a raw egg each day and he'll be fine in 2017. And that is only if he is dedicated and disciplined enough to even try and keep his conditioning. He's not renown for his mature, self-directed behavior. A year away from AFL is a very, very long time these days. It most certainly is a big set back to miss a whole year away from the club. And it is a crucial year missed on getting our new tight backline together where he should be the key plank. WE'll have to work around that this year.

People don't want to look at the reality. Its not about over-stating things but not ridiculously under-stating things either (Its a blessing). ST Kilda big wigs will be in crisis talks today about how they handle this to make sure their big investment in this guy doesn't go down the drain.


User avatar
skeptic
Saintsational Legend
Posts: 16573
Joined: Wed 10 Mar 2004 7:10pm
Has thanked: 3457 times
Been thanked: 2723 times

Re: Carlisle ban?

Post: # 1595657Post skeptic »

I think people's recollection of the trade has morphed a bit to suit the hysteria.

The trade was:

IN - Jake Carlisle and pick 14
OUT - pick 5 and 24

We didn't pay overs. That's a fair trade.

I wasn't happy with the trade because I thought we could have leveraged a better deal. That said, it was still a decent trade.


If there's a silver lining here, our players should by an large improve but with our key back deficiencies we'll finish lower than we should and get a better pick as a result...
We might improve dramatically in 2017
Last edited by skeptic on Tue 12 Jan 2016 6:57pm, edited 1 time in total.


ripplug66
Club Player
Posts: 1452
Joined: Fri 25 Sep 2015 10:35am

Re: Carlisle ban?

Post: # 1595658Post ripplug66 »

Bluthy wrote:
magnifisaint wrote:Why do you need to hang shyt on the guy. If he comes back in 2017 and earns AA selection will you start to embrace him. I'd rather have a druggie at our club rather than a cross dressing Brownlow medalist who likes to expose himself to school children.
I'm actually taking the piss out of those ridiculously downplaying the effect of Carlisle missing a whole year away from the club. There are people saying its a blessing - literally!. A blessing to miss a whole crucial development year of footy. Or "it doesn't matter because we won't be playing finals this year". Its so dismissive and extremely disrespectful of how hard players work at a club and the huge expensive resources that club put into the players and how important each year is at a club. Its a process and a break in the process can be a big set back. Each year they carefully lay on muscle, build up certain areas to cope with increase in mass, build up fitness in specific ways of endurance vs speed and what they want the player to have a strength in. Its a scientific pursuit. Carlisle won't have access to the sports science, fitness staff, club facilities specifically designed for AFL like gym, massage, dietary requirements, body data recording etc, on call experts for specific physical problems, recovery expertise, coaching, complex tactics specific to St Kilda, all the video review and video decision making tool etc etc etc.

What a blessing that is right? People have this Rocky fantasy that Jake can just go chasing chickens in the morning, climb library steps in the arvo, skull a raw egg each day and he'll be fine in 2017. And that is only if he is dedicated and disciplined enough to even try and keep his conditioning. He's not renown for his mature, self-directed behavior. A year away from AFL is a very, very long time these days. It most certainly is a big set back to miss a whole year away from the club. And it is a crucial year missed on getting our new tight backline together where he should be the key plank. WE'll have to work around that this year.

People don't want to look at the reality. Its not about over-stating things but not ridiculously under-stating things either (Its a blessing). ST Kilda big wigs will be in crisis talks today about how they handle this to make sure their big investment in this guy doesn't go down the drain.

I totally agree that it isn't a blessing or good for anyone him missing a year but I don't think him training on his own will be as bad as people think. Even if he doesn't do anywhere near the work of an AFL player which is likely he will still have 5 months to get ready for the next season. That would be enough time for me let alone a player who will be looked after by the club. Surely we don't think the club will make sure he does plenty of work and have access to the best facilities. Of course they will.


User avatar
saintsRrising
Saintsational Legend
Posts: 30058
Joined: Mon 15 Mar 2004 11:07am
Location: Melbourne
Has thanked: 705 times
Been thanked: 1219 times

Re: Carlisle ban?

Post: # 1595664Post saintsRrising »

skeptic wrote:I think people's recollection of the trade has morphed a bit to suit the hysteria.

