Carlisle ban?

[The OtherThommo]

Who cares what fate awaits other cheating clubs and their players.
In the end it was the St Kilda recruiters who were "too clever by half" and it was us who got royally poked - by self poking. $700 K down the tube and a recruit that has to sit out a year.

You do realize we have to pay that 700k to someone (under the AFL TPP rues)?
We can't just keep it.

But, that in itself is emblematic of the AFL's attitude to doping, MM - how in the hell would they consider it reasonable to suggest someone should get paid for a period when they sit on the sidelines because they've been done for doping?

What, meeting the salary cap rules trumps global anti-doping rules? Rip snorter piece of prioritising, that is.

How can they even presume to justify such nonsense?

It even incentivises people to go out and dope - gimme a coupla jabs, send me an email that describes how I'm in on the joke, but just enough in to-to to mean I get 3 years. That'll be good enough to run out my last 3 year contract - money for jam, digger, money for jam.

Where's the financial disincentive?

If they, the AFL, were fair dinkum about anti-doping, they would have already made a provision in the salary rules for such circumstances or, at least, call an extraordinary meeting of the commission and fess up to not thinking ahead, and change the goddamn rules.

Here's an idea how to address it at our mob - meet and ratify a "The drinks are on Jake" rule for 2016, and whack a cap on that of $700K. And, include a clause that says if the players can't get through $700K in 2016, the members will take up the slack, and nominate which player should have his salary credited.

Turnbull has suggested the country's economy needs to get "agile" in its thinking and application of investment capital. I'm here to help the AFL's agility.

P.S. $700K less the upgraded rookie's payments, of course.........which raises a further question that's just struck me.....what happens if the salary increase for an upgraded rookie, in combination with paying Carlisle puts us (or any other club in a similar position) over the salary cap? Ya reckon the AFL might be agile then?

The organisation's a farce. How many bloke's sitting in gaol are still being paid their contract amounts for not working?

[ripplug66]

Who cares what fate awaits other cheating clubs and their players.
In the end it was the St Kilda recruiters who were "too clever by half" and it was us who got royally poked - by self poking. $700 K down the tube and a recruit that has to sit out a year.

You do realize we have to pay that 700k to someone (under the AFL TPP rues)?
We can't just keep it.

But, that in itself is emblematic of the AFL's attitude to doping, MM - how in the hell would they consider it reasonable to suggest someone should get paid for a period when they sit on the sidelines because they've been done for doping?

What, meeting the salary cap rules trumps global anti-doping rules? Rip snorter piece of prioritising, that is.

How can they even presume to justify such nonsense?

It even incentivises people to go out and dope - gimme a coupla jabs, send me an email that describes how I'm in on the joke, but just enough in to-to to mean I get 3 years. That'll be good enough to run out my last 3 year contract - money for jam, digger, money for jam.

Where's the financial disincentive?

If they, the AFL, were fair dinkum about anti-doping, they would have already made a provision in the salary rules for such circumstances or, at least, call an extraordinary meeting of the commission and fess up to not thinking ahead, and change the goddamn rules.

Here's an idea how to address it at our mob - meet and ratify a "The drinks are on Jake" rule for 2016, and whack a cap on that of $700K. And, include a clause that says if the players can't get through $700K in 2016, the members will take up the slack, and nominate which player should have his salary credited.

Turnbull has suggested the country's economy needs to get "agile" in its thinking and application of investment capital. I'm here to help the AFL's agility.

P.S. $700K less the upgraded rookie's payments, of course.........which raises a further question that's just struck me.....what happens if the salary increase for an upgraded rookie, in combination with paying Carlisle puts us (or any other club in a similar position) over the salary cap? Ya reckon the AFL might be agile then?

The organisation's a farce. How many bloke's sitting in gaol are still being paid their contract amounts for not working?

If they cant pay they wouldn't. Don't blame the AFL. Blame WADA for not having rules that they cant get paid. And if I thought the organisation was a farce I wouldn't be following it but each to their own. Also its not always about financial dis incentive. These guys will be drug cheats for the rest of their lives. If I was you I would suggest you start a campaign to get rid of a drug cheat at our club if you feel so strongly about it. And what the hell has jail got to do with this. I didn't realise it was a crime. Obviously there is no way you would support a drug cheat suing the club?

