PRESS CONFERENCE 4.15pm Today !!

Eastern · Post: # 867858Post **Eastern** » Thu 24 Dec 2009 4:23pm

Saints CEO, Michael Nettlefold will be addressing the media at 4.15pm today (15mins from now).

Those in Melbourne will be able to listen in on SEN 1116 !!

Spinner · Post: # 867860Post **Spinner** » Thu 24 Dec 2009 4:28pm

Should we be concerned its the CEO.....Or is it assumed that everyone else is just on holidays?

Eastern · Post: # 867864Post **Eastern** » Thu 24 Dec 2009 4:31pm

Spinner wrote:Should we be concerned its the CEO.....Or is it assumed that everyone else is just on holidays?

Very serious issue. Needs to be CEO and/or President !!

Saint Bev · Post: # 867865Post **Saint Bev** » Thu 24 Dec 2009 4:32pm

Is there a link we can listen to on the net.

clarky449 · Post: # 867866Post **clarky449** » Thu 24 Dec 2009 4:32pm

http://www.sportsentral.com/pro/main/MediaPlayer.aspx

Spinner · Post: # 867867Post **Spinner** » Thu 24 Dec 2009 4:33pm

I hope SEN broadcast it.

clarky449 · Post: # 867869Post **clarky449** » Thu 24 Dec 2009 4:34pm

They have said they will

sabras · Post: # 867870Post **sabras** » Thu 24 Dec 2009 4:37pm

any updates?

listening live now - still on for 4:15pm?

mick13 · Post: # 867871Post **mick13** » Thu 24 Dec 2009 4:39pm

Im not sure if I'm on SEN, but it looks like it on the dial.

They're interviewing some random....okay its Ox. So we're on SEN.

Eastern · Post: # 867873Post **Eastern** » Thu 24 Dec 2009 4:39pm

Still Waiting. Will post as fast as I can type !!

mick13 · Post: # 867875Post **mick13** » Thu 24 Dec 2009 4:42pm

Now.

Basically just saying what we already knew.

Nettlefold rushing...stuttering...

Not saying much.

Darren · Post: # 867876Post **Darren** » Thu 24 Dec 2009 4:43pm

on now.

Eastern · Post: # 867877Post **Eastern** » Thu 24 Dec 2009 4:45pm

MN reading a prepared statement. Sounds like the release sent out earlier today.

Club has spoken to Lovett & management. Confidential. Is this the end for him? Can't answer

Standard AFL contract. No special behaviour clauses.

Asked what the odds he will never play for us. No Answer

Asked whether any other saint were there. Said no other saints under investigation (whatever that means)

MN sounded very nervous & stuttery (understandable)

!!

Darren · Post: # 867879Post **Darren** » Thu 24 Dec 2009 4:45pm

- Saints have spoken to Andrew Lovett and management already
- AFL has been informed
- Confirmed that no other Saints player are involved
- Will wait for Vic police to lay any charges
- Met with senior coach, football manager and leadership group to discuss

Thu 24 Dec 2009 4:46pm

same statement as issued to press

lots of no comments to questions

stressed no other player being investigated

lovett on standard afl contract ...

leadership group were consulted in process of indefinite suspension

lots of deferring to andrew's management and police with questions asked

Saintersss · Post: # 867882Post **Saintersss** » Thu 24 Dec 2009 4:47pm

So does that mean if he is found guilty and we sack him we still have to pay him out?

Eastern · Post: # 867883Post **Eastern** » Thu 24 Dec 2009 4:50pm

Saintersss wrote:So does that mean if he is found guilty and we sack him we still have to pay him out?

I think there are behavioural clauses in the standard contract. I think can be sacked for bringing brand/club/game/afl into disrepute, meaning NO payout !!

Spinner · Post: # 867886Post **Spinner** » Thu 24 Dec 2009 4:54pm

That was not informative.

Gabba · Post: # 867890Post **Gabba** » Thu 24 Dec 2009 4:59pm

Eastern wrote:
Saintersss wrote:So does that mean if he is found guilty and we sack him we still have to pay him out?
I think there are behavioural clauses in the standard contract. I think can be sacked for bringing brand/club/game/afl into disrepute, meaning NO payout !!

One would assume and hope so...

St Fidelius · Thu 24 Dec 2009 5:07pm

Eastern wrote:
Saintersss wrote:So does that mean if he is found guilty and we sack him we still have to pay him out?
I think there are behavioural clauses in the standard contract. I think can be sacked for bringing brand/club/game/afl into disrepute, meaning NO payout !!

I can't believe there was no "special clause" in his contract and he was given a "standard contract", given his past misdemeanour's

If this is true it's embarrassing to say the least.

Mr Magic · Post: # 867904Post **Mr Magic** » Thu 24 Dec 2009 5:14pm

St Fidelius wrote:
Eastern wrote:
Saintersss wrote:So does that mean if he is found guilty and we sack him we still have to pay him out?
I think there are behavioural clauses in the standard contract. I think can be sacked for bringing brand/club/game/afl into disrepute, meaning NO payout !!
I can't believe there was no "special clause" in his contract and he was given a "standard contract", given his past misdemeanour's

If this is true it's embarrassing to say the least.

I may be wrong but I believe that the 'Didak clause' (as these special clauses becasme known) were found to be in breach of the AFLPA agreement and were stopped?
I seem to recall that when Didak transgressed again in 2008 it was stated that he no longer had those clauses in his contract becasue tehy were illegal.

Therefore the AFL claim that their standard contract contains enough 'wriggle room' to cover Clubs in situations where players are found to have misbehaved so appallingly that they require sacking.

VietNam_Saint · Fri 25 Dec 2009 8:07pm

Eastern wrote:
Asked whether any other saint were there. Said no other saints under investigation (whatever that means)

read what it means. PC speak well in use there.

Translation

Yes , there certainly was another Saint there ,, but at this time he/they are not being investigated.