The trade was:

IN - Jake Carlisle and pick 14
OUT - pick 5 and 24

We didn't pay overs. That's a fair trade.

It would have been fair IF there was no WADA Cloud. There was and it has rained.


Flying the World in comfort thanks to FF Points....
lefty
Club Player
Posts: 1296
Joined: Tue 28 Sep 2004 8:11pm
Been thanked: 36 times

Re: M A K I N G T H E M O S T O F I

Post: # 1595665Post lefty »

the dome wrote:First of all it was KATE (A GOOD FEW PAGES EARLIER] who mentioned that if the bumbrres are stepping forward for VFL top-up players we should be right in there doing what we can to get some player compensation (ie another player ) for JC being stood down for his previous life indescretions. I suspect that a lack of due diligence was brought to bear over the scenario of trading out pick 5 for the quick fix 200cm. backman (JC). I suspect further that our jokey corporate 'deal' with the stadium rulers that repeatedly rips us off has set up a debilitating and destabilising foundation of massive pressure on our club to simply survive. This pressure continues to keep ticking every day into the future until the 'stadium deal' is fixed.
Would we be able to re-draft Markworth to the rookie list?
I'd still like to see him play (this isn't a troll)


User avatar
magnifisaint
Saintsational Legend
Posts: 7792
Joined: Sun 02 May 2004 2:52am
Has thanked: 206 times
Been thanked: 552 times

Re: Carlisle ban?

Post: # 1595667Post magnifisaint »

Bluthy wrote:
magnifisaint wrote:Why do you need to hang shyt on the guy. If he comes back in 2017 and earns AA selection will you start to embrace him. I'd rather have a druggie at our club rather than a cross dressing Brownlow medalist who likes to expose himself to school children.
I'm actually taking the piss out of those ridiculously downplaying the effect of Carlisle missing a whole year away from the club. There are people saying its a blessing - literally!. A blessing to miss a whole crucial development year of footy. Or "it doesn't matter because we won't be playing finals this year". Its so dismissive and extremely disrespectful of how hard players work at a club and the huge expensive resources that club put into the players and how important each year is at a club. Its a process and a break in the process can be a big set back. Each year they carefully lay on muscle, build up certain areas to cope with increase in mass, build up fitness in specific ways of endurance vs speed and what they want the player to have a strength in. Its a scientific pursuit. Carlisle won't have access to the sports science, fitness staff, club facilities specifically designed for AFL like gym, massage, dietary requirements, body data recording etc, on call experts for specific physical problems, recovery expertise, coaching, complex tactics specific to St Kilda, all the video review and video decision making tool etc etc etc.

What a blessing that is right? People have this Rocky fantasy that Jake can just go chasing chickens in the morning, climb library steps in the arvo, skull a raw egg each day and he'll be fine in 2017. And that is only if he is dedicated and disciplined enough to even try and keep his conditioning. He's not renown for his mature, self-directed behavior. A year away from AFL is a very, very long time these days. It most certainly is a big set back to miss a whole year away from the club. And it is a crucial year missed on getting our new tight backline together where he should be the key plank. WE'll have to work around that this year.

People don't want to look at the reality. Its not about over-stating things but not ridiculously under-stating things either (Its a blessing). ST Kilda big wigs will be in crisis talks today about how they handle this to make sure their big investment in this guy doesn't go down the drain.
Did I ever say it was a blessing. What I'm saying is that hindsight is a wonderful thing and I think most on here have a licence to whack the club when things might not go to plan and like to claim credit when things do. Ego and emotion just don't mix.


Posting 20 years of holey crap!
User avatar
saintbrat
Saintsational Legend
Posts: 44575
Joined: Tue 09 Mar 2004 4:11pm
Location: saints zone
Has thanked: 6 times
Been thanked: 188 times

Re: M A K I N G T H E M O S T O F I

Post: # 1595668Post saintbrat »

lefty wrote: Would we be able to re-draft Markworth to the rookie list?
I'd still like to see him play (this isn't a troll)
has done his shoulder and still recovering


StReNgTh ThRoUgH LoYaLtY
Rejoicing in hope, patient in tribulation, continuing steadfastly..!!
Image
MEMBERSHIP 2014 31,134 Membership 2015 32,746 MEMBERSHIP 2016 - 38,101
MEMBERSHIP 2017 42,095 , Membership 2018 46,998
MEMBERSHIP 2019 43,106 http://saintsational.net/viewtopic.php? ... 9#p1816890
MEMBERSHIP 2020 48,588 http://saintsational.net/viewtopic.php?f=1&t=100107
CQ SAINT
Saintsational Legend
Posts: 6072
Joined: Sat 12 Sep 2015 1:03pm
Has thanked: 336 times
Been thanked: 1557 times

Re: Carlisle ban?

