Carlisle ban?

[Gershwin]

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

From the AFL site:

"Can the banned Essendon players be paid?
Essendon has made a commitment to pay the 12 players remaining on its list, but the exact terms of this will be negotiated with the AFL Players Association. The AFLPA suggested on Tuesday it was keen to reach a financial settlement for the players, rather than engage in a court battle. A settlement would likely include compensation for the players to account for damages to their careers, as well as contractual commitments.

Can they train with the club?
The 12 Essendon players are allowed to train together as a group, but not with the club – or under any supervision from coaches – until two months before their ban expires in November this year. The same applies for Jake Carlisle, Stewart Crameri, Jake Melksham, Angus Monfries and Patrick Ryder at their respective clubs.

Can the affected clubs use top-up players in 2016?
Only Essendon. The Bombers have been granted the ability to sign up to 10 top-up players. The club will be given guidelines on the players they are able to sign. They will also be able to promote their five category-A rookies to their senior list immediately. It is possible they will also promote highly touted Irish category-B rookie Conor McKenna. The other affected clubs can promote rookies to replace their banned players. Port Adelaide has indicated it is keen to discuss the option of signing top-up players.

Would the Bombers hold the No.1 pick at the 2017 NAB AFL Draft if they finish last this season?
Yes. The AFL will not sanction the Bombers further for their 2012 supplements program, having punished the club and its officials extensively in 2013. Th0se sanctions included significant draft penalties. The Bombers will participate in the 2017 NAB AFL Draft as normal, meaning a wooden spoon finish would give them the rights to pick No.1.

What are the legal implications for Essendon?
AFLPA chief executive Paul Marsh suggested on Tuesday the Bombers were in a vulnerable position. "What they did at the time is nothing short of disgraceful and you can't escape that. The players are in this position because of the Essendon football club." The Bombers could face hefty payouts, but insurance agreements would protect the club from being financially crippled.

Why is the AFL bound by the CAS decision?
The AFL is a WADA signatory and therefore must accept CAS's decision. The League, which previously operated under its own tailored testing regime, has expressed concerns about how the code is applied to team sports in the past. Withdrawing from the WADA code would, however, see government funds and support withdrawn from the game. Tuesday's decision sparked debate about the suitability of the WADA code to the AFL and the League said it invited that discussion.

Penalty is 'manifestly unfair', says Essendon chairman

Why did the players receive the maximum two-year ban?
The players and clubs were surprised at the decision to ban them for two years, because there was a provision for CAS to reduce their penalties by 12 months because of a no fault or negligence provision. The AFL submitted this to CAS and said the players, if guilty, would have been the "unwilling and unwitting victim of the gross negligence of others". This was rejected by the panel, meaning maximum bans were handed out. The players received reductions for time already served under provisional suspensions, and for other considerations including procedural delays.

Will Jobe Watson keep his Brownlow Medal?
The AFL Commission will convene in February to determine if Watson keeps his 2012 Brownlow Medal. The midfielder will be invited to address the Commission should he choose to present a case for keeping the award. Sam Mitchell and Trent Cotchin were joint runners up in 2012. "It is the AFL's view that due process must apply in this matter," CEO Gillon McLachlan said on Tuesday. Watson would become the first player in VFL/AFL history to be stripped of his medal.

[st.byron]

AFLPA chief executive Paul Marsh suggested on Tuesday the Bombers were in a vulnerable position. "What they did at the time is nothing short of disgraceful and you can't escape that. The players are in this position because of the Essendon football club."

And what they've done since then is nothing short of disgraceful.
And zero acceptance of players' responsibility from Marsh . To be expected, but zero humility.

[Teflon]

His contract is not being paid this year he is not able to receive money from us whilst baned though he will be able to take legal action against essendon to recoupe his money so it was a front loaded contract meaning we just saved ourself 700 thousand and get a 25 yo on average wage next year

that helps if true....
Essendon should be made to pay
im hoping for a massive suit now
12 months is a long time out of an AFL career that can be over at anytime...

[WinnersOnly]

HTF should these players be compensated for damage to their careers? They are as complicit as the club the AFL are losing the plot...

[satchmo]

HTF should these players be compensated for damage to their careers? They are as complicit as the club the AFL are losing the plot...

I'm guessing that the players didn't get together and decide to get on the gear. Their employer made this happen. They went along with it and are guilty under the WADA code, but I think we will see the people responsible for instigating this program eventually flushed out and held responsible.

[BigMart]

If the players took part... They are culpable

They are not children FFS

[bergholt]

Just result overall. Finally.

