Lovett lodges notice of grievance with club

[meher baba]

About time the club came clean and stated why Lovett has been treated the opposite to M&M.

Would kill the rumours of a prominent someone pulling the strings in the background.

GO, here's a quote from a newspaper at the time charges against M&M were dropped. I've highlighted what I think are the key words.

On March 16, the Saints confirmed police were investigating sex allegations against Milne and Montagna.

The following day, police confirmed the two players were the subject of a rape investigation.

While the two players have not commented, St Kilda has always strongly denied the allegations.

I think that the key point of difference is that the club believed M&M were innocent, whereas with Lovett........................

The club isn't going to come out and say "the reason we are treating Lovett differently to M&M is because we think he's guilty".

I reckon plugger66 has been right about this all along.

[plugger66]

http://www.theage.com.au/afl/afl-news/l ... -nsfi.html

some interesting points made by Sam Lane

My take on the article:

A lot of grandstanding with a lot of disclaimers on the part of the journo !!

Well I hope all journalists, but especially the likes of Sam Lane, Caroline Wilson, Christie Malthouse etc, don’t start writing crap about the Saints being in the wrong here. Just imagine what the “girlsâ€

[stinger]

About time the club came clean and stated why Lovett has been treated the opposite to M&M.

Would kill the rumours of a prominent someone pulling the strings in the background.

GO, here's a quote from a newspaper at the time charges against M&M were dropped. I've highlighted what I think are the key words.

On March 16, the Saints confirmed police were investigating sex allegations against Milne and Montagna.

The following day, police confirmed the two players were the subject of a rape investigation.

While the two players have not commented, St Kilda has always strongly denied the allegations.

I think that the key point of difference is that the club believed M&M were innocent, whereas with Lovett........................

The club isn't going to come out and say "the reason we are treating Lovett differently to M&M is because we think he's guilty".

I reckon plugger66 has been right about this all along.

well........an official did say that they were supporting /backing gram to the hilt and that lovett wouldn't be pulling on a saints jumper again.....i posted that ...and more last saturday....pretty clear they think lovett is guilty of something.....

[degruch]

About time the club came clean and stated why Lovett has been treated the opposite to M&M.

Would kill the rumours of a prominent someone pulling the strings in the background.

GO, here's a quote from a newspaper at the time charges against M&M were dropped. I've highlighted what I think are the key words.

On March 16, the Saints confirmed police were investigating sex allegations against Milne and Montagna.

The following day, police confirmed the two players were the subject of a rape investigation.

While the two players have not commented, St Kilda has always strongly denied the allegations.

I think that the key point of difference is that the club believed M&M were innocent, whereas with Lovett........................

The club isn't going to come out and say "the reason we are treating Lovett differently to M&M is because we think he's guilty".

I reckon plugger66 has been right about this all along.

As I stated earlier, the club is taking a 'no comment until the police investigation is complete' stance, as it should. This does not in any way imply that they believe AL is guilty. IMO, the statement the club made in regards to MM back in 2004 was really asking for strife. Luckily, it didn't come back and bite the club on the arse that time...this time they're ensuring it will not. I wouldn't read any more into it.

Implying the club's actions are an admission of guilt re: AL, is as plausible as saying they realised they backed two rapists last time and are determined to distance themselves from their past mistake. Honestly, as few of you guys are reading too much into this...there were less conspiracy theories about the Sgt Peppers album cover!

[Eastern]

If the above was directed at me, I was commenting on the article written by the journo, NOT the person !!

[degruch]

http://www.theage.com.au/afl/afl-news/l ... -nsfi.html

some interesting points made by Sam Lane

My take on the article:

A lot of grandstanding with a lot of disclaimers on the part of the journo !!

Well I hope all journalists, but especially the likes of Sam Lane, Caroline Wilson, Christie Malthouse etc, don’t start writing crap about the Saints being in the wrong here. Just imagine what the “girlsâ€

[plugger66]

http://www.theage.com.au/afl/afl-news/l ... -nsfi.html

some interesting points made by Sam Lane

My take on the article:

A lot of grandstanding with a lot of disclaimers on the part of the journo !!