Post: # 1595670Post CQ SAINT »

Can anyone tell me a better way to solve the defensive tall problem other than the risk we took with Carlisle. We had pick 5 not pick 1. We had pick 1 2014 and took a tall forward who hasnt really got going yet. I wonder who will be better quicker. We werent going to develop a player of Carlisles stature any time soon. A year is no big deal really.

All u sad sack realists need to pull your head out your arse and look at the Carlisle deal for what it was. There was no likened opportunity available. If any tall fefender plays better than Carlisle mext year I will eat my hat.


User avatar
Kate
Club Player
Posts: 1174
Joined: Wed 07 Jul 2004 1:58pm
Location: Emerald
Has thanked: 133 times
Been thanked: 37 times

Re: Carlisle ban?

Post: # 1595671Post Kate »

http://www.farmweekly.com.au/news/metro ... 50807.aspx

I don't have any personal issues with Jake, but I really hope we are not going to be paying him for 2016.


saintjake
Club Player
Posts: 1511
Joined: Sat 09 Feb 2008 1:49pm
Contact:

Re: Carlisle ban?

Post: # 1595674Post saintjake »

At least BJ will finally live his dream of being a Captain :lol: :lol: :lol:


st.byron
Saintsational Legend
Posts: 10598
Joined: Tue 14 Jun 2005 7:04pm
Location: North
Has thanked: 1011 times
Been thanked: 1055 times

Re: Carlisle ban?

Post: # 1595675Post st.byron »

To the top wrote:
Plus, to finish, as with Armstrong, Watson's Brownlow Medal is GONE.

Who was the Runner-up, because they are now a Brownlow Medalist.
Trent Cotchin, Sam Mitchell equal - provided they were both eligible.


lefty
Club Player
Posts: 1296
Joined: Tue 28 Sep 2004 8:11pm
Been thanked: 36 times

Re: M A K I N G T H E M O S T O F I

Post: # 1595676Post lefty »

saintbrat wrote:
lefty wrote: Would we be able to re-draft Markworth to the rookie list?
I'd still like to see him play (this isn't a troll)
has done his shoulder and still recovering
Again? :/


Bluthy
Saintsational Legend
Posts: 4068
Joined: Wed 29 May 2013 8:05pm

Re: Carlisle ban?

Post: # 1595677Post Bluthy »

ripplug66 wrote:
Bluthy wrote:
magnifisaint wrote:Why do you need to hang shyt on the guy. If he comes back in 2017 and earns AA selection will you start to embrace him. I'd rather have a druggie at our club rather than a cross dressing Brownlow medalist who likes to expose himself to school children.
I'm actually taking the piss out of those ridiculously downplaying the effect of Carlisle missing a whole year away from the club. There are people saying its a blessing - literally!. A blessing to miss a whole crucial development year of footy. Or "it doesn't matter because we won't be playing finals this year". Its so dismissive and extremely disrespectful of how hard players work at a club and the huge expensive resources that club put into the players and how important each year is at a club. Its a process and a break in the process can be a big set back. Each year they carefully lay on muscle, build up certain areas to cope with increase in mass, build up fitness in specific ways of endurance vs speed and what they want the player to have a strength in. Its a scientific pursuit. Carlisle won't have access to the sports science, fitness staff, club facilities specifically designed for AFL like gym, massage, dietary requirements, body data recording etc, on call experts for specific physical problems, recovery expertise, coaching, complex tactics specific to St Kilda, all the video review and video decision making tool etc etc etc.

