Our Legal Eagles

[tezza1]

When it comes to the tribunal we have to have the most underperforming legal representation of any afl club.

They sure earn their money easy with us.

Time and time again we get done over by the tribunal. Not just the tribunal but also the match review committee.

Each week you see infringments not referred but as soon as it is a red , white and black jumper they cant wait to jump on it.

Numerous times in the past has this shepherd been carried out against stkilda players , Kositchske and Luke Ball come to mind but when we are the instigator we feel the full force.....

What a corrupt organisation is the AFL

[crackers35]

giansiricusa on kosi = 0 weeks
melbourne player on ball = 0 weeks
trent west on xavier clarke = 0 weeks

steven king on sam power = 4 weeks
steven baker on jeff farmer = 7 weeks
zac dawson on brad symes = 2 weeks

i also compare the following incidents which were identical and just 8 days apart
Paddy Ryder = 0 weeks
Michael Gardiner = 1 week

[mustangjack]

Agree reckon its that muppet Anderson would love to come across him in the street ,he better have a straw handy

[derby Street]

giansiricusa on kosi = 0 weeks
melbourne player on ball = 0 weeks
trent west on xavier clarke = 0 weeks

steven king on sam power = 4 weeks
steven baker on jeff farmer = 7 weeks
zac dawson on brad symes = 2 weeks

i also compare the following incidents which were identical and just 8 days apart
Paddy Ryder = 0 weeks
Michael Gardiner = 1 week

Makes you bloody cross doesn't it I will "shout the bar" if we ever win an appeal.

[St Fidelius]

giansiricusa on kosi = 0 weeks
melbourne player on ball = 0 weeks
trent west on xavier clarke = 0 weeks

steven king on sam power = 4 weeks
steven baker on jeff farmer = 7 weeks
zac dawson on brad symes = 2 weeks

i also compare the following incidents which were identical and just 8 days apart
Paddy Ryder = 0 weeks
Michael Gardiner = 1 week

Makes you bloody cross doesn't it I will "shout the bar" if we ever win an appeal.

Great, but my only wish is that the Club does appeal...

Time for the Club to stand firm FOR ONCE, and appeal....

[crackers35]

giansiricusa on kosi = 0 weeks
melbourne player on ball = 0 weeks
trent west on xavier clarke = 0 weeks

steven king on sam power = 4 weeks
steven baker on jeff farmer = 7 weeks
zac dawson on brad symes = 2 weeks

i also compare the following incidents which were identical and just 8 days apart
Paddy Ryder = 0 weeks
Michael Gardiner = 1 week

Makes you bloody cross doesn't it I will "shout the bar" if we ever win an appeal.

Great, but my only wish is that the Club does appeal...

Time for the Club to stand firm FOR ONCE, and appeal....

THE TIME HAS COME FOR US TO STOP TAKING THE BAD DECISIONS WE GET AND STAND UP FOR WHAT'S RIGHT!

[saintsrus]

Barnum and Bailey for sure


St Fid your on fire tonight!

[St Fidelius]

Barnum and Bailey for sure


St Fid your on fire tonight!

Mate...

We have been SHAFTED for years and time to ACT...

Time to get rid of the legal personal we have @ the Club and go for someone with that has a CLUE!

I am of the belief we sacked Sheldon because of the Baker decision, or at least that was the nail in the coffin, time to change legal representation and pay some more $$$ for someone that has a CLUE.

STAND UP ST KILDA AND SUPPORT THE PLAYER!

STAND UP AND SUPPORT A PLAYER THAT HAS NEVER BEEN REPORTED!

FOR F*** SAKE STAND UP!

[F_Q_F]

[happy feet]

Denis Denuto - it's the vibe of the thing!

[skeptic]

GT tried to take on the AFL once... cost us 4 pts against Freo

I appreciate guys are angry but we can't take the AFL on and win. Vlad is powerful enough to ignore the media and sink our season

cop it on the chin and move on IMO

[oneteam]

When it comes to the tribunal we have to have the most underperforming legal representation of any afl club.

They sure earn their money easy with us.

Time and time again we get done over by the tribunal. Not just the tribunal but also the match review committee.

Each week you see infringments not referred but as soon as it is a red , white and black jumper they cant wait to jump on it.

Numerous times in the past has this shepherd been carried out against stkilda players , Kositchske and Luke Ball come to mind but when we are the instigator we feel the full force.....

What a corrupt organisation is the AFL

I already asked about this at the agm. They said the club uses the same 2 qcs that collingwood and geelong use.

[saint75]

The problem is not the representation. The problem is the jumper colour. If any one doubted it before, you surely can not now.

Not sure what is better, to fight it or to move on. To be honest, the team doesn't need the distraction. If he was to get off, you can bet your a*%e the next player that goes up will get double weeks. Just ask Maxwell from Collingwood.

[Life Long Saint]

Here is our lead counsel


And here's a quote from our star legal team on the judges decision...

Well, he's kind of had it in for me ever since I accidentally ran over his dog. Actually, replace "accidentally" with "repeatedly," and replace "dog" with "son."

[saintsrus]

classic

[Sunday Red]

When it comes to the tribunal we have to have the most underperforming legal representation of any afl club.

Uhhh... isn't our Board full of lawyers and barristers?

Maybe we're not underperforming. Maybe we're just not rocking the boat?