[The OtherThommo]

Who cares what fate awaits other cheating clubs and their players.
In the end it was the St Kilda recruiters who were "too clever by half" and it was us who got royally poked - by self poking. $700 K down the tube and a recruit that has to sit out a year.

You do realize we have to pay that 700k to someone (under the AFL TPP rues)?
We can't just keep it.

But, that in itself is emblematic of the AFL's attitude to doping, MM - how in the hell would they consider it reasonable to suggest someone should get paid for a period when they sit on the sidelines because they've been done for doping?

What, meeting the salary cap rules trumps global anti-doping rules? Rip snorter piece of prioritising, that is.

How can they even presume to justify such nonsense?

It even incentivises people to go out and dope - gimme a coupla jabs, send me an email that describes how I'm in on the joke, but just enough in to-to to mean I get 3 years. That'll be good enough to run out my last 3 year contract - money for jam, digger, money for jam.

Where's the financial disincentive?

If they, the AFL, were fair dinkum about anti-doping, they would have already made a provision in the salary rules for such circumstances or, at least, call an extraordinary meeting of the commission and fess up to not thinking ahead, and change the goddamn rules.

Here's an idea how to address it at our mob - meet and ratify a "The drinks are on Jake" rule for 2016, and whack a cap on that of $700K. And, include a clause that says if the players can't get through $700K in 2016, the members will take up the slack, and nominate which player should have his salary credited.

Turnbull has suggested the country's economy needs to get "agile" in its thinking and application of investment capital. I'm here to help the AFL's agility.

P.S. $700K less the upgraded rookie's payments, of course.........which raises a further question that's just struck me.....what happens if the salary increase for an upgraded rookie, in combination with paying Carlisle puts us (or any other club in a similar position) over the salary cap? Ya reckon the AFL might be agile then?

The organisation's a farce. How many bloke's sitting in gaol are still being paid their contract amounts for not working?

If they cant pay they wouldn't. Don't blame the AFL. Blame WADA for not having rules that they cant get paid. And if I thought the organisation was a farce I wouldn't be following it but each to their own. Also its not always about financial dis incentive. These guys will be drug cheats for the rest of their lives. If I was you I would suggest you start a campaign to get rid of a drug cheat at our club if you feel so strongly about it. And what the hell has jail got to do with this. I didn't realise it was a crime. Obviously there is no way you would support a drug cheat suing the club?

I was going to go with "Oh, just go away"...until I got to your mention of crims in gaol not being paid being irrelevant.

Someone on a contract is being paid to provide a good or a service. Whether that person is in gaol, buggered off elsewhere, decides against continuing to provide the contracted good or service for any reason, or because that person has breached a law or rule in their field of endeavour, and is no longer able to honour that contract, DO YOU RECKON THEY SHOULD BE PAID?!?!?!

And, how many are in fields other than the AFL? Was Tyson Gay paid? Is anyone trying to get back the dough swindled by Lance Armstrong? Is anyone allowed to pay Armstrong for pushing a bike around in sanctioned events? Will the Russian athletes get paid if they're prevented from competing in Brazil?

The gaol reference was an example of how others are effected if they breach laws and rules in the fields in which they operate.

I say, again, what makes the AFL such an exception?

Fair dinkum.....

As for the rest of your submission, it's just another waste of time to even read it (unfortunately I still make the mistake of doing so from time to time, and I always regret it).

[ripplug66]

I was going to go with "Oh, just go away"...until I got to your mention of crims in gaol not being paid being irrelevant.

Someone on a contract is being paid to provide a good or a service. Whether that person is in gaol, buggered off elsewhere, decides against continuing to provide the contracted good or service for any reason, or because that person has breached a law or rule in their field of endeavour, and is no longer able to honour that contract, DO YOU RECKON THEY SHOULD BE PAID?!?!?!

And, how many are in fields other than the AFL? Was Tyson Gay paid? Is anyone trying to get back the dough swindled by Lance Armstrong? Is anyone allowed to pay Armstrong for pushing a bike around in sanctioned events? Will the Russian athletes get paid if they're prevented from competing in Brazil?

