Carlisle ban?

[saintsRrising]

A defence based on Carlisle-Goddard-Webster-Roberton does look very very good.

At almost 23 and wth 39 games I think we will really start to see Webster blossom this season.

[Con Gorozidis]

A defence based on Carlisle-Goddard-Webster-Roberton does look very very good.

At almost 23 and wth 39 games I think we will really start to see Webster blossom this season.

Getting close to the magical 50 game mark.
Roberton is only 24 and has 84 games to his name and finished 6th in the B & F.

If these 4 stay healthy and Jake comes back it is one hell of a backline for the next 6 or 7 years.

[Wrote for Luck]

others who similarly have to show:

hickey 41
ross 37
dunstan 35
longer 43
delaney 59
bruce 46

by season end nearly all these players will be in the swinging sixties where we currently have Newnes and Weller. so it's a good level to aim for.

[SAAD]

Ah k sweet thanks for response Con.

[uptheboys]

A defence based on Carlisle-Goddard-Webster-Roberton does look very very good.

+1

[SuperDuper]

A defence based on Carlisle-Goddard-Webster-Roberton does look very very good.

At almost 23 and wth 39 games I think we will really start to see Webster blossom this season.

yep, Webster looks the goods IMO... very much so... I remember a game last year when someone (cant recall, but classy player) was cutting Shenton to shreds... poor guy was getting outclassed ... Webster moved on to him and matched him in each contest, quelling his influence

23 is the age when players start to get to their best, on average... so I am looking forward to a big year from JW...

[BigMart]

Webster turns it over wat too much at the moment. He needs to work on disposal consistency.

[one point]

Webster turns it over wat too much at the moment. He needs to work on disposal consistency.

He has potential but tends to fall over in the contest

[Con Gorozidis]

1. yes he did get a strike for the video incident.
2. very good question.... can you get a strike under the illicit drug policy when you are serving a ped ban? I'm not sure if this has been clarified..... What is his 'status' within the AFL and is he still subject to their code?

I tend to think YES he is (he is still contracted) and as such he does still fit under the AFL code. So I think that he probably could get another strike for party drugs this year.

e.g. if a player is serving a regular suspension they could still get a strike.

[loris]

Finnis has now made it official, today. Saints have asked AFL for an extra Rookie. They are going to upgrade a current rookie to cover for Carlilse, so they want another rookie to cover the upgraded rookie. Info is on the AFL. Com site. They are waiting on the response from AFL.

[saintbrat]

Finnis has now made it official, today. Saints have asked AFL for an extra Rookie. They are going to upgrade a current rookie to cover for Carlilse, so they want another rookie to cover the upgraded rookie. Info is on the AFL. Com site. They are waiting on the response from AFL.

http://www.afl.com.au/news/2016-01-31/s ... suspension

ST KILDA wants the AFL to allow it to add a rookie to its list after losing recruit Jake Carlisle to suspension after the Court of Arbitration for Sport's imposition of season-long bans on 34 past and present Essendon players.

Saints CEO Matt Finnis said on Sunday the club would upgrade a rookie to the senior list to replace Carlisle but would like the opportunity to add another player as a rookie so they were not disadvantaged.

He said the AFL was considering the matter.

"Our focus is to upgrade a rookie … [but it] remains to be seen whether we will have another player to add to our rookie list in place in that upgrade."

Finnis also confirmed that the four clubs other than Essendon with suspended players on their 2016 list (St Kilda, Western Bulldogs, Melbourne and Port Adelaide) believed they should not have to pay those players for this season.

He hoped the matter would not become bogged down in legalities and that the AFL, Essendon and the affected clubs could work to ensure a fair result for the Saints, Bulldogs, Demons and Power.

"I think there has been enough legal action and it is time for people to come together and work these things through, and I am confident that will happen," Finnis said.

Suspended players received a further update on compensation talks on Friday at the AFL Players Association.

Finnis said the lack of clarity around what Carlisle could and couldn't do during his suspension remained frustrating but St Kilda would not do anything that might potentially lengthen his suspension.

[saintbrat]

Finnis has now made it official, today. Saints have asked AFL for an extra Rookie. They are going to upgrade a current rookie to cover for Carlilse, so they want another rookie to cover the upgraded rookie. Info is on the AFL. Com site. They are waiting on the response from AFL.

Loris
the herald Sun read the same article we did
http://www.heraldsun.com.au/sport/afl/t ... 0780aadf15

[Bluthy]

http://www.theage.com.au/afl/essendon-t ... mi4ai.html

Essendon, not St Kilda, are likely to have to pay former Don Jake Carlisle's contract at the Saints this year as he serves his year-long drug ban as one of the Essendon 34.
The Saints do not believe they have to pay Carlisle during his ban and that non-payment forms part of a compensation claim against the Bombers by Carlisle – and by all players banned by the Court of Arbitration for Sport – for Essendon's role in the drug case.