[oneteam]

When it comes to the tribunal we have to have the most underperforming legal representation of any afl club.

Uhhh... isn't our Board full of lawyers and barristers?

Maybe we're not underperforming. Maybe we're just not rocking the boat?

the club does not use the solicitors on the board to speak at the tribunal. They use specialist QCs who do the tribunal work all the time , and do tribunal work for other clubs too. I don't want us using anyone other than the most specilist and most expert and experienced barristers representing our club at the tribunal.

[spert]

GT tried to take on the AFL once... cost us 4 pts against Freo

I appreciate guys are angry but we can't take the AFL on and win. Vlad is powerful enough to ignore the media and sink our season

cop it on the chin and move on IMO

GT thought the sledgehammer verbal approach was the way to achieve all things, but smarter avenues would have got better results..let's sincerely hope the club uses some clever legal nouse in this affair to overturn the abhorrent penalty..

[oneteam]

GT tried to take on the AFL once... cost us 4 pts against Freo

I appreciate guys are angry but we can't take the AFL on and win. Vlad is powerful enough to ignore the media and sink our season

cop it on the chin and move on IMO

GT thought the sledgehammer verbal approach was the way to achieve all things, but smarter avenues would have got better results..let's sincerely hope the club uses some clever legal nouse in this affair to overturn the abhorrent penalty..

the nclub used an expert QC who does tribunal work all the time , very successfully...If it took 30 minutes, the chances of an appeal are almost zero. An appeal is not a second hearing. it is only for an error of law , like when the jury does not follow the laws or rules ,or a manifestly excessive number of weeks. the afl changed it to stop clubs appealing and hoping the Qcs listening to the appeal would have had a different opinion on the report than the jury.
there has benn only one successful appeal EVER, which was about an error in the actual rules.
So lets not waste thousands of dollars cahsing an impossible dream to make us feel better . That is what you get with a jury. they looked at the incident , probably like most Crows supporters did.

[Life Long Saint]

When Collingwood got Maxwell off, didn't they argue something along the lines of that no reasonable body could not only find Maxwell not guilty but also not suspend the player for five weeks.

We can appeal if we believe that the punishment is unreasonably disproportionate to the crime.

We surely have grounds given that it was in full view of the umpire and no action was taken at the time. In other words, Dawson has not broken any AFL rules.
The ball was within 5m, the contact was to the body and the player was involved in the play. The player was temporarily winded and recovered quite quickly. I read that he has bruising now but I challenge any team to name players that aren't showing bruising at round 16!

[spert]

GT tried to take on the AFL once... cost us 4 pts against Freo

I appreciate guys are angry but we can't take the AFL on and win. Vlad is powerful enough to ignore the media and sink our season

cop it on the chin and move on IMO

GT thought the sledgehammer verbal approach was the way to achieve all things, but smarter avenues would have got better results..let's sincerely hope the club uses some clever legal nouse in this affair to overturn the abhorrent penalty..

the nclub used an expert QC who does tribunal work all the time , very successfully...If it took 30 minutes, the chances of an appeal are almost zero. An appeal is not a second hearing. it is only for an error of law , like when the jury does not follow the laws or rules ,or a manifestly excessive number of weeks. the afl changed it to stop clubs appealing and hoping the Qcs listening to the appeal would have had a different opinion on the report than the jury.
there has benn only one successful appeal EVER, which was about an error in the actual rules.
So lets not waste thousands of dollars cahsing an impossible dream to make us feel better . That is what you get with a jury. they looked at the incident , probably like most Crows supporters did.

It's not about impossible dreams, or feeling better, it's about getting the best team on the field in this cut-throat business, that's what it is, and if avenues of appeal are available, which they are, then they must be used to exhaustion -a club like St.Kilda gets few cracks at a flag, and the hungrier we are, the better.

[perfectionist]

... An appeal is not a second hearing. it is only for an error of law , like when the jury does not follow the laws or rules ,or a manifestly excessive number of weeks...

This is not completely true, being only part of the Appeal justification. In an attempt to stop clubs from going to the courts (which they can't actually do) to seek remedy, the AFL established the Appeals Board. It conducts a somewhat "first principles" approach to the case, that is, it neither relies on the determinations of the MRP nor the Tribunal. This avoids the claim that it is one "arm" of the AFL reviewing a decision of another "arm". It can consider any evidence it sees fit, that which was introduced at the Tribunal following the referral from the MRP or that which was not which any party can seek to introduce. Of course, it can choose what evidence is relevant and what is not. This from the AFL:

Appeals are available in relation to an error of law, a grossly unreasonable decision, manifestly excessive classification or manifestly excessive sanction. The Appeal Rule 24 however provides that an appellant can seek leave of the Appeal Board to produce fresh evidence provided the appellant can convince the Appeal Board that the evidence sought to be produced could not by reasonable diligence, have been obtained prior to the conclusion of the Tribunal hearing and where that evidence is of sufficient value that had it been presented before the Tribunal, the Tribunal would have reached a different decision.

Appeals have not been successful in the past (with the exception of the Nick Maxwell case) because the MRP and the Tribunal have not sought to extend the rules of the competition through their processes - until now.

[Legendary]

The same guy represented Maxwell so unless he was enjoying too much red wine before the hearing last night, I don't see the problem with the representation.