What a blessing that is right? People have this Rocky fantasy that Jake can just go chasing chickens in the morning, climb library steps in the arvo, skull a raw egg each day and he'll be fine in 2017. And that is only if he is dedicated and disciplined enough to even try and keep his conditioning. He's not renown for his mature, self-directed behavior. A year away from AFL is a very, very long time these days. It most certainly is a big set back to miss a whole year away from the club. And it is a crucial year missed on getting our new tight backline together where he should be the key plank. WE'll have to work around that this year.

People don't want to look at the reality. Its not about over-stating things but not ridiculously under-stating things either (Its a blessing). ST Kilda big wigs will be in crisis talks today about how they handle this to make sure their big investment in this guy doesn't go down the drain.

I totally agree that it isn't a blessing or good for anyone him missing a year but I don't think him training on his own will be as bad as people think. Even if he doesn't do anywhere near the work of an AFL player which is likely he will still have 5 months to get ready for the next season. That would be enough time for me let alone a player who will be looked after by the club. Surely we don't think the club will make sure he does plenty of work and have access to the best facilities. Of course they will.
How much contact can the club have with him under the ban do you know? Its not just physical either. He's going to miss a whole year of footy development which at 24 (?) is a big loss. This is a brutal industry. If you are not moving forward, you're going backwards. He's obviously got innate talent but the consensus is he hasn't been maximising it. Richo would have been itching to put his stamp on Carlisle as the corner stone of his defence. That's another year gone for that. Its harder to teach an older dog new tricks.


User avatar
saintbrat
Saintsational Legend
Posts: 44575
Joined: Tue 09 Mar 2004 4:11pm
Location: saints zone
Has thanked: 6 times
Been thanked: 188 times

Re: Carlisle ban?

Post: # 1595678Post saintbrat »

None Bluthy- or with any other sporting organisation.

Club maintained contact with Ahmed through one rep- player welfare person.


StReNgTh ThRoUgH LoYaLtY
Rejoicing in hope, patient in tribulation, continuing steadfastly..!!
Image
MEMBERSHIP 2014 31,134 Membership 2015 32,746 MEMBERSHIP 2016 - 38,101
MEMBERSHIP 2017 42,095 , Membership 2018 46,998
MEMBERSHIP 2019 43,106 http://saintsational.net/viewtopic.php? ... 9#p1816890
MEMBERSHIP 2020 48,588 http://saintsational.net/viewtopic.php?f=1&t=100107
ripplug66
Club Player
Posts: 1452
Joined: Fri 25 Sep 2015 10:35am

Re: Carlisle ban?

Post: # 1595680Post ripplug66 »

Bluthy wrote:
ripplug66 wrote:
Bluthy wrote:
magnifisaint wrote:Why do you need to hang shyt on the guy. If he comes back in 2017 and earns AA selection will you start to embrace him. I'd rather have a druggie at our club rather than a cross dressing Brownlow medalist who likes to expose himself to school children.
I'm actually taking the piss out of those ridiculously downplaying the effect of Carlisle missing a whole year away from the club. There are people saying its a blessing - literally!. A blessing to miss a whole crucial development year of footy. Or "it doesn't matter because we won't be playing finals this year". Its so dismissive and extremely disrespectful of how hard players work at a club and the huge expensive resources that club put into the players and how important each year is at a club. Its a process and a break in the process can be a big set back. Each year they carefully lay on muscle, build up certain areas to cope with increase in mass, build up fitness in specific ways of endurance vs speed and what they want the player to have a strength in. Its a scientific pursuit. Carlisle won't have access to the sports science, fitness staff, club facilities specifically designed for AFL like gym, massage, dietary requirements, body data recording etc, on call experts for specific physical problems, recovery expertise, coaching, complex tactics specific to St Kilda, all the video review and video decision making tool etc etc etc.

What a blessing that is right? People have this Rocky fantasy that Jake can just go chasing chickens in the morning, climb library steps in the arvo, skull a raw egg each day and he'll be fine in 2017. And that is only if he is dedicated and disciplined enough to even try and keep his conditioning. He's not renown for his mature, self-directed behavior. A year away from AFL is a very, very long time these days. It most certainly is a big set back to miss a whole year away from the club. And it is a crucial year missed on getting our new tight backline together where he should be the key plank. WE'll have to work around that this year.