The gaol reference was an example of how others are effected if they breach laws and rules in the fields in which they operate.

I say, again, what makes the AFL such an exception?

Fair dinkum.....

As for the rest of your submission, it's just another waste of time to even read it (unfortunately I still make the mistake of doing so from time to time, and I always regret it).

" oh just go away" well done. Jail is because you break the law. There is no law broken otherwise they would be in jail and not being paid. These players will be still be working hard. Do I think they should get the full amount? No but they aren't in jail and they haven't broken any law and they will still be working. Put me on ignore. Its not that hard. I love reading your stuff. Its such a contradiction from you at Moorabbin when you abused nearly every single race and religion. And Tyson Gay? WTF. For a start I bet he got plenty of money when suspended and secondly what club did he normally get paid from previously? Please try some examples that make sense. Its a pretty simple problem to solve. WADA need to stop athletes getting paid. Look forward to seeing you at the Bentleigh RSL to discuss further. And I would still expect you to write to the club to get rid of a cheat. I would if my morals were like yours or is it just another case where people use morals when they suit.

[ripplug66]

Do we still have an exact date when Carlisle can train with the group again. I have heard various dates.

[The OtherThommo]

I was going to go with "Oh, just go away"...until I got to your mention of crims in gaol not being paid being irrelevant.

Someone on a contract is being paid to provide a good or a service. Whether that person is in gaol, buggered off elsewhere, decides against continuing to provide the contracted good or service for any reason, or because that person has breached a law or rule in their field of endeavour, and is no longer able to honour that contract, DO YOU RECKON THEY SHOULD BE PAID?!?!?!

And, how many are in fields other than the AFL? Was Tyson Gay paid? Is anyone trying to get back the dough swindled by Lance Armstrong? Is anyone allowed to pay Armstrong for pushing a bike around in sanctioned events? Will the Russian athletes get paid if they're prevented from competing in Brazil?

The gaol reference was an example of how others are effected if they breach laws and rules in the fields in which they operate.

I say, again, what makes the AFL such an exception?

Fair dinkum.....

As for the rest of your submission, it's just another waste of time to even read it (unfortunately I still make the mistake of doing so from time to time, and I always regret it).

" oh just go away" well done. Jail is because you break the law. There is no law broken otherwise they would be in jail and not being paid. These players will be still be working hard. Do I think they should get the full amount? No but they aren't in jail and they haven't broken any law and they will still be working. Put me on ignore. Its not that hard. I love reading your stuff. Its such a contradiction from you at Moorabbin when you abused nearly every single race and religion. And Tyson Gay? WTF. For a start I bet he got plenty of money when suspended and secondly what club did he normally get paid from previously? Please try some examples that make sense. Its a pretty simple problem to solve. WADA need to stop athletes getting paid. Look forward to seeing you at the Bentleigh RSL to discuss further. And I would still expect you to write to the club to get rid of a cheat. I would if my morals were like yours or is it just another case where people use morals when they suit.

"Abused nearly every single race and religion" - and you dare to call other people liars at the drop of a hat, you imbecile.

That is a stinking defamatory lie, you disgraceful dog.

I'll let you know when I'm next travelling down to the Bentleigh RSL - come on down and repeat it, by all means.

Witless idiot.

[ripplug66]

"Abused nearly every single race and religion" - and you dare to call other people liars at the drop of a hat, you imbecile.

That is a stinking defamatory lie, you disgraceful dog.

I'll let you know when I'm next travelling down to the Bentleigh RSL - come on down and repeat it, by all means.

Witless idiot.

Sorry. I can only say what I remember. I apologise for remembering. How about we start again. I'm happy to do that.

[matrix]

Someone post the popcorn emoticon
I'm at work and have no link

[ripplug66]

IM still trying to work out how long before he can actually train with a group. Any answers.

[Linton Lodger]

Carlisle is worth babysitting. Absolute GUN. Best hands of a 200cm possibly ever certainly been none better.

Indeed. And such players don't grow on trees.

