Lovett interviewed by Police

[St Fidelius]

JESUS CHRIST!! Its 1998 ALL over again. Stan Alves all that crap now we have Lovett and all his crap!!

We might make the finals but like 1998 will fade BIG TIME!! and what happened in 1999 and 2000?? OMG!! well thats just great. Thypical of stkilda to have a great team and throw it away and off field issues!!

You really need to take a big deep breath and a bit of a think before you post....your last few (including that ludicrous pile of nonsense about Andrew Swallow) have done you no favours at all

Agreed.

Pissed off that thread is locked - No chance to respond, and detail how much of an idiot the original poster is.

Me too mate...

I just find it hard to believe someone can post crap like that, yes it should be locked and maybe viewed for a week just so other posters know the likes of this OP of that locked thread...

Otherwise, I really don't see the reason why the thread has not been deleted ....

Stinger should know more, but I think he's off surfing with hot young chicks

St Fid is a better source..... I know he is.

I wouldn't assume anything from the other.

STOP BLOODY BAITING!!!

I really don't think Grumps was baiting, but I maybe wrong...

There are many posters that know the legal system and the amount of work that's required to prepare a brief of evidence on this forum...

I have offered my opinion and their maybe others that think the same or have different views, it's just an opinion...

[Milton66]

This is going to be an interesting one...

What does the club do?

My view is simple: Even if he is charged, it may take a while to go to court. So until proven guilty, you can't sack the bloke.

If so, then he should train and play this year. Why waste him in the magoos? Besides, I'd be loathe to simply abandon him, and maybe a close involvement will open his eyes somewhat.

He was recruited for a purpose, so play him until he's proven guilty or not.

Unless there is major dissent and the players don't want him there. That's a different matter.

I never though it would be possible to fell so angry and yet sorry for someone at the same time.

[ausfatcat]

I never though it would be possible to fell so angry and yet sorry for someone at the same time.

Angry at him if he did it and angry at him for putting himself in that situation if he didn't do it. Sorry for him if he didn't do it.


I just don't know what to think, I just hope which ever way it is resolved quickly.

[matrix]

bahahahahah
that was a bait if i ever saw one

[Milton66]

I never though it would be possible to fell so angry and yet sorry for someone at the same time.

Angry at him if he did it and angry at him for putting himself in that situation if he didn't do it. Sorry for him if he didn't do it.


I just don't know what to think, I just hope which ever way it is resolved quickly.

Angry that he put himself in that situation (if he actually did).

I feel sorry for him in the sense that he's going to fritter away an opportunity to rise above mediocrity.

Mind you, it's easy for us know-alls to call him derogatory names. But no one really knows what sort of upbrining he had etc.

Not that it should be used as an excuse, but not everyone is strong enough to break the cycle. Just look at Carey.

[St Fidelius]

I never though it would be possible to fell so angry and yet sorry for someone at the same time.

Angry at him if he did it and angry at him for putting himself in that situation if he didn't do it. Sorry for him if he didn't do it.


I just don't know what to think, I just hope which ever way it is resolved quickly.

Me too....

We only have the Club we follow and support to make the right decision based on the facts that they have and I will support their decision what ever it is...

I hope the players support that decision and not take a personal stance on the matter, if no charges are laid...

Again, I hope it's resolved as quick as possible so 2010 can start with the players, the Club and fans united

[SENsei]

I'm not sure the decision about Lovett's suspension and the length of it will be a St Kilda decision alone.

This accusation is more serious than Bock's. More serious than the Cousins situation too.

The AFL will have huge input into this. I believe they will make the decision, not St Kilda FC.

Have also heard that the players are livid and do not want him at the club.

And have also heard that we haven't heard the last of a certain Brisbane forward, Brownlow Medal night, a certain HS reporter and potential legal proceedings.....

Gut feeling? If he's charged, he will not play for us at all. Suspended without pay most likely. If no charges are laid, he will resume training sometime in January.

And if he did it? Throw the book at him.

[St Fidelius]

I'm not sure the decision about Lovett's suspension and the length of it will be a St Kilda decision alone.

This accusation is more serious than Bock's. More serious than the Cousins situation too.

The AFL will have huge input into this. I believe they will make the decision, not St Kilda FC.

Have also heard that the players are livid and do not want him at the club.

And have also heard that we haven't heard the last of a certain Brisbane forward, Brownlow Medal night, a certain HS reporter and potential legal proceedings.....

Gut feeling? If he's charged, he will not play for us at all. Suspended without pay most likely. If no charges are laid, he will resume training sometime in January.

