Lovett lodges notice of grievance with club

[mbogo]

well...i flagged that this might happen earlier....

..but then...also gives the club an out from their current stated position...lovett could be accepted back into the fold with the saints saying...'well..we had no choice"....

Agreed! No blame on us - our hand was forced - this only leaves the issue being players and coach!!!!

[WinnersOnly]

The club needs to dance a tight rope...They are waiting on the VicPol and the police themselves need to very careful in such sensitive matters. This could drag on for months yet without advice, particularly if the Police seek legal opinion from the DPP before laying charges.

Given the clubs immediate reaction with LOVETT you get the impression that they acted on the information provided by the other players involved eg GRAM. I cant speculate as to what they witnessed or what evidence they will provide, but they are not likely to have provided the most impartial information to the club.

I believe the club made the right decision in immediately suspending him, but perhaps now they need to reassess their stand, if only to lesson the financial burden this twit is going to cause the club in the future.

What about considering have him return to training with the Zebras and he can play in their seconds team. This honours the clubs contractual requirements to him and to put it simply 'A guy like LOVETT will not take long to breach his contract'.

If the club is to wait for the Police and courts decisions, this is going to drag on for years and will continue to cause the club and it's supporters heart ache! I am sure the Zebras coaches and players can give him the welcome he deserves and it wouldn't take long for a guy like LOVETT to take off consequently breaching his end of the contract. That would provide the club with more solid grounds to remove him without the financial fallout.

[mbogo]

For the record wasn't the M&M saga resolved with no charge after about 4 months? WE are only at week 5 with this fiasco! FFS!
OH BTW good advice WO!
(Edit - I think MM was 10 weeks after family day - xmas eve - family day -> stupid footballers)

[santazzi]

Is anyone else going to the AGM on Thursday?

Good timing that Lovett has brought it up just 2 days before it.....

I'm with him on the fact that the AFL doesn't have appropriate guidelines for standing down players.

It's simply not fair on any player to left in limbo for over a month.

Put it this way - in other industries - public ones - how would a similar case be handled?

Is there protocol elsewhere as to how to deal with it?

Spot on. Much neglected principles like "Due process"...."Natural justice"....come to mind.

[mbogo]

Natural justice - like send the bros around to "sort the issue"? Lot of that going on at the moment it seems!

[sainterinsydney]

Have you read the realfooty article? It states that Lovett is holding steadfast to his innocence. What do you make of it?

[SaintWodonga]

I actually agree with the article, natural justice has not been done (yet) he should at least be training with the club. Perhaps not allowed to play NAB cup etc..

[markinUSA]

Hi

It would be most improper for the club to have contacted the AFLPA prior to making a decision. The whole system of player advocacy by the AFLPA is based on its independence... it must act, and advocate, wholeheartedly in the interests of the players... like any union, it has different interests to those of the employer.

We don't see most employers negotiating with a Union before they decide to take action against an employee... that always happens afterwards... the employee goes to the Union and then seeks redress. If an employer wanted to chat with the Union prior to taking action, it would completely compromise the integrity of the Union's independence. So that's just not the way it works.

On the other hand, if I were in the Club's position right now, I would let the current arrangement stand. In the big scheme of things, the club is a multi-million dollar enterprise, with lots financially at stake from any damage to the "brand" (a term I hate to use about our beloved club).

Handled REALLY badly, that damage might last for years.... whereas the way that the club has gone has completely minimised any damage. The fellow has never played a game for us, and has barely trained with us!

[bigred]

Players dont want to play with him.

Source: Been bleated all over the melbourne radio this morning....

And on here....

Our only issue here is whether or not he gets a full pay out.

He wont play or train with us again....

[kos]

lovett may be innocent.
i was recently informed by a source that lovetts statement to the police was in a way a role reversal of the incident and a case of mistaken identity.

[plugger66]

Players dont want to play with him.

Source: Been bleated all over the melbourne radio this morning....

And on here....

Our only issue here is whether or not he gets a full pay out.

He wont play or train with us again....

That is 100% IMO. RL is a hard bastard and I would suggest AL has got on the wrong side of him once to often.

[saint66au]

Is it not possible that Lovetts contract may have had a "D1ckhead" clause? ie step out of line and we'll throw the book at you as we see fit?

Its a honest question..and if it does then you wouldnt think theres much any legal counsel or the AFLPA can do about his suspension

The comparisions to the M&M case are beginning to annoy me. AL did not come to this club a cleanskin. Far from it.

