lane sinks slipper over player being exited out...

[Milan Faletic]

Maybe the Lanes should interview the alleged victim.

[GrumpyOne]

i don't see how a rational person can bring the Milne & Monty saga into this.

You can't paint all sexual assualts under the 1 brush

Unless you are a complete and total moron.

As we saw on this site last week.

Of course you can't compare the M&M matter to this.

After all, M&M are white.

And they had the backing of the Saints Franchise Player.

They had the backing of the then coach.

And they corroborated each others evidence.

No similarity really.

[perfectionist]

Obviously people have different perceptions. I have always regarded Tim Lane as an excellent commentator (football, cricket and athletics). His interviews in the good old days on the ABC on a Saturday afternoon were the highlight of the footy week (for me at least). Whatever the main footy story of the week was, he would get the nitty gritty in a fearless and frank way. No pussy footing for Tim.

I have never noticed any Carlton bias (like Eddie's Collingwood bias) or anti St Kilda bias (like the man who replaced Tim at the ABC, Gerard Whateley).

His opinion pieces in The Age each week seek to cut the sensationalism and provide a balanced perspective. Most times I agree with his conclusions but sometimes I don't, but so what.

Our three best TV footy commentators, by a long way, are Tim, Bruce and Dennis. The fact that they are all around my age, with absolutely no-one emerging from the younger generation is interesting in a number of ways, but just goes to show how difficult the job is. There is no other sport where such commentating skills are required (horse racing is not a sport). Not only do you need to have a good voice, but you need to describe things a split second after they have happened with no ums and ahs (Tony Abbott need not apply).

I can no longer listen to either football or cricket on the radio and, for that, I blame Tim Lane.

[SainterK]

I agree actually Perfectionist, and they are much older than me

I get frustrated with channel 7 and it's unwillingness to bring footy live, but the commentary is of a good standard. I also liked Tom Harley with special comments, and judging from Richo's interview with Roo, I think his relaxed and friendly demeanour is actually going to get a bit more out of players which will be interesting.

[perfectionist]

...judging from Richo's interview with Roo, I think his relaxed and friendly demeanour is actually going to get a bit more out of players which will be interesting.

Yep, I noticed that too. While never a great fan of him as a player, he seemed to be "a natural" in his new role. Whilst on field interviewers can't be expected to ask in depth questions, so many ask exceedingly dumb questions. On current evidence, not so with Richo.

[Animal Enclosure]

i don't see how a rational person can bring the Milne & Monty saga into this.

You can't paint all sexual assualts under the 1 brush

Unless you are a complete and total moron.

As we saw on this site last week.

Of course you can't compare the M&M matter to this.

After all, M&M are white.

And they had the backing of the Saints Franchise Player.

They had the backing of the then coach.

And they corroborated each others evidence.

No similarity really.

And the alleged victim's friend denied any assault took place didn't help the 'case' either.

[Con Gorozidis]

Tim Lane's last point is:

If Lovett is found not guilty of the charge, the Saints may have to defend themselves against a torrent of criticism.

Which is true, but not, I suspect, from Saints Supporters who are (mostly) glad that the issue of his playing future at the club is settled.

i think they may face some legal action. but i dont think we will face any criticism at all. will just be lawyers milking the system for extra cash - but i think everyone knows saints have done the right thing.

lets face it the guy was a saints player for 5 minutes.


lane just hates the saints.

[Hurricane]

Ive long since accepted that Tim Lame and most of his fellow media buddies write opinions or straight out lies rather than go to the hassle of actually reserching a story.

Lets face it with the Luke Ball saga and the Lovett case St Kilda are seen as a soft target for Saints haters and every half assed jurno looking for an easy story.

Personally I couldnt care less what the write about us. Opinions are like assholes we all have them and in terms of the media that usually describes who is writing the story....also they are almost always full of s***

BANG BANG

[HarveysDeciple]

i don't see how a rational person can bring the Milne & Monty saga into this.

You can't paint all sexual assualts under the 1 brush

Unless you are a complete and total moron.

As we saw on this site last week.

Of course you can't compare the M&M matter to this.

After all, M&M are white.

And they had the backing of the Saints Franchise Player.

They had the backing of the then coach.

And they corroborated each others evidence.

No similarity really.

So you honestly think colour is an issue?

Race issue is not usually created by those in the incident, but by people who jump and shadows whilst observing from the outside.

Milne and Montagna had been on the list for 3 and 4 years respectively.

They had credits in the bank, were respected members of the team, and went straight to the club's management and coaching staff with the problem they were confronted with, co-operated fully.

Lovett came to the club with several players reportedly unsure of the merits of it, he had several "priors" at Essendon for lack of discipline etc, and was always going to be on a tight leash.

Twice he stuffed up within a month of walking in the door, he also reportedly failed to contact the relevant people at the club, and spat in the face of a football club that gave him a second chance.

It's different not because he is black (and when ever someone's skin colour is different, the race card automatically gets played). It is different because it is different.