Unfortunately it's bad for the competition as a whole. All the clubs are in the same financial boat so any money this costs (for instance in lawyer's fees) is just money out of the pockets of the AFL and therefore of the clubs. The poorest clubs like us are the ones who can least afford to have our distribution reduced, but that has to be what happens. It's a zero-sum game. We'll all get through it and in two years it'll all be history, but we really don't need to have less money right when we're building Moorabbin.

Not so bad for us on-field though. Carlisle will miss a year, that's fine. We're not contending anyway. Tommy Lee might get a proper last chance, Goddard and probably McCartin will get more games than they would have otherwise. Carlisle will just have a very long pre-season for 2017, and in 2018 he should be really ready to hit his straps, he's still only 26 that year. We play Essendon twice so that should be two easy wins, with a bit of guts we should be able to beat last year's total of 6.5 and finish maybe 10th to 12th. Worst case, given a few injuries, maybe we slip to 15th or 16th but it shouldn't be a huge issue if that happens, just a slightly better draft pick.

The worst argument in this whole thing is "oh, the players just trusted the club so it's not really their fault". Robinson and others seem to be pushing that. It's crap. They're big men who can look after themselves. HTFU and take some responsibility. If you raised your children with that sort of attitude you'd get terrible results. "Oh little Tommy, it's not your fault you pushed your brother over and broke his arm, it was the situation, don't feel bad about it." Builds a society of sooks who are never at fault for anything. If Essendon and the AFL had had the guts to make the players take responsibility much earlier, the whole thing would have been over in 12 months.

[suss]

So the club makes a stupid trade decision and apparently anyone who calls them out is a sook.

Next time I make a dumb mistake at work and get criticised by my boss I'll be sure to call him a sook and ask him why he thinks the sky is falling in.

I don't think anyone is calling people sooks for saying its a stupid trade. I think in 8 pages you can see the posts that sound sooky but it isn't those saying it was a poor trade.

Exhibit A:

Never seen so many people happy to tell us how right they were about Carlisle even if being right means the club suffers. Pat on the backs. Having said that we made a poor decision in hindsight obviously. One person said its the same a knee reco. Yep missing the year the same but there is no way we would have paid what we did if a person was known to be missing a year.

Anyway that's all in the past and none of it can be changed now so those who are saying they were right or sooking about our club need to get on board. Knocking the recruiting or Carlisle isn't going to help anyone. All it seems to do is make more people angry on here.

How does that post prove anything. If anything it proves exactly what I said. There are two different terms I used. I never said they were sooking because of bad recruiting. Not once so another example would be good. Knocking the recruiting of the club wasn't mentioned in the same line as sooking. Nice try just a poor result. Try example B.

Dude. Really.

Here's a further example to satisfy yourself - an exchange between you and WinnersOnly:

I have absolutely no sympathy for the club (St Kilda), as it was an extremely poor decision to trade for Carlisle which has again been proven to be the case. Carlisle and Essendon are poison and always have been! 

The one positive out of this is it will give Goddard and Delaney the chance to further develop their games. 

Carlisles trade will cost our club for years with this years salary for zero games, the poor marketing outlook and the drafts picks we gave up for this clown. 

As far as our recruiting team are concerned they should publicly apologise to the membership for making such a quantum f-up....

What salary? And we probably are nearly on the minimum anyway. How does paying a salary, which I don't think we do, cost us into next season let alone years? Please explain? And they shouldn't apologise at all. The last thing we need is people knocking the club all the time.

Of this exchange you then say:

This thread and every other thread you invade will be worse off if you continue attacking posters for their opinions

Just comment on the topic or f*** off

Wow. If someone acts like a sook then I will say so. You don't like it then put me on ignore. Now run away and don't attack me for my opinion. And where did I attack him anyway. Iasked questions which is more than you did in your post.

Clearly, typically, you think that any criticism is unwarranted no matter how bad the adminstration of the club.

Carro just described it as an absolute disaster on Footy Classified.

And to finish off: this was not an error made in "hindsight". We went into this with or eyes wide open.

An unmitigated disaster. Full stop.

[st.byron]

The worst argument in this whole thing is "oh, the players just trusted the club so it's not really their fault". Robinson and others seem to be pushing that. It's crap. They're big men who can look after themselves. HTFU and take some responsibility. If you raised your children with that sort of attitude you'd get terrible results. "Oh little Tommy, it's not your fault you pushed your brother over and broke his arm, it was the situation, don't feel bad about it." Builds a society of sooks who are never at fault for anything. If Essendon and the AFL had had the guts to make the players take responsibility much earlier, the whole thing would have been over in 12 months.

