Lovett lodges notice of grievance with club

[GrumpyOne]

Player stuffs up badly damaging the reputation of a club and breaches contract. Is fired.

How did he "stuff up"?

Drunk in a public place?

Fraser Gherig anyone?

What has he been found guilty of?

[ralphsmith]

Disgracing a clubs reputation.

[Ghost Like]

If you think the club has done the responsible financial and ethical decision re Lovett, go ahead and enjoy it.

Others can see that their actions have a lot of question marks lingering around them.

I think the club has made the responsible & best financial decision regarding Lovett. Ethical??? What's ethics got to do with this, perhaps that's a question that can also be aimed at Lovett.

As far as St Kilda is concerned, I liken the Lovett fiasco to buying a piece of machinery to help our production. We didn't even get a chance to install that piece of machinery when we started finding faults with it. We have now got rid of that machinery before it causes damage to our product and god forbid effects other perfectly good machines once it's intergrated with them. No ethics involved, just responsible decision making once a problem was identified.

When did we recruit robots as players?

I must have missed that recruiting announcement.

Humans require fairness, equity and ethical treatment. Robots require grease and oil changes.

Simply my analogy GO. We're a business, we look after the employees we have faith in and do the right thing by us, we compensate them accordingly for that and to get the job done on the field. The AFL is littered with players who believe they've been hard done by, some have, some haven't...it's a business, anyone who thinks otherwise is naive.

I'm sure the victim, her family and friends are asking similar questions in terms of her treatment...this is human life, harsh and unfair and at times very sad. Not a good situation for anyone involved but only one person has caused this chain of events.

[yipper]

Player stuffs up badly damaging the reputation of a club and breaches contract. Is fired.

How did he "stuff up"?

Drunk in a public place?

Fraser Gherig anyone?

What has he been found guilty of?

Mate, you have no idea!!! At least 3 StKilda players were privy to the circumstances and may well end up witnesses for the prosecution. This is a rape allegation remember!! Very serious. AL Could end up in jail.

[GrumpyOne]

What would you have done with him.

'Now, now Andrew, that behaviour is unacceptable.
You've been a 'naughty boy.
Here's your weekly pay packet of $7000 and promise to be a good boy from now on!'

As I have said before, and are tired of repeating, there were other options.

The club is concealing something.

[GrumpyOne]

Player stuffs up badly damaging the reputation of a club and breaches contract. Is fired.

How did he "stuff up"?

Drunk in a public place?

Fraser Gherig anyone?

What has he been found guilty of?

Mate, you have no idea!!! At least 3 StKilda players were privy to the circumstances and may well end up witnesses for the prosecution. This is a rape allegation remember!! Very serious. AL Could end up in jail.

If he does, I'll be the first in line on visiting day to p1ss in his gravy.

However.

The only people who know, are the people who were there. We cannot be sure of the content of their evidence, the credibility of that evidence, or whether any were in a fit condition to remember correctly. It will all be tested in a court of law.

Again, what has he been found guilty of?

[Richter]

Indefinate suspension rolled into Contract Termination, so YES. It's the timing and strategy of the official wording that is the only area that is clouded !!

So you believe everything the club has said about this situation East?

Thats good to hear.

They haven't given me any reason NOT TO. Care to enlighten me on why I shouldn't? !!

My goldmine is just north of Kalgoorlie. Cheap investment at $1M.

I don't believe that you asked that question.

The club is concealing something.... obvious as the face on your nose.

Of course they are. And it is amazing to me that you don't seem to be able to see what it is GO. The club are supporting its player(s) that was involved. They will require even more support as the trial gets under way. I repeat, it is inconceivable that the club could support 2+ players giving potentially conflicting stories in these circumstances.

The reason the club are not publically saying what they are concealing is because it is subjudice. IMO

[GrumpyOne]

Indefinate suspension rolled into Contract Termination, so YES. It's the timing and strategy of the official wording that is the only area that is clouded !!

So you believe everything the club has said about this situation East?

Thats good to hear.

They haven't given me any reason NOT TO. Care to enlighten me on why I shouldn't? !!

My goldmine is just north of Kalgoorlie. Cheap investment at $1M.

I don't believe that you asked that question.

The club is concealing something.... obvious as the face on your nose.