People don't want to look at the reality. Its not about over-stating things but not ridiculously under-stating things either (Its a blessing). ST Kilda big wigs will be in crisis talks today about how they handle this to make sure their big investment in this guy doesn't go down the drain.

I totally agree that it isn't a blessing or good for anyone him missing a year but I don't think him training on his own will be as bad as people think. Even if he doesn't do anywhere near the work of an AFL player which is likely he will still have 5 months to get ready for the next season. That would be enough time for me let alone a player who will be looked after by the club. Surely we don't think the club will make sure he does plenty of work and have access to the best facilities. Of course they will.
How much contact can the club have with him under the ban do you know? Its not just physical either. He's going to miss a whole year of footy development which at 24 (?) is a big loss. This is a brutal industry. If you are not moving forward, you're going backwards. He's obviously got innate talent but the consensus is he hasn't been maximising it. Richo would have been itching to put his stamp on Carlisle as the corner stone of his defence. That's another year gone for that. Its harder to teach an older dog new tricks.

He can officially have none but of course he will. He has enough footy development that 5 months pre season will get him up to speed. Players say pre season is vital but going by what you have said about Freeman and now worried about Carlisle you mustn't believe them. I do, ive seen it. Carlisle will be fine next year but there int one positive of losing him this season.


BigMart
Saintsational Legend
Posts: 13622
Joined: Sat 22 Mar 2008 6:06pm
Been thanked: 1 time

Re: Carlisle ban?

Post: # 1595682Post BigMart »

We know

Anytime someone questions a club decision... They are attacking it, denigrating the people involved and basically being poor (lesser) supporters!!!

Me
I think the recruiting of Carlisle is a definite win...






For Essendon


Gershwin
Club Player
Posts: 1558
Joined: Tue 06 Apr 2004 2:05pm
Location: NE Victoria
Has thanked: 19 times
Been thanked: 283 times

Re: Carlisle ban?

Post: # 1595683Post Gershwin »

It is certainly a set-back for Carlisle and the club. Saad took it on the chin and worked his butt off in the gym and honing his football skills. I don't know if Carlisle has the same mentality. But what is he going to do with his time? I'm sure Richo will meet up with him from time-to-time to keep his spirits up.
I certainly have concerns about how Carlisle will be able to handle it.


summertime and the living is easy ........
User avatar
desertsaint
Saintsational Legend
Posts: 10347
Joined: Sun 27 Apr 2008 2:02pm
Location: out there
Has thanked: 183 times
Been thanked: 689 times

Re: Carlisle ban?

Post: # 1595684Post desertsaint »

Apparently the essendon 12, whilst not allowed to be involved with the club, can train with each other. That is a huge advantage over Carlisle's situation.


"The starting point of all achievement is desire. "
To the top
SS Life Member
Posts: 3266
Joined: Fri 16 Mar 2007 4:05pm
Been thanked: 390 times

Re: Carlisle ban?

Post: # 1595685Post To the top »

Saad?

And he was banned for 18 months if I recall correctly.

In terms of the AFL, in the Corporate world a Company Director has absolutely nowhere to hide - and can not place responsibility with anyone else (although the Directors can then take action against employees including by terminating their services and by taking legal action against the employee as available).

So the Directors of the AFL are the point of responsibility (noting the Workcover involvement).

Essendon, if you like, are a branch office functioning under an operational administration.

But, Head Office is the AFL.

So the chain of responsibility commences with the AFL and the Directors of the AFL.

They are the first ones in the firing line.

And correctly so.

From there, others have reneged on responsibility (including AFL directives which would be included in licencing agreements and the renewal of same which would incorporate - you would envisage - an annual review at least covering all facets of operation including financial which would encompass also the Salary Cap) and they will pay a price for reneging on those responsibilities (akin to an employee being dismissed - and legal action then taken against that employee because they have acted contrary to requirements including legal requirements ie: they broke the law in the discharge of their duties, which is what Essendon have done as a branch office of the AFL structure).

So the AFL should strap itself in.

It is going to be a very, very rough ride where the reputations (and positions) of all will be the subject of forensic scrutiny - as it should be.

Heads will roll. And at the very top.

As they should.