Exactly. Not only did they not have the guts, they deliberately spun lies and deception and claimed to be victims all the while.

[satchmo]

If the players took part... They are culpable

The WADA code holds the individual responsible. There is no doubt about that. Also no doubt that some people at the club organised it.

[Bluthy]

The worst argument in this whole thing is "oh, the players just trusted the club so it's not really their fault". Robinson and others seem to be pushing that. It's crap. They're big men who can look after themselves. HTFU and take some responsibility. If you raised your children with that sort of attitude you'd get terrible results. "Oh little Tommy, it's not your fault you pushed your brother over and broke his arm, it was the situation, don't feel bad about it." Builds a society of sooks who are never at fault for anything. If Essendon and the AFL had had the guts to make the players take responsibility much earlier, the whole thing would have been over in 12 months.

Exactly. Not only did they not have the guts, they deliberately spun lies and deception and claimed to be victims all the while.

So you want St Kilda to pay out Jakes contract then Bryon? I mean this is a matter of principle surely - Jake is a convicted drug cheat. How can you keep a cheater on your list?

[Linton Lodger]

The club would've factored in a 3 month ban, so they'll be shattered as much as we are!!

The club would have looked at worst case scenario, which is what we have, 12 months. They were obviously willing to cop the worst case scenario if it happened, as were Hawthorn. We will only know in a few years whether it was a good or bad choice. I'm sure the Club's disappointed but fine. Is this verdict or penalty able to be appealed?

[IanRush]

Can I throw a very left field question out there? (It's an 'inquisitive' query, treat it as nothing more).

OK here goes - did the Saints hire Jake C as a defacto Science experiment, knowing full well that a WADA ban was imminent? (i.e. probe him with questions and regulate his blood tests, about what Science practices Ess did?)

I think Aaron Coutts was hired by Carlton, from Essendon, for the same reason? (i.e. to 'steal and learn' technology).

it's very left field, but please treat it as such.

[st.byron]

Exactly. Not only did they not have the guts, they deliberately spun lies and deception and claimed to be victims all the while.

So you want St Kilda to pay out Jakes contract then Bryon? I mean this is a matter of principle surely - Jake is a convicted drug cheat. How can you keep a cheater on your list?[/quote]

The players are culpable for their negligence during the doping regime. The whole club and especially their board and management are culpable for what transpired in trying to cover it up and deny any wrongdoing. Carlisle will serve his penalty, as they all will. Then they should all have the opportunity to resurrect their careers in accordance with the WADA code and the judgement made. That seems fair to me.

The EFC as an entity should without question suffer further punishment for their behaviour. Their behaviour since the doping regime was arguably worse than the doping regime itself. They should at the very least not gain any high draft picks as a result of a low ladder finish. Hird, Little, Thompson and all those in positions of responsibility at the club at the time of the regime should also receive bans or suspensions. Hird's one year suspension was a farce. A wet lettuce wrist slap with a $1m softener. It seems very likely that the AFL will take no further action, but the sting in the tail for EFC may be civil damages actions.

[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.

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

Look i don't disagree. My preference was that he was worth our second round pick and taking our chances with the PSD, but you can't base a the merit of this trade on an external outcome. Even if it was a chance.

If there was no WADA cloud, no suspension, and he did his knee resulting in him missing a season... Is it still a fair trade?

[loris]

The worst argument in this whole thing is "oh, the players just trusted the club so it's not really their fault". Robinson and others seem to be pushing that. It's crap. They're big men who can look after themselves. HTFU and take some responsibility. If you raised your children with that sort of attitude you'd get terrible results. "Oh little Tommy, it's not your fault you pushed your brother over and broke his arm, it was the situation, don't feel bad about it." Builds a society of sooks who are never at fault for anything. If Essendon and the AFL had had the guts to make the players take responsibility much earlier, the whole thing would have been over in 12 months.

Exactly. Not only did they not have the guts, they deliberately spun lies and deception and claimed to be victims all the while.

+1

+1

[SuperDuper]

the annoying thing p66 is that you were totally wrong about this. You said repeatedly that you thought there would be no bans, or only small ones

And now, instead of just admitting that you were wrong. you start saying that somehow you were just being optimistic about a good conclusion for our club and that others here, who thought there should be a punishment, are now happy when they should not be. Well, why not be happy that rules are being enforced? What is a sport without rules? In fact, Witgenstein said that a game consists of the rules by which it is played. Any sports fan should be at least relieved that rules are upheld, as they were here...