Of course they are. And it is amazing to me that you don't seem to be able to see what it is GO. The club are supporting its player(s) that was involved. They will require even more support as the trial gets under way. I repeat, it is inconceivable that the club could support 2+ players giving potentially conflicting stories in these circumstances.

The reason the club are not publically saying what they are concealing is because it is subjudice. IMO

Both were St Kilda players at the time of the offence. Why are we supporting one and not the other?

As I said, have the club tried Lovett and found him guilty and executed him?

In a criminal matter, what gives them the right to subvert the due legal process?

[Finna]

Ethics.....What rubbish. Ethics is a matter of perception and interpretation.

Its about football games its not a church or a government. As much as you may not it like this IS about 3 hours on the weekend x 22 plus finals and finally a grand final.

The outcome is winning football games and grand finals not to be the most ethical club.

Ridiculous..

Besides some would argue that we DID the ethical thing...Perception and interpretation.....

[GrumpyOne]

Ethics.....What rubbish. Ethics is a matter of perception and interpretation.

Its about football games its not a church or a government. As much as you may not it like this IS about 3 hours on the weekend x 22 plus finals and finally a grand final.

The outcome is winning football games and grand finals not to be the most ethical club.

Ridiculous..

Besides some would argue that we DID the ethical thing...Perception and interpretation.....

In case you haven't noticed. St Kilda Football Club is a bloody big business.

To compare it, as you have by default, with Upper Timbucta West is the ridiculous thing in this matter

I am sure that some people could argue that red was brown. Colour blindness is a common disability. Doesn't make it so though.

[ace]

I have as much faith in the club's legal position re Lovett as I have in their handling of GT's sacking and payout.

If he is found innocent Lovett would never want to play for a club that dumped on him rather than support him.
If he is found guilty no club would ever want him to play for them.

This is only about money - the money in his existing contract and the money lost from contract extensions.
How did the club go versus GT?
They found the club stuffed up big time.

[ozrulestrace]

I know I have come in late into this discussion but for all the discussion about what the club is or isn't doing to look after AL, whereby some might be dismissive of the ethics within the club.

Well for once in our lives how about we as a club stand up to an employee and say "we cannot defend the indefensible" "we want to do the right thing by one party and that one party is not you-so out"

I have no doubt that it wouldn't have taken it too long for whoever was in attendance at the apartment at the time, to tell their mates the details of the incident, plus provide witness statements to the police which would have provided the club with a sufficient sense of what is right and what is wrong with the behaviour of any one individual within an organisation and that they cannot continue to be an employee of this club.

So stop looking for conspiracy theories as to what has happened to AL.

[3rd generation saint]

Let's not forget that AL is going to court, therefore, the club cannot reveal any information regarding what they know because it might prejudice the case and Lovett would not get a fair trial, or the case would be thrown out.
As I said earlier, in order to charge Lovett, the police must feel they have a pretty strong case against Lovett as sexual assault cases like this are hard too get a conviction in court.

[Animal Enclosure]

Lovett is supported by his management, the AFLPA and his lawyers.

The club owes him nothing as he disrespected the place before he even got to train let alone play.

It's obvious to all why the club sacked him but for legal reasons they have chosen to not publicly state it. Everyone can see this except for Caroline Wilson, Jon Ralph, Mike Sheahan and GrumpyOne.

[plugger66]

Indefinate suspension rolled into Contract Termination, so YES. It's the timing and strategy of the official wording that is the only area that is clouded !!

So you believe everything the club has said about this situation East?

Thats good to hear.

They haven't given me any reason NOT TO. Care to enlighten me on why I shouldn't? !!

My goldmine is just north of Kalgoorlie. Cheap investment at $1M.

I don't believe that you asked that question.

The club is concealing something.... obvious as the face on your nose.

Of course they are. And it is amazing to me that you don't seem to be able to see what it is GO. The club are supporting its player(s) that was involved. They will require even more support as the trial gets under way. I repeat, it is inconceivable that the club could support 2+ players giving potentially conflicting stories in these circumstances.

The reason the club are not publically saying what they are concealing is because it is subjudice. IMO

Both were St Kilda players at the time of the offence. Why are we supporting one and not the other?

As I said, have the club tried Lovett and found him guilty and executed him?

In a criminal matter, what gives them the right to subvert the due legal process?

What do you actually want to happen when no one at the club wants him. Coaches, players and the supporters. You are argueing just for the sake of it. You even brought up the race card.