For McLachlan to say the pending decision on the Brownlow Medal is the most difficult decision he would have faced in his time at the AFL is an abject nonsense.

The most difficult decision was accepting responsibility for the illegal actions of Essendon FC and acting other than to cover up.

There is no comparison.

But that is what you get when you put a "talking head" into such positions of responsibility.


Bluthy
Saintsational Legend
Posts: 4068
Joined: Wed 29 May 2013 8:05pm

Re: Carlisle ban?

Post: # 1595686Post Bluthy »

saintbrat wrote:None Bluthy- or with any other sporting organisation.

Club maintained contact with Ahmed through one rep- player welfare person.
Wow its that strict. Jake with be like that astronaut in Gravity, just floating around out on his own, desperate to get home :cry: Hang in there Jakey! You hope they've been ready for this and he has a nice thick dossier of what the club wants him to do training and rehab wise. I wonder if he can train with the Essendon banned players - I'm sure they'll be working as a group.


ripplug66
Club Player
Posts: 1452
Joined: Fri 25 Sep 2015 10:35am

Re: Carlisle ban?

Post: # 1595688Post ripplug66 »

To the top wrote:Saad?

And he was banned for 18 months if I recall correctly.

In terms of the AFL, in the Corporate world a Company Director has absolutely nowhere to hide - and can not place responsibility with anyone else (although the Directors can then take action against employees including by terminating their services and by taking legal action against the employee as available).

So the Directors of the AFL are the point of responsibility (noting the Workcover involvement).

Essendon, if you like, are a branch office functioning under an operational administration.

But, Head Office is the AFL.

So the chain of responsibility commences with the AFL and the Directors of the AFL.

They are the first ones in the firing line.

And correctly so.

From there, others have reneged on responsibility (including AFL directives which would be included in licencing agreements and the renewal of same which would incorporate - you would envisage - an annual review at least covering all facets of operation including financial which would encompass also the Salary Cap) and they will pay a price for reneging on those responsibilities (akin to an employee being dismissed - and legal action then taken against that employee because they have acted contrary to requirements including legal requirements ie: they broke the law in the discharge of their duties, which is what Essendon have done as a branch office of the AFL structure).

So the AFL should strap itself in.

It is going to be a very, very rough ride where the reputations (and positions) of all will be the subject of forensic scrutiny - as it should be.

Heads will roll. And at the very top.

As they should.

For McLachlan to say the pending decision on the Brownlow Medal is the most difficult decision he would have faced in his time at the AFL is an abject nonsense.

The most difficult decision was accepting responsibility for the illegal actions of Essendon FC and acting other than to cover up.

There is no comparison.

But that is what you get when you put a "talking head" into such positions of responsibility.

As you said workcover and who got the fine? Yep not the AFL. Essendon did. Yep Essendon are part of the AFL but only one club gave the players PEDS and that Essendon. 17 other clubs didn't. Heads wont role at all. People need to stop looking for others to blame. It was Essendon and only Essendons fault. If there had been a history of this then maybe blame the AFL.


User avatar
WinnersOnly
SS Life Member
Posts: 3059
Joined: Wed 10 Mar 2004 10:24pm
Location: Canberra

Re: Carlisle ban?

Post: # 1595689Post WinnersOnly »

All the media suggest the players will be paid - does anyone know for certain?


SAINTS another day older another day closer to the Holy Grail!
User avatar
saintbrat
Saintsational Legend
Posts: 44575
Joined: Tue 09 Mar 2004 4:11pm
Location: saints zone
Has thanked: 6 times
Been thanked: 188 times

Re: Carlisle ban?

Post: # 1595694Post saintbrat »

http://www.ausport.gov.au/supporting/in ... ing_policy
9.11 Status during Ineligibility

19.11.1 Prohibition against participation during Ineligibility

No Athlete or other Person who has been declared Ineligible may, during the period of Ineligibility, participate in any capacity in a Competition or activity (other than authorised anti-doping education or rehabilitation programs) authorised or organised by any Signatory, Signatory’s member organisation or a club or other member organisation of a Signatory’s member organisation, the ASC, their IF, their NSO or its Members, or in Competitions authorised or organised by any professional league or any international-level or national-level Event organisation. This would include, for example:

43 This Article shall not apply where the period of Ineligibility already has been reduced under Article 19.6.4.

44 An Athlete’s voluntary acceptance of a Provisional Suspension is not an admission by the Athlete and shall not be used in any way as to draw an adverse inference against the Athlete.

a practising or training with any national, state or club team or scholarship squad

b acting as a coach or sport official

c selection in any representative team or scholarship squad

d competing in any Competitions or Events

e receiving, directly or indirectly, funding or assistance from the ASC

f use of official ASC facilities, and

g holding any position with the ASC.