And the fact is, you wrote many times that your opinion was that no bans would occur. You were wrong.
So stop the fight. this is why you take up so much real estate on this website, because every single issue you just dont know when to put up your hand and say you were wrong... you simply change tack and keep arguing.

Unambiguously, you were wrong about this.

[WinnersOnly]

The club would've factored in a 3 month ban, so they'll be shattered as much as we are!!

The club would have looked at worst case scenario, which is what we have, 12 months. They were obviously willing to cop the worst case scenario if it happened, as were Hawthorn. We will only know in a few years whether it was a good or bad choice. I'm sure the Club's disappointed but fine. Is this verdict or penalty able to be appealed?

The fact that he was traded for at all was a total calamity. If the recruiting team/club considered what you are suggesting and still went ahead with it (wasting 700k of members dollars) then they should all be sacked!

Caro is totally correct this is a disaster and someone needs to be held accountable to the St Kilda membership.

[st.byron]

the annoying thing p66 is that you were totally wrong about this. You said repeatedly that you thought there would be no bans, or only small ones

And now, instead of just admitting that you were wrong. you start saying that somehow you were just being optimistic about a good conclusion for our club and that others here, who thought there should be a punishment, are now happy when they should not be. Well, why not be happy that rules are being enforced? What is a sport without rules? In fact, Witgenstein said that a game consists of the rules by which it is played. Any sports fan should be at least relieved that rules are upheld, as they were here...

And the fact is, you wrote many times that your opinion was that no bans would occur. You were wrong.
So stop the fight. this is why you take up so much real estate on this website, because every single issue you just dont know when to put up your hand and say you were wrong... you simply change tack and keep arguing.

Unambiguously, you were wrong about this.

Very clear that RP66 was in the opposite corner to the CAS decision. And that the CAS has emphatically said it regards the players as liars and highly accountable, not victims.
But more so RP66 - yesterday in another post about Carlisle being suspended, you said, "Morals don't matter"......As though the right or wrong is irrelevant and the only thing that matters is whether or not Carlisle can play for STKFC. I thought this was really strange. In saying that, you basically supported the notion that any means justify the end and that any behaviour is OK if you can get away with it. Which is what EFC and its players have tried to do for 3 years. And now, thank god, they've been held to account. I actually think they're lucky they can play again from November. Lucky not to get two full years or 18 months.

[Enrico_Misso]

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

Good call BJ.
Should see out your days with two or three spoons.
What a bummer

[Con Gorozidis]

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

From the AFL site:

"Can the banned Essendon players be paid?
Essendon has made a commitment to pay the 12 players remaining on its list, but the exact terms of this will be negotiated with the AFL Players Association. The AFLPA suggested on Tuesday it was keen to reach a financial settlement for the players, rather than engage in a court battle. A settlement would likely include compensation for the players to account for damages to their careers, as well as contractual commitments.

Can they train with the club?
The 12 Essendon players are allowed to train together as a group, but not with the club – or under any supervision from coaches – until two months before their ban expires in November this year. The same applies for Jake Carlisle, Stewart Crameri, Jake Melksham, Angus Monfries and Patrick Ryder at their respective clubs.

Can the affected clubs use top-up players in 2016?
Only Essendon. The Bombers have been granted the ability to sign up to 10 top-up players. The club will be given guidelines on the players they are able to sign. They will also be able to promote their five category-A rookies to their senior list immediately. It is possible they will also promote highly touted Irish category-B rookie Conor McKenna. The other affected clubs can promote rookies to replace their banned players. Port Adelaide has indicated it is keen to discuss the option of signing top-up players.

Would the Bombers hold the No.1 pick at the 2017 NAB AFL Draft if they finish last this season?
Yes. The AFL will not sanction the Bombers further for their 2012 supplements program, having punished the club and its officials extensively in 2013. Th0se sanctions included significant draft penalties. The Bombers will participate in the 2017 NAB AFL Draft as normal, meaning a wooden spoon finish would give them the rights to pick No.1.

What are the legal implications for Essendon?
AFLPA chief executive Paul Marsh suggested on Tuesday the Bombers were in a vulnerable position. "What they did at the time is nothing short of disgraceful and you can't escape that. The players are in this position because of the Essendon football club." The Bombers could face hefty payouts, but insurance agreements would protect the club from being financially crippled.