[Dr Spaceman]

i don't see how a rational person can bring the Milne & Monty saga into this.

You can't paint all sexual assualts under the 1 brush

Unless you are a complete and total moron.

As we saw on this site last week.

Of course you can't compare the M&M matter to this.

After all, M&M are white.

And they had the backing of the Saints Franchise Player.

They had the backing of the then coach.

And they corroborated each others evidence.

No similarity really.

So you honestly think colour is an issue?

The race issue is not usually created by those in the incident, but by people who jump at shadows whilst observing from the outside.

Milne and Montagna had been on the list for 3 and 4 years respectively.

They had credits in the bank, were respected members of the team, and went straight to the club's management and coaching staff with the problem they were confronted with, co-operated fully.

Lovett came to the club with several players reportedly unsure of the merits of it, he had several "priors" at Essendon for lack of discipline etc, and was always going to be on a tight leash.

Twice he stuffed up within a month of walking in the door, he also reportedly failed to contact the relevant people at the club, and spat in the face of a football club that gave him a second chance.

It's different not because he is black (and when ever someone's skin colour is different, the race card automatically gets played). It is different because it is different.

Exactly!

[Sainterman]

i don't see how a rational person can bring the Milne & Monty saga into this.

You can't paint all sexual assualts under the 1 brush

Unless you are a complete and total moron.

As we saw on this site last week.

Of course you can't compare the M&M matter to this.

After all, M&M are white.

And they had the backing of the Saints Franchise Player.

They had the backing of the then coach.

And they corroborated each others evidence.

No similarity really.

So you honestly think colour is an issue?

Race issue is not usually created by those in the incident, but by people who jump and shadows whilst observing from the outside.

Milne and Montagna had been on the list for 3 and 4 years respectively.

They had credits in the bank, were respected members of the team, and went straight to the club's management and coaching staff with the problem they were confronted with, co-operated fully.

Lovett came to the club with several players reportedly unsure of the merits of it, he had several "priors" at Essendon for lack of discipline etc, and was always going to be on a tight leash.

Twice he stuffed up within a month of walking in the door, he also reportedly failed to contact the relevant people at the club, and spat in the face of a football club that gave him a second chance.

It's different not because he is black (and when ever someone's skin colour is different, the race card automatically gets played). It is different because it is different.

Spot on HD. I can't for the life of me understand why anyone thinks otherwise. Perhaps Grumpy and looking for a release on the issue.

[GrumpyOne]

i don't see how a rational person can bring the Milne & Monty saga into this.

You can't paint all sexual assualts under the 1 brush

Unless you are a complete and total moron.

As we saw on this site last week.

Of course you can't compare the M&M matter to this.

After all, M&M are white.

And they had the backing of the Saints Franchise Player.

They had the backing of the then coach.

And they corroborated each others evidence.

No similarity really.

So you honestly think colour is an issue?

Race issue is not usually created by those in the incident, but by people who jump and shadows whilst observing from the outside.

Milne and Montagna had been on the list for 3 and 4 years respectively.

They had credits in the bank, were respected members of the team, and went straight to the club's management and coaching staff with the problem they were confronted with, co-operated fully.

Lovett came to the club with several players reportedly unsure of the merits of it, he had several "priors" at Essendon for lack of discipline etc, and was always going to be on a tight leash.

Twice he stuffed up within a month of walking in the door, he also reportedly failed to contact the relevant people at the club, and spat in the face of a football club that gave him a second chance.

It's different not because he is black (and when ever someone's skin colour is different, the race card automatically gets played). It is different because it is different.

Just pointing out some of the differences in the way the two cases were handled HD. Its up to others to draw their own conclusions.

You are relying on information leaked from the club or implied from their official statement in your reply. It would be only natural for the club to back up their position by releasing a few rats under the floorboards. They will after all, probably have to defend their actions in the Supreme Court.

Lovett will have to wait until his court case to give his version of events, in the meantime, the club will continue to blacken (no pun intended) his name at every opportunity.

The captain and the leadership group should come clean on the reasons for their ultimatum to the club, that forced this action.

[plugger66]

i don't see how a rational person can bring the Milne & Monty saga into this.

You can't paint all sexual assualts under the 1 brush

Unless you are a complete and total moron.

As we saw on this site last week.

Of course you can't compare the M&M matter to this.

After all, M&M are white.

And they had the backing of the Saints Franchise Player.

They had the backing of the then coach.

And they corroborated each others evidence.

No similarity really.

So you honestly think colour is an issue?

Race issue is not usually created by those in the incident, but by people who jump and shadows whilst observing from the outside.

Milne and Montagna had been on the list for 3 and 4 years respectively.

They had credits in the bank, were respected members of the team, and went straight to the club's management and coaching staff with the problem they were confronted with, co-operated fully.

Lovett came to the club with several players reportedly unsure of the merits of it, he had several "priors" at Essendon for lack of discipline