And if he did it? Throw the book at him.

Agreed if he did do it, throw the book at him..

What if a brief has been submitted and not authorised....


What if a brief has been submitted and the DPP say insufficient evidence ...

What if it ends up going to court and he is found not guilty....

Why do you think the AFL will step over what the Club has done so far???

Don't you think the Club will be diligent on any outcome??

Do you really think the AFL will jump in front of what our Club will do???

For the AFL to step in before the Saints have their say is a huge call IMO, and I believe the AFL will be in constant talks with the Club before they even consider making a move...

If some players don't want Lovett at the Club, and IF there is no case to answer OR he is proven innocent then the Club has learnt nothing IMO..

The Club is bigger than the players....

That includes the so called said players that refuse to play with him....

Again, if that's the case the Club is still suffering from the Stan Alves syndrome and will never move forward...

The Club WILL make the decision and NOT the AFL IMO

[Milton66]

Based on all of the above, it would seem that the legals will take care of itself.

The AFL may well be the smokie in al lof this, because if he is charged, thn they will probably want to act.

As far as the players go, well that's looking like another can of worms.

The only way I can see him staying and the players accepting him is for the club to suspend him and let him stay clean, and earn the respect.

I agree that we cannot afford to let the tail wag the dog. Then if the players are tight and there aren't any cliques then stability and morale have to come into consideration.

Acker wasn't the most popular bloke up North. Although he's nothing like Lovett.

[SydneySainter]

At least for now, we'll have to accept that we wont be a part of St Kilda in any way, shape or form.

[Moorabbin Saints]

I believe we will wait until more comes out about the situation. It all depends on the timing.

If he is found not guilty in the near future, he will resume his position.

If he is found guilty in the near future, he will be sacked (we will not hesitate).

If it is going to take an extended period to decide the verdict he will be allowed to resume his position until a decision is made. If it is guilty he will be sacked and if he is not guilty he will continue with us.

It's just the most logical way to deal with it. We are just stalling until we find out more.

[St Fidelius]

At least for now, we'll have to accept that we wont be a part of St Kilda in any way, shape or form.

WTF

[ace]

I'm not sure the decision about Lovett's suspension and the length of it will be a St Kilda decision alone.

This accusation is more serious than Bock's. More serious than the Cousins situation too.

The AFL will have huge input into this. I believe they will make the decision, not St Kilda FC.

Have also heard that the players are livid and do not want him at the club.

And have also heard that we haven't heard the last of a certain Brisbane forward, Brownlow Medal night, a certain HS reporter and potential legal proceedings.....

Gut feeling? If he's charged, he will not play for us at all. Suspended without pay most likely. If no charges are laid, he will resume training sometime in January.

And if he did it? Throw the book at him.

My lay view is:

The AFL can't do squat.
The AFL can not make a finding that could interfere with the legal situation.
He remains innocent unless charged and found guilty.

If he is charged, the club could suspend him with pay pending the legal outcome.
Not to pay him would imply a finding.
If he is convicted St Kilda and the AFL will terminate him permanently.
If he is charged and found not guilty, the club and AFL can take no action against him - he is deemed innocent.

ONLY if he is NOT charged, then the club or the AFL can take action for damaging the clubs and games reputations.
This does not imply a finding.

The club indefinite suspension is meaningless until the players resume training on 6 January, simply because everyone is effectively suspended on pay during holidays.

The club has to tread very carefully because the players and sponsors will be unhappy if he resumes pre season training, but to not allow him to train implies a finding.

I make no finding unless he is charged and a court finding is made other than stupidity.
I am annoyed like hell that he has placed himself in this position.
Unfortunately stupidity does not disqualify a person from being a good footballer.
Unfortunately natural selection does not prevent stupid women going home with stupid footballers.

[ace]

Which team mate lives in Port Melbourne.
Which team mate would go to a pub with Lovett.
Which team mate would take Lovett and these women to his home.
You may have to train with the guy but forming that type of friendship is not smart.

I hope it wasn't Raph expecting Lovett to replace his older brother.

[St Fidelius]

I'm not sure the decision about Lovett's suspension and the length of it will be a St Kilda decision alone.

This accusation is more serious than Bock's. More serious than the Cousins situation too.

The AFL will have huge input into this. I believe they will make the decision, not St Kilda FC.

Have also heard that the players are livid and do not want him at the club.

And have also heard that we haven't heard the last of a certain Brisbane forward, Brownlow Medal night, a certain HS reporter and potential legal proceedings.....

Gut feeling? If he's charged, he will not play for us at all. Suspended without pay most likely. If no charges are laid, he will resume training sometime in January.