The conservative approach would have been to take the best key defender available at our first or second draft picks. Who may have hit the ground running as a gun, very unlikely. May have become a great key defender in 3, 4 or 5 years, perhaps. May have turned out to be a GOP Key Defender in 3, 4 or 5 years, possible. Or may have not made it, possible.

I think we made the right decision.

[The OtherThommo]

"Abused nearly every single race and religion" - and you dare to call other people liars at the drop of a hat, you imbecile.

That is a stinking defamatory lie, you disgraceful dog.

I'll let you know when I'm next travelling down to the Bentleigh RSL - come on down and repeat it, by all means.

Witless idiot.

Sorry. I can only say what I remember. I apologise for remembering. How about we start again. I'm happy to do that.

Keep digging.

[Playon]

Well I really love the bombers now as much as I love Collingwood, cheating ar5e of a club.

I'm hoping we smash them by over a 120 points in both games we play them, they can smile about Carlisle then.

But it will make me feel all rosy and warm inside knowing they'll get the number 1 draft pick in 2017, not.
I'm sure they'll be happy to be compensated.
Signed
Peachy

[Bluthy]

Thats why I'd be really disappointed if the club hadn't loaded him up with all the stuff they want him to do well before. They knew with Saad how it worked. They shouldn't risk playing funny buggers with anything sneaky now.

Personally I suspect that the Saints got caught out by not knowing that the players had all lied to the ASADA Testers after being instructed to do so by the EFC (which was to me the biggest surpise of Tuesday), which has caused the full penalty to be handed down. Remember that as far as WADA is concerned attempting to cheat is just as much as an infraction as actually cheating. So intent is everything.

I strongly suspect that the Saint's Brains Trust was expecting some form of no-fault discount if a guilty verdict came down and that Carlisle would at most miss half a season. So once agin EFC lies have brought us undone.

I agree. The worry is that they had Jake still separate from the main training group so they were obviously working on some issues with his body like his knee, nursing it carefully. Hopefully Jake has all the info and contacts he needs - such as specialists, physio's etc. Otherwise he might need to use his own initiative. Perhaps thats not a bad thing. After all its his own body and he should take responsibility for making sure he can maximise his footy career.

[st.byron]

And I agree with Lovett murray that they aren't drug cheats. The club are the cheats. The players take the penalty. Those people on here who believe the players knew or agreed to this surely don't think they can then sue the club. Cant have it both ways.

I think they did or did not know exactly what they were taking. So they could claim some ignorance there. (That's not an excuse though)
I think they certainly were complicit in covering up what was being done and that alone begs the question, "Why are we covering up what we're being given"? Seems none of them thought to ask that question or follow it through. It's their own fault.

[ROLS-LEE]

And I agree with Lovett murray that they aren't drug cheats. The club are the cheats. The players take the penalty. Those people on here who believe the players knew or agreed to this surely don't think they can then sue the club. Cant have it both ways.

I think they did or did not know exactly what they were taking. So they could claim some ignorance there. (That's not an excuse though)
I think they certainly were complicit in covering up what was being done and that alone begs the question, "Why are we covering up what we're being given"? Seems none of them thought to ask that question or follow it through. It's their own fault.

Probably because they knew it won't get picked up in a drug / blood test and they knew it would benefit them.

[Playon]

IM still trying to work out how long before he can actually train with a group. Any answers.

The banned 34 players, including five at Port Adelaide, St Kilda, Western Bulldogs and Melbourne, can officially return to training with their teams two months before their bans expires.

For most, that would mean a return to the club from mid-September. But players at clubs out of the finals will be on mandated holidays then, so the effective return date is day one of pre-season training.

St Kilda recruit Jake Carlisle is not permitted to train at his new club or under its guidance, but Saints chief executive Matt Finnis seemed not to be aware of this yesterday.

“We are still dealing with the AFL, but Jake will definitely have a program that will have him ready for pre-season ‘17,” he said on Twitter.
http://www.heraldsun.com.au/sport/afl/t ... 31270007c5

[ripplug66]

And I agree with Lovett murray that they aren't drug cheats. The club are the cheats. The players take the penalty. Those people on here who believe the players knew or agreed to this surely don't think they can then sue the club. Cant have it both ways.