That will ease the pain of his suspension a bit. If they can have that subtracted from the salary cap they could even put it into the Morrabbin development. There's half a mill down.

[Bluthy]

http://www.afl.com.au/news/2016-02-05/a ... -melbourne

No go on Jakey replacement. No drama for us but reckon Port are stiff with Monfries.

[loris]

http://www.afl.com.au/news/2016-02-05/a ... -melbourne

No go on Jakey replacement. No drama for us but reckon Port are stiff with Monfries.

Agree there Bluthy re Monfries......... I think it's most unfair. Monfries signed before the whole Essendope scandal came out, yet Essendon knew it was going to happen, duplicitous mob that they are.

Unfair inthat Port now have one less player this season, than the deliberate cheaters of the AFL.

[bozza1980]

http://www.afl.com.au/news/2016-02-05/a ... -melbourne

No go on Jakey replacement. No drama for us but reckon Port are stiff with Monfries.

It is illogical for the AFL to decide a club that breaches the drug code can replace players suspended as a result of their actions but other clubs can't.

Talk of "buyer beware" is BS. Trading for a player should not have greater ramifications than injecting a player with illegal substances.

[magnifisaint]

What's good for the goose is good for the gander. Again the AFL have got it wrong. Essendon are the perpetrators yet they are allowed top ups. Really the club should have been banned this year

[saintbrat]

http://www.heraldsun.com.au/sport/afl/p ... 9ade766b0c

IN just 83 days at St Kilda Jake Carlisle denied and then admitting snorting drugs, slept through training sessions, then was banned for the entire 2016 season.

Not a bad hit parade for a player on a $2.4 million contract, as St Kilda’s bold recruitment was roundly mocked as a catastrophic failure.

Yet the collateral damage to St Kilda’s long-term plans is exactly zero, with 25-year-old Carlisle’s absence actually containing a small silver lining

.

[magnifisaint]

http://www.heraldsun.com.au/sport/afl/p ... 9ade766b0c

IN just 83 days at St Kilda Jake Carlisle denied and then admitting snorting drugs, slept through training sessions, then was banned for the entire 2016 season.

Not a bad hit parade for a player on a $2.4 million contract, as St Kilda’s bold recruitment was roundly mocked as a catastrophic failure.

Yet the collateral damage to St Kilda’s long-term plans is exactly zero, with 25-year-old Carlisle’s absence actually containing a small silver lining

.

So what is the silver lining?

[Jacks Back]

http://www.afl.com.au/news/2016-02-05/a ... -melbourne

No go on Jakey replacement. No drama for us but reckon Port are stiff with Monfries.

It is illogical for the AFL to decide a club that breaches the drug code can replace players suspended as a result of their actions but other clubs can't.

Talk of "buyer beware" is BS. Trading for a player should not have greater ramifications than injecting a player with illegal substances.

I agree with that Bozza!

[saintbrat]

http://www.heraldsun.com.au/sport/afl/p ... 9ade766b0c

IN just 83 days at St Kilda Jake Carlisle denied and then admitting snorting drugs, slept through training sessions, then was banned for the entire 2016 season.

Not a bad hit parade for a player on a $2.4 million contract, as St Kilda’s bold recruitment was roundly mocked as a catastrophic failure.

Yet the collateral damage to St Kilda’s long-term plans is exactly zero, with 25-year-old Carlisle’s absence actually containing a small silver lining

.

So what is the silver lining?

Melbourne will easily absorb the loss of Jake Melksham for a year, with Dees fans a little unsure of his talents and the club’s onball unit steadily gaining depth anyway.

St Kilda are years away from a flag, should more easily pump games into centre half-back Hugh Goddard, and might hope Carlisle’s travails are the circuit-breaker for a potentially squandered talent.

[saintbrat]

wrong thread sorry

[Con Gorozidis]

Theoretically I agree that affected teams should be allowed a top-up player but I just dont think it makes any practical difference to our situation at all.

We can promote a rookie - so maybe we give Coughlan (Payne) or O'Kearney a few senior games.
If we bring in some outsider for one season - there wouldnt be much point giving him a game for development purposes. Id rather play Coughan or O'K anyway.

Now for the Power - I think it does hurt them much more because now they are a ruckman down which hurts when you are challenging for a flag.

[To the top]

The question is "Who pays ANY attention to ANY article in any Murdoch outlet, globally?"

A politically biased and poisoned media organisation which lacks any semblance of credibility on ANY subject.

And, to boot, they tap people's telephone conversations - including the telephone conversations of parent's whose children have been murdered.

Says it all really.

[Jacks Back]

The question is "Who pays ANY attention to ANY article in any Murdoch outlet, globally?"

A politically biased and poisoned media organisation which lacks any semblance of credibility on ANY subject.

And, to boot, they tap people's telephone conversations - including the telephone conversations of parent's whose children have been murdered.

Says it all really.

Yeah but tell us what you really think.