Well I hope all journalists, but especially the likes of Sam Lane, Caroline Wilson, Christie Malthouse etc, don’t start writing crap about the Saints being in the wrong here. Just imagine what the “girlsâ€

[degruch]

http://www.theage.com.au/afl/afl-news/l ... -nsfi.html

some interesting points made by Sam Lane

My take on the article:

A lot of grandstanding with a lot of disclaimers on the part of the journo !!

Well I hope all journalists, but especially the likes of Sam Lane, Caroline Wilson, Christie Malthouse etc, don’t start writing crap about the Saints being in the wrong here. Just imagine what the “girlsâ€

[plugger66]

Agreed. Cant stand people who just go the opposite if there is no reason but when there is a reason they are the best posters unless of course we should just have one big love in.

[degruch]

Agreed. Cant stand people who just go the opposite if there is no reason but when there is a reason they are the best posters unless of course we should just have one big love in.

Oh, so you've read my opinion piece under the 'Roger Fox, blah, blah' thread in the General Forum then?

[plugger66]

Agreed. Cant stand people who just go the opposite if there is no reason but when there is a reason they are the best posters unless of course we should just have one big love in.

Oh, so you've read my opinion piece under the 'Roger Fox, blah, blah' thread in the General Forum then?

I wasn t actually meaning you. Just stating that I think it is good that people just dont go along with the crowd especially if you think that person is wrong.

[samoht]

If the St Kilda official stated Gram is being supported to the hilt , if it's that clear cut that Lovett is guilty and won't be donning a St Kilda jumper again .. then the evidence must be overwhelming, with Gram being a key and credible witness.

Yet as every second poster points out - Lovett was expected to be charged within a few days of the "incident" but he still hasn't been charged !

And what is it with girls hopping from one footballer's bed to another .. what do they expect an all night signing session ? - they should think before spending the night with single footballers who may turn over 100 girls each in their careers.

a 2 month relationship is probably an anniversary and a commitment to some of the footballers.

The girls may target footballers as an ego thing.. but the footballers likewise target girls ... it's a casual choice and an ego boost on both sides.

anyway ..
If there's a reasonable doubt .. then we shouldn't be stigmatising Lovett for the rest of his life for an act he may have not committed.

That's what should be clear cut.

[plugger66]

If the St Kilda official stated Gram is being supported to the hilt , if it's that clear cut that Lovett is guilty and won't be donning a St Kilda jumper again .. then the evidence must be overwhelming, with Gram being a key and credible witness.

Yet as every second poster points out - he was expected to be charged within a few days of the "incident" but he still hasn't been charged !

And what is it with girls hopping from one footballer's bed to another .. what do they expect an all night signing session ? - they should think before spending the night with single footballers who may turn over 100 girls each in their careers.

a 2 month relationship is probably an anniversary and a commitment to some of the footballers.

The girls may target footballers as an ego thing.. but the footballers likewise target girls ... it's a casual choice and an ego boost on both sides.

anyway ..
If there's a reasonable doubt .. then we shouldn't be stigmatising Lovett for the rest of his life for an act he may have not committed.

That's what should be clear cut.

Have you spoken to the girl? Can you give us a rundown of what she said.

[bozza1980]

http://www.theage.com.au/afl/afl-news/l ... -nsfi.html

some interesting points made by Sam Lane

It is an interesting article.

How it will be resolved is uncertain and it will be interesting to see how it pans out.

[samoht]

If the St Kilda official stated Gram is being supported to the hilt , if it's that clear cut that Lovett is guilty and won't be donning a St Kilda jumper again .. then the evidence must be overwhelming, with Gram being a key and credible witness.

Yet as every second poster points out - he was expected to be charged within a few days of the "incident" but he still hasn't been charged !