And if he did it? Throw the book at him.

My lay view is:

The AFL can't do squat.
The AFL can not make a finding that could interfere with the legal situation.
He remains innocent unless charged and found guilty.

If he is charged, the club could suspend him with pay pending the legal outcome.
Not to pay him would imply a finding.
If he is convicted St Kilda and the AFL will terminate him permanently.
If he is charged and found not guilty, the club and AFL can take no action against him - he is deemed innocent.

ONLY if he is NOT charged, then the club or the AFL can take action for damaging the clubs and games reputations.
This does not imply a finding.

The club indefinite suspension is meaningless until the players resume training on 6 January, simply because everyone is effectively suspended on pay during holidays.

The club has to tread very carefully because the players and sponsors will be unhappy if he resumes pre season training, but to not allow him to train implies a finding.

I make no finding unless he is charged and a court finding is made other than stupidity.
I am annoyed like hell that he has placed himself in this position.
Unfortunately stupidity does not disqualify a person from being a good footballer.
Unfortunately natural selection does not prevent stupid women going home with stupid footballers.

agreed...

I really cant see why SENsaintsational thinks that the AFL will step in over what ever the Club has/will do.....

And yes, as I have mentioned the players are off on a short leave period atm and the suspension means jack....

But again, I feel sure the Club is on the front foot and what ever is discovered it would be dealt by the Club and not the AFL FFS.....

Again, if Lovett has a case to answer for, so be it, and the Club would no doubt act accordingly and I fail to see why the AFL would intervene...

accordingly...

If some players have expressed that they don't wish to play with Lovett, albeit hearsay and before any legal recommendation .....

F*** them .....

[plugger66]

Well I feel much more confident he will play with us this year now, due to the fact we've sent the heavies in (David Grace).

IF the club seriously were already jack of Lovett, they wouldn't have put this much effort (and expense) into the case.

IMO the club desperately wants Lovett to play, and will do all possible to make it happen.

The club wouldnt and cannot pay for his legal advise. Lovett brought in the heavies.

[plugger66]

I'm not sure the decision about Lovett's suspension and the length of it will be a St Kilda decision alone.

This accusation is more serious than Bock's. More serious than the Cousins situation too.

The AFL will have huge input into this. I believe they will make the decision, not St Kilda FC.

Have also heard that the players are livid and do not want him at the club.

And have also heard that we haven't heard the last of a certain Brisbane forward, Brownlow Medal night, a certain HS reporter and potential legal proceedings.....

Gut feeling? If he's charged, he will not play for us at all. Suspended without pay most likely. If no charges are laid, he will resume training sometime in January.

And if he did it? Throw the book at him.

My lay view is:

The AFL can't do squat.
The AFL can not make a finding that could interfere with the legal situation.
He remains innocent unless charged and found guilty.

If he is charged, the club could suspend him with pay pending the legal outcome.
Not to pay him would imply a finding.
If he is convicted St Kilda and the AFL will terminate him permanently.
If he is charged and found not guilty, the club and AFL can take no action against him - he is deemed innocent.

ONLY if he is NOT charged, then the club or the AFL can take action for damaging the clubs and games reputations.
This does not imply a finding.

The club indefinite suspension is meaningless until the players resume training on 6 January, simply because everyone is effectively suspended on pay during holidays.

The club has to tread very carefully because the players and sponsors will be unhappy if he resumes pre season training, but to not allow him to train implies a finding.

I make no finding unless he is charged and a court finding is made other than stupidity.
I am annoyed like hell that he has placed himself in this position.
Unfortunately stupidity does not disqualify a person from being a good footballer.
Unfortunately natural selection does not prevent stupid women going home with stupid footballers.

agreed...

I really cant see why SENsaintsational thinks that the AFL will step in over what ever the Club has/will do.....

And yes, as I have mentioned the players are off on a short leave period atm and the suspension means jack....

But again, I feel sure the Club is on the front foot and what ever is discovered it would be dealt by the Club and not the AFL FFS.....

Again, if Lovett has a case to answer for, so be it, and the Club would no doubt act accordingly and I fail to see why the AFL would intervene...

accordingly...

If some players have expressed that they don't wish to play with Lovett, albeit hearsay and before any legal recommendation .....

F*** them .....

So if players dont want to play with him because they actually know what happened then you say F*** them. That makes no sense at all. if they dont want to play with him then Lovett is gawn. Simple as that. Unless Lovett isnt charged the club will have to make a decision way before the case goes to court so that will be made in consultation with the players so the club will need them on side. Up to 4 people really know what happened maybe even 2 but that player who was with Lovett will have a huge bearing on Lovett's future because we arent going to wait for the court's to decide.