[GrumpyOne]

Everyone can see this except for Caroline Wilson, Jon Ralph, Mike Sheahan and GrumpyOne.

Says something when the two most respected football commentators are on the same thought line as me. They must have their inside sources, I am just a spectator looking on.

Not bad company to be in IMHO.

[GrumpyOne]

You are argueing just for the sake of it.

Because I don't agree with you, and I am willing to state it?

I still believe in the old principle of innocent till proven etc etc.

The club's track record for honesty and financial prudence is shaky.

Support them... I will. Believe every single word they say?..... Give me a break.

[plugger66]

You are argueing just for the sake of it.

Because I don't agree with you, and I am willing to state it?

I still believe in the old principle of innocent till proven etc etc.

The club's track record for honesty and financial prudence is shaky.

Support them... I will. Believe every single word they say?..... Give me a break.

I am far from one of those supporters who believe every word. Matter of fact I hardly believe anything the club say when it is about controversial things but in this case I fail to see any options they had. No one wants to play with him and I would suggest with witnesses there may be a good reason. Give me an option they had under that scenario? There isnt one.

[Dr Spaceman]

Everyone can see this except for Caroline Wilson, Jon Ralph, Mike Sheahan and GrumpyOne.

Says something when the two most respected football commentators are on the same thought line as me. They must have their inside sources, I am just a spectator looking on.

Not bad company to be in IMHO.

Except I wouldn't pay too much attention to what journos say. It is their nature to oppose. Patrick Smith is the king of it - never writes a positive story about anything. If the Saints hadn't sacked Lovett I have no doubt the majority of the stories would have been about how we were prepared to (disgracefully) overlook his discretions and criminal charges purely in pursuit of a flag.

Journos who don't write hard-hitting controversial stories simply aren't gonna rise up the ladder which is why they're prepared to go off half cocked in the pursuit of a scoop (hello Hutchie!)

So while you're entitled to your opinion; which by the way I totally disagree with, I would not take too much comfort in the fact some journos have similar views.

[satchmo]

If your baby sitter is charged with kidnapping, due you need to wait for a verdict before you act?

[GrumpyOne]

You are argueing just for the sake of it.

Because I don't agree with you, and I am willing to state it?

I still believe in the old principle of innocent till proven etc etc.

The club's track record for honesty and financial prudence is shaky.

Support them... I will. Believe every single word they say?..... Give me a break.

I am far from one of those supporters who believe every word. Matter of fact I hardly believe anything the club say when it is about controversial things but in this case I fail to see any options they had. No one wants to play with him and I would suggest with witnesses there may be a good reason. Give me an option they had under that scenario? There isnt one.

Must be the dozenth time I've been asked that question in the hundred or so pages that address the Lovett issue.

Can't be bothered any more going into detail.

Suspension; without pay; exile to Sandy.

No need to be sacked just to avoid legitimate grievance procedure that they didn't get out of anyway. Well done Board.

[Dr Spaceman]

If your baby sitter is charged with kidnapping, due you need to wait for a verdict before you act?

Can she kick goals from outside 50????

[GrumpyOne]

Everyone can see this except for Caroline Wilson, Jon Ralph, Mike Sheahan and GrumpyOne.

Says something when the two most respected football commentators are on the same thought line as me. They must have their inside sources, I am just a spectator looking on.

Not bad company to be in IMHO.

Except I wouldn't pay too much attention to what journos say. It is their nature to oppose. Patrick Smith is the king of it - never writes a positive story about anything. If the Saints hadn't sacked Lovett I have no doubt the majority of the stories would have been about how we were prepared to (disgracefully) overlook his discretions and criminal charges purely in pursuit of a flag.

Journos who don't write hard-hitting controversial stories simply aren't gonna rise up the ladder which is why they're prepared to go off half cocked in the pursuit of a scoop (hello Hutchie!)

So while you're entitled to your opinion; which by the way I totally disagree with, I would not take too much comfort in the fact some journos have similar views.

I said two respected journos... who mentioned Fat Pryck?

[satchmo]

If your baby sitter is charged with kidnapping, due you need to wait for a verdict before you act?

Can she kick goals from outside 50????

Yes, but only in the exercise yard.

[GrumpyOne]

If your baby sitter is charged with kidnapping, due you need to wait for a verdict before you act?

I wouldn't sign my baby sitter to a three year contract.