I think they did or did not know exactly what they were taking. So they could claim some ignorance there. (That's not an excuse though)
I think they certainly were complicit in covering up what was being done and that alone begs the question, "Why are we covering up what we're being given"? Seems none of them thought to ask that question or follow it through. It's their own fault.

Probably because they knew it won't get picked up in a drug / blood test and they knew it would benefit them.

If they actually knew that then they could have just said they were getting vitamins. And if they knew that then they are the smartest players in the world. The way Dank seemed to run this I doubt he even knew exatly what was going on. The half wit didn't even know what was legal and illegal under WADA.

[satchmo]

Nobody knew anything. The whole thing was just an unfortunate mistake. I feel for James. His name has been dragged through the mud, and all he did was sit in the box on match day. He didn't even know where the footys were kept.

[gringo]

And I agree with Lovett murray that they aren't drug cheats. The club are the cheats. The players take the penalty. Those people on here who believe the players knew or agreed to this surely don't think they can then sue the club. Cant have it both ways.

I think they did or did not know exactly what they were taking. So they could claim some ignorance there. (That's not an excuse though)
I think they certainly were complicit in covering up what was being done and that alone begs the question, "Why are we covering up what we're being given"? Seems none of them thought to ask that question or follow it through. It's their own fault.

Probably because they knew it won't get picked up in a drug / blood test and they knew it would benefit them.

If they actually knew that then they could have just said they were getting vitamins. And if they knew that then they are the smartest players in the world. The way Dank seemed to run this I doubt he even knew exatly what was going on. The half wit didn't even know what was legal and illegal under WADA.

they have been reporting that the thing that hurt them most in the WADA decision was that they were meant to declare all meds (even aspirin) they took in regular ASADA forms. They chose to exclude the injections from these. It made them look like they thought there might be something worth hiding. If they hadn't chosen to be secretive they probably would have walked free.

[magnifisaint]

IM still trying to work out how long before he can actually train with a group. Any answers.

September

[saintbrat]

they have been reporting that the thing that hurt them most in the WADA decision was that they were meant to declare all meds (even aspirin) they took in regular ASADA forms. They chose to exclude the injections from these. It made them look like they thought there might be something worth hiding. If they hadn't chosen to be secretive they probably would have walked free.

players from other clubs have mentioned the - team first, one in all in, doing as asked and not questioning, sticking together,- etc etc
maybe one of them should have said lets stick together on this- BUT designated one to double check or ask more...
CAS/WADA papers mention that during 30 tests taken in the year not ONE player declared.
Crowley got a year for a painkiller, Ahmed got 18 mths for a drink-- despite the 'stick together' spiel surely they would/ should have known an 'injection' was seen as a medication..

[St Lenny]

I have always hated Essendon, so arrogant. No sympathy for any of them included JC. I wish we didn't have him. Trouble from the word go. They all got what they deserve. In fact they got off lightly, just ask Amed Saad.

[saintsRrising]

IM still trying to work out how long before he can actually train with a group. Any answers.

September

See sections 172 and 173 of the Judgement.
http://www.tas-cas.org/fileadmin/user_u ... SENDON.pdf

So can train 2-3 months before the supension concludes. AFL to rule on this (if they have not already) as per the WADA guidelines.

So Carlisle will have training with us before next pre-season. commences.

[IanRush]

I have always hated Essendon, so arrogant. No sympathy for any of them included JC. I wish we didn't have him. Trouble from the word go. They all got what they deserve. In fact they got off lightly, just ask Amed Saad.

I agree, I think most reasoned observers think that Saad was hard done by.

[Bluthy]

From what I've read Carlisle can attend footy games as a spectator including AFL games. It raises the question of whether he should attend Saints games.

Would he be a distraction and bad press for the club at the ground? The cameras are going to focus on him every chance they get while its such a hot topic early. St Kilda player banned for drug cheating they will gleefully point out without failing to mention his other off-season snap-chat activities. Plus it would be frustrating for Carlisle to see all the players out there. Would it be better for the club and Carlisle to at least not attend in the early part of the season when some of the media heat has gone out of the drug bans?