An Athlete or other Person subject to a period of Ineligibility longer than four (4) years may, after completing four (4) years of the period of Ineligibility, participate in local sport events in a sport other than the sport in which the Athlete or other Person committed the anti-doping rule violation, but only so long as the local sport event is not at a level that could otherwise qualify such Athlete or other Person directly or indirectly to compete in, or accumulate points toward, a national championship or International Event.
An Athlete or other Person subject to a period of Ineligibility shall remain subject to Testing.45

45 For example, an Ineligible Athlete cannot participate in a training camp, exhibition or practice organised by the ASC or a NSO or other member organisation of a NSO. Further, an Ineligible Athlete may not compete in a non-Signatory professional league (for example, the US National Hockey League or the US National Basketball Association), Events organised by a non-Signatory International Event organisation, or a non-Signatory national-level event organisation without triggering the Consequences set forth in Article 19.11.2. Sanctions in one sport will also be recognised by other sports (see Article 23).

19.11.2 Violation of the prohibition of participation during Ineligibility
Where an Athlete or other Person who has been declared Ineligible violates the prohibition against participation during Ineligibility described in Article 19.11.1, the results of such participation shall be Disqualified and the period of Ineligibility that was originally imposed shall start
over again as of the date of the violation. The new period of Ineligibility may be reduced under Article 19.6.2 if the Athlete or other Person establishes that he or she bears No Significant Fault or Negligence for violating the prohibition against participation. The determination of whether an Athlete or other Person has violated the prohibition against participation, and whether a reduction under Article 19.6.2 is appropriate, shall be made by the Anti-Doping Organisation whose results management led to the imposition of the initial period of Ineligibility.46

19.11.3 Withholding of financial support during Ineligibility

In addition, for any anti-doping rule violation not involving a reduced sanction for Specified Substances as described in Article 19.5, some or all sport-related financial support or other sport-related benefits received by such Person will be withheld by the ASC.

19.12 Reinstatement Testing
As a condition to regaining eligibility at the end of a specified period of Ineligibility, an Athlete must, during any period of Provisional Suspension or Ineligibility, make him or herself available for Out-of-Competition Testing by ASADA and any other
Anti-Doping Organisation having Testing jurisdiction, and must, if requested, provide current and accurate whereabouts information as provided in Article 10. If an Athlete subject to a period of Ineligibility retires from sport and is removed from Registered Testing Pools and later seeks reinstatement, the Athlete shall not be eligible for reinstatement until the Athlete has notified ASADA (in accordance with Article 11.2.4) and has been subject to Out-of-Competition Testing for a period of time equal to the longer of the period set forth in Article 11.2.6 or the period of Ineligibility remaining as of the date the Athlete had retired.


StReNgTh ThRoUgH LoYaLtY
Rejoicing in hope, patient in tribulation, continuing steadfastly..!!
Image
MEMBERSHIP 2014 31,134 Membership 2015 32,746 MEMBERSHIP 2016 - 38,101
MEMBERSHIP 2017 42,095 , Membership 2018 46,998
MEMBERSHIP 2019 43,106 http://saintsational.net/viewtopic.php? ... 9#p1816890
MEMBERSHIP 2020 48,588 http://saintsational.net/viewtopic.php?f=1&t=100107
User avatar
Wayne42
Saintsational Legend
Posts: 4911
Joined: Mon 24 Jun 2013 10:27pm
Has thanked: 619 times
Been thanked: 558 times

Re: Carlisle ban?

Post: # 1595695Post Wayne42 »

Does Carlisle now have to serve his 2 weeks for snorting white "stuff" after he has served his Essendope drug taking penalty ?


The Saints are under review, will it make any difference to the underachievers ?
Post Reply