[Mr Magic]

I'm pretty sure I read/heard somewhere at the time of the Didak/Shaw fiasco that the AFLPA had stepped in and stopped 'd**khead clauses' being included in contracts?
I'm sure that was the reason given when Collingwood was asked as to why Didal was back on a 'standard contract'.

[fingers]

Way to endear yourself to the club and team Andrew.

My GUESS would be that the club also as some insight on what happened on the night from other players that were there which is influencing its stance.

See ya Andrew.

[rodgerfox]

Surely the club spoke with the AFLPA and their lawyers prior to 'suspending' him?

They're not stupid........are they?

Why?

Wheres the protocol suggesting they must do that?

The club went to the highest body in the sport - AFL HQ - informed them of the situation......

Are you suggesting all clubs have previously advised the AFLPA prior to taking action against players for behaviour/stupidity?

Do you know if West Coast informed the AFLPA prior to their treatment of Cousins?

Ahhh....so many questions....so much foxing...and so little answers..

It's not that they must do it - it's that quite clearly this is a very big issue, and suspending a dude (not just from playing but from the sounds of it from the club entirely) during a police investigation of this nature isn't the type of thing to be taken lightly.

Frankly, I'd be very surprised if the club didn't at the very least make sure they legally Ok to take such a drastic action.

And if they did, then there should be no issue here.

If they didn't, then they are incredibly stupid.

[bigred]

Well, I cant really blame Lovett for trying to look after himself.

If he tried to get a full contract pay out, you really couldnt hold that against him either.

If the players wont have him, it puts the club in a pretty tough position. And I daresay that Lyon is not afraid of making the hard call.

[rodgerfox]

Does anyone believe the 'rumour' that the players didn't want him in the first place?

If it's true, then this whole affair could quite easily take some shine off how the players see the decision makers at the club.

[bigred]

Does anyone believe the 'rumour' that the players didn't want him in the first place?

If it's true, then this whole affair could quite easily take some shine off how the players see the decision makers at the club.

I dont really buy into that one.

We really only have one player on the list that you could consider big enough a deal to have a say in such a matter. Obviously I mean Roo....

I also think that RL would be more than able to take control of such a situation....

[Saints43]

Is it not possible that Lovetts contract may have had a "D1ckhead" clause? ie step out of line and we'll throw the book at you as we see fit?

Its a honest question..and if it does then you wouldnt think theres much any legal counsel or the AFLPA can do about his suspension

The comparisions to the M&M case are beginning to annoy me. AL did not come to this club a cleanskin. Far from it.

I don't think that a player that we chased, convinced to play for less than market value (apparently) would have any DH clauses in his contract (other than the standard AFLPA contact). I'm not sure how much 'whip-hand' we would have had in the negotiations if AL had already made pay concessions and was seen as worth a first-round pick.

His recruitment was quite different to, say, Gardiner who was basically on his way out of the system until we threw him a lifeline.

[Hurricane]

Yet another nail in Lovett's St Kilda coffin.

Now looking almost certain he wont play a game with us at all.

What a massive waste. Waste time, talent and waste of an opportunity at something special. I guess now it falls to the rest of the side to stand up and be counted among the greatest teams of all time. Something that we all know they can do

BANG BANG

[bigred]

....waste of a draft pick...

[degruch]

lovett may be innocent.
i was recently informed by a source that lovetts statement to the police was in a way a role reversal of the incident and a case of mistaken identity.

WTF? Can you run this scenario past us Kos? It sounds intriguing...possibly a bit Taratino-esque.

[chook23]

Think Lovett has some claims here

entitled to go to grievance process

HE HAS NOT BEEN CHARGED OR FOUND GUILTY......

he has a contract etc......

by not allowed to train at club he has a contract when not charged.....at what point can the suspension carry to under this circumstance...

it has been SIX weeks

[Joffa 5]

If he continues to be paid as per his contract, I can't see why he would have a grievance. Suspended without pay is a different matter. I have a feeling AFLPA have stepped in here and suggested he take this action.

[meher baba]

lovett may be innocent.
i was recently informed by a source that lovetts statement to the police was in a way a role reversal of the incident and a case of mistaken identity.

WTF? Can you run this scenario past us Kos? It sounds intriguing...possibly a bit Taratino-esque.

Not the good old "she raped me" defence!! I've heard it all before: even if the defence has some merit, it doesn't excuse him for putting himself in the situation in the first place.

If it is meant to have been a case of mistaken identity involving the other Saints player in the flat, then we must be dealing with a very serious case of eyesight impairment!