[saintly]

http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2009 ... 782964.htm

Just spotted this article that says Lovett is expected to be charged. Doesn't sound good....

Depends what the DPP says who wouldn't even have had the interview info yet.

what does "charged on summons" mean?

[saintly]

Well I feel much more confident he will play with us this year now, due to the fact we've sent the heavies in (David Grace).

IF the club seriously were already jack of Lovett, they wouldn't have put this much effort (and expense) into the case.

IMO the club desperately wants Lovett to play, and will do all possible to make it happen.

maybe it wasn't stkilda that brought in David Grace but Lovett or his management?

[markp]

So if players dont want to play with him because they actually know what happened then you say F*** them. That makes no sense at all. if they dont want to play with him then Lovett is gawn. Simple as that. Unless Lovett isnt charged the club will have to make a decision way before the case goes to court so that will be made in consultation with the players so the club will need them on side. Up to 4 people really know what happened maybe even 2 but that player who was with Lovett will have a huge bearing on Lovett's future because we arent going to wait for the court's to decide.

I think you're right, the report and impression from the player(s) present will be vital.

This isn't just a case of a simple personality clash, we are talking about the most serious allegations imaginable.

To stand behind him and let him play the Club would want to be very confident that he will be cleared...

It will be very challenging to market the Club and the brand with this hanging over it anyway... impossible if he's training/playing and his teammates think he's guilty, or if he is likely to be found so.

On a minor aside, we all know what we (and the team) are going to cop from oppo fans this coming season too....

[joffaboy]

So if players dont want to play with him because they actually know what happened then you say F*** them.

I think if there is any witness that knows something about the case, they should go straight to the police. If a player knows what happens and now doesn't want to play with Lovett, you are implying that the crime took place - very dangerous to impy this while police are investigating

That makes no sense at all. if they dont want to play with him then Lovett is gawn.

You mean like Akermanis at Brisbane all through their premiership years, or Edwards and Mcleod at Adelaide???

I understand what you are saying, but you are telling us that the players, once again run the club - is this correct?

Up to 4 people really know what happened maybe even 2 but that player who was with Lovett will have a huge bearing on Lovett's future because we arent going to wait for the court's to decide.

If four people really know what happened have they, or are they going to be interviewed by police?

The inference from your post is that Lovett is guilty as charged. Are you suggesting that Lovett will try to beat the charge, but players at the club know he is guilty even if there is insufficinent evidence?

Any of those players know what happened in the Milne and Montagna scandal? The one were no charges were laid for insufficient evidence?

Still I believe Lovett has burnt his bridges and if guilty, playing football or not will be the least of his worries.

[stinger]

I really don't think Grumps was baiting, but I maybe wrong...

There are many posters that know the legal system and the amount of work that's required to prepare a brief of evidence on this forum...

I have offered my opinion and their maybe others that think the same or have different views, it's just an opinion...

yeah he was...anytime he wants to put his money were his mouth is we can resolve that little issue.....just give one of the mods a thousand bucks...i'll do the same....

[SENsei]

My view expressed above is that the AFL will have a big say in the way St Kilda handles this situation.

The precedent was set with Ben Cousins. He had broken no rules but was arrested and charged. Sacked straight away by West Coast and then suspended for 12mths by the AFL (deregistered most likely).

And then the charges were dropped.


Make no mistake, if Lovett is charged, he will be suspended pending his court case at the behest of the AFL. Whether he is found guilty in the long run will be largely irrelevant, because the AFL will not allow a charged alleged sex offender to wear the AFL logo.

My view only. Take it or leave it.

[stinger]

I believe we will wait until more comes out about the situation. It all depends on the timing.

If he is found not guilty in the near future, he will resume his position.

If he is found guilty in the near future, he will be sacked (we will not hesitate).

If it is going to take an extended period to decide the verdict he will be allowed to resume his position until a decision is made. If it is guilty he will be sacked and if he is not guilty he will continue with us.

It's just the most logical way to deal with it. We are just stalling until we find out more.

if he is charged it will take many months ..or years to resolve.....

[SENsei]

And remember one further thing regarding the AFL and Cousins and the precedent.

Cousins has never tested positive, never been charged with a serious crime, never hurt a third party (to my knowledge).

Suspended 12months.

Lovett could be potentially charged with two of the above three acts shortly.

No way the AFL will let St Kilda play him IMO if he's charged, regardless of what St Kilda want to do. He's got to be AFL registered first.