And what is it with girls hopping from one footballer's bed to another .. what do they expect an all night signing session ? - they should think before spending the night with single footballers who may turn over 100 girls each in their careers.

a 2 month relationship is probably an anniversary and a commitment to some of the footballers.

The girls may target footballers as an ego thing.. but the footballers likewise target girls ... it's a casual choice and an ego boost on both sides.

anyway ..
If there's a reasonable doubt .. then we shouldn't be stigmatising Lovett for the rest of his life for an act he may have not committed.

That's what should be clear cut.

Have you spoken to the girl? Can you give us a rundown of what she said.

No .. but we're not talking about he said /she said - we're supposedly talking about clearcut evidence which should ( maybe even should've already ) led to a charge.
Until we have that charge - I'm giving Lovett the benefit of the doubt - as it's too serious a crime to be randomly ascribing to someone.

There's people that wake up with aliens at the end of their beds too and insist they are abducted by aliens.

[plugger66]

If the St Kilda official stated Gram is being supported to the hilt , if it's that clear cut that Lovett is guilty and won't be donning a St Kilda jumper again .. then the evidence must be overwhelming, with Gram being a key and credible witness.

Yet as every second poster points out - he was expected to be charged within a few days of the "incident" but he still hasn't been charged !

And what is it with girls hopping from one footballer's bed to another .. what do they expect an all night signing session ? - they should think before spending the night with single footballers who may turn over 100 girls each in their careers.

a 2 month relationship is probably an anniversary and a commitment to some of the footballers.

The girls may target footballers as an ego thing.. but the footballers likewise target girls ... it's a casual choice and an ego boost on both sides.

anyway ..
If there's a reasonable doubt .. then we shouldn't be stigmatising Lovett for the rest of his life for an act he may have not committed.

That's what should be clear cut.

Have you spoken to the girl? Can you give us a rundown of what she said.

No .. but we're not talking about he said /she said - we're supposedly talking about clearcut evidence which should ( maybe even should've already ) led to a charge.
Until we have that charge - I'm giving Lovett the benefit of the doubt - as it's too serious a crime to be randomly ascribing to someone.

There's people that wake up with aliens at the end of their beds too and insist they are abducted by aliens.

I see. Benefit of the doubt to Lovett but you seem to know what the girl was doing.

[meher baba]

http://www.theage.com.au/afl/afl-news/l ... -nsfi.html

some interesting points made by Sam Lane

It is an interesting article.

How it will be resolved is uncertain and it will be interesting to see how it pans out.

I reckon she's mainly been talking to Lovett's people and the AFLPA.

The article contains some incorrect assumptions: eg, for Lovett to be "found innocent" of anything, he first of all has to be charged.

Let's assume that the police eventually decide not to lay charges (BTW, looking back over newppaper articles about the M&M case, the police decision to drop their case took well over 2 months, so there's nothing unusual about AL yet). I am pretty certain from what I've heard that the club has got avenues in terms of terminating his contract or, at least, suspending indefinitely him from the playing staff, on the grounds of misconduct.

While his contract might not include any specific "no d**khead behaviour" clauses, the club has other powers to use against players who misbehave.

I assume that they intend to exercise these powers if and when the police decide not to lay charges.

If there was any realistic chance of a negotiated arrangement whereby Lovett could come back onto the playing list, I think we'd be reading something different in the press to what Sam Lane has written.

However, it's amazing how the course of these types of cases can twist and turn, so nothing would surprise me.

[degruch]

http://www.theage.com.au/afl/afl-news/l ... -nsfi.html

some interesting points made by Sam Lane

It is an interesting article.

How it will be resolved is uncertain and it will be interesting to see how it pans out.

This is the most important paragraph IMO:

"The approach had blokey overtones and sat uncomfortably with some. But as long as the case remained open the club had the ultimate comeback to critics: Milne and Montagna had the right to be presumed innocent. Eventually police closed the case, without charges, citing insufficient evidence."