Why is the AFL bound by the CAS decision?
The AFL is a WADA signatory and therefore must accept CAS's decision. The League, which previously operated under its own tailored testing regime, has expressed concerns about how the code is applied to team sports in the past. Withdrawing from the WADA code would, however, see government funds and support withdrawn from the game. Tuesday's decision sparked debate about the suitability of the WADA code to the AFL and the League said it invited that discussion.

Penalty is 'manifestly unfair', says Essendon chairman

Why did the players receive the maximum two-year ban?
The players and clubs were surprised at the decision to ban them for two years, because there was a provision for CAS to reduce their penalties by 12 months because of a no fault or negligence provision. The AFL submitted this to CAS and said the players, if guilty, would have been the "unwilling and unwitting victim of the gross negligence of others". This was rejected by the panel, meaning maximum bans were handed out. The players received reductions for time already served under provisional suspensions, and for other considerations including procedural delays.

Will Jobe Watson keep his Brownlow Medal?
The AFL Commission will convene in February to determine if Watson keeps his 2012 Brownlow Medal. The midfielder will be invited to address the Commission should he choose to present a case for keeping the award. Sam Mitchell and Trent Cotchin were joint runners up in 2012. "It is the AFL's view that due process must apply in this matter," CEO Gillon McLachlan said on Tuesday. Watson would become the first player in VFL/AFL history to be stripped of his medal.

Nononono. The AFLPA dont decide what players get paid. The wada code/afl does. FU Marsh, Bring this guy on. I will eat him alive. Bombers players (including our boy) are in breach of contract. They can suck it up. The AFLPA can well and truly F off. Do not be fooled by these half-wits pretending to have power. They had their chance to represent players three years ago and chose to support the Bombers Executives instead. FU Marsh and everything you say.

[ace]

To make a mistake is human to repeat it is unforgivable.

Lesson that should have been learned from the Lovett fiasco - Don't do deals with the mafia (Dildora), you always lose.

[ripplug66]

The worst argument in this whole thing is "oh, the players just trusted the club so it's not really their fault". Robinson and others seem to be pushing that. It's crap. They're big men who can look after themselves. HTFU and take some responsibility. If you raised your children with that sort of attitude you'd get terrible results. "Oh little Tommy, it's not your fault you pushed your brother over and broke his arm, it was the situation, don't feel bad about it." Builds a society of sooks who are never at fault for anything. If Essendon and the AFL had had the guts to make the players take responsibility much earlier, the whole thing would have been over in 12 months.

Exactly. Not only did they not have the guts, they deliberately spun lies and deception and claimed to be victims all the while.

So you want St Kilda to pay out Jakes contract then Bryon? I mean this is a matter of principle surely - Jake is a convicted drug cheat. How can you keep a cheater on your list?

Exactly. Morals seems to apply when it suits. The argument of trusting the club is because for many many years the clubs have done the right things by the players. There was no history of PEDS so why would anyone think it would start in 2012 and unlike an individual who pick their own coach footballers cant even pick their own club. The whole game is built on trust. Just about every former player has said we just always trusted the club when taking things. Like I said because there was no history why wouldn't you. Who expected anyone to go rogue. To me its a hindsight comment to say you shouldn't trust what you are given. Of course players now wont justrust the club because no there is a history of PEDS. You either think 34 players are stupid or 34 cheated. If you think they cheated then your morals would suggest we must pay Carlisle out and have nothing to do with the club. If they are dumb its surprising that there are that many dumb people in one club. I know Jobe isn't popular for some reason on here but he doesn't strike me as dumb but he does come from a family where his dad would have taken anything the club gave him without question. It would have ingrained. Ive seen it far to many times to know it doesn't happen. I saw it for 15 years where players had no idea what they were taking. Do you think a player when he hurts himself in a game asks what they are about to be given to feel better. They may now but I would suggest never previously. It was about trust.

And I'm unsure the AFL could make the players plead guilty. WB tried to get their players to plead guilty but they wouldn't and that is with a lawyer telling them too.

And finally those saying Carlisle will struggle after a year off training, well I would like to point out he will only miss 7 months training and will be back training with the group about 6 weeks before the season ends. Fitness wont be Carlisle's problem. It will be in his head. That is what we need to look after.

[SaintPav]

I reckon our recruiting of Carslile, the recruiting of the 4 players from the list of 34 and comments coming from the AFL and the AFLPA shows that wilfull ignorance not limited to E.F.C.

[CURLY]

Very harsh penalty given they've basically had three seasons taken from them already. Those that say the players were gutless clearly have no idea of the trust a playing group develops in each other and the club.