...which is the reason why the club are silent. I remember distinctly, the opinion of one of the investigating officers being that the players were let off the hook. Pretty unprofessional of him, but maybe an indication of why the club is much more guarded about what it says this time.

[Con Gorozidis]

And what is it with girls hopping from one footballer's bed to another .. what do they expect an all night signing session ? - they should think before spending the night with single footballers who may turn over 100 girls each in their careers.

100 in a season more accurate for some....

[MACEwasACE]

Personally I think the club has handled this very poorly.

Surely they must have questioned Andrew and made some conclusion as to his guilt or innocence, obviously based on only his information and details.

So the club should either have sacked him or support him and let him train and play. If charges are laid at a later date and he’s found guilty, then sack him..

Seems to me the club are too scared to make a decision and prefer to sit on the fence.

C'mon saints....Time to toughen up and get on with it. Let him play or sack him.

[Solar]

Personally I think the club has handled this very poorly.

Surely they must have questioned Andrew and made some conclusion as to his guilt or innocence, obviously based on only his information and details.

So the club should either have sacked him or support him and let him train and play. If charges are laid at a later date and he’s found guilty, then sack him..

Seems to me the club are too scared to make a decision and prefer to sit on the fence.

C'mon saints....Time to toughen up and get on with it. Let him play or sack him.

that would be the worst thing the club could do, have a look at what the dons did with hurley, waited until he was charged till they punished him. So sack him and effect natural justive... smart

btw I hope the AFL is going to help with the court costs if lovett takes the club to court as the club is working within the confines of the AFL's contracts and rules/

[S.A Saint]

imho there is nothing more the club could have done...suspend him until a decision is made and after that take it from their...the have still provided him with a training program just away from the group....

the interesting part will be when the police make the decision to charge him or not...then we shall see how the club handles it...but from now there havnt done anything wrong.....

[MACEwasACE]

Solar....

You mis-understand me.

If the club believes he's guilty .... Sack him. Cause they will then anyway. If they believe he's innocent then back him and support him like they did with Milne and Montagna in 03 or 04.

As my daily job involves charging people, i'd hazzard to guess it's not an open and shut matter or Andrew would have been charged already. There appears to be areas of inconsistency which requires a more indepth investigation.

So as far as the club goes,.. Stop pussy footing around and support Andrew.. Let him train, let him play, let him bond with his team mates and then make a decision when courts (if it gets that far) have made theirs.

[Solar]

Solar....

You mis-understand me.

If the club believes he's guilty .... Sack him. Cause they will then anyway. If they believe he's innocent then back him and support him like they did with Milne and Montagna in 03 or 04.

As my daily job involves charging people, i'd hazzard to guess it's not an open and shut matter or Andrew would have been charged already. There appears to be areas of inconsistency which requires a more indepth investigation.

So as far as the club goes,.. Stop pussy footing around and support Andrew.. Let him train, let him play, let him bond with his team mates and then make a decision when courts (if it gets that far) have made theirs.

couple of points

the club is in a no win situation if they decide to make their views on his guilt either way. Until he is charged the club can do no more.

also how do we know how the playing group feels about this situation, unlike most jobs where you can still be professional and do you job while criminal procedings are hanging over someone, football is a very "trust" based job. The outcomes in sport can be effected by the emotional state of the team.

[degruch]

Solar....

You mis-understand me.

If the club believes he's guilty .... Sack him. Cause they will then anyway. If they believe he's innocent then back him and support him like they did with Milne and Montagna in 03 or 04.

As my daily job involves charging people, i'd hazzard to guess it's not an open and shut matter or Andrew would have been charged already. There appears to be areas of inconsistency which requires a more indepth investigation.

So as far as the club goes,.. Stop pussy footing around and support Andrew.. Let him train, let him play, let him bond with his team mates and then make a decision when courts (if it gets that far) have made theirs.

Where does any of this come from? It's all opinion and heresay...I'm glad you're not charging me with anything! MACE, the club stands nothing to gain from sacking him without a pretext, other than being sued by AL. They're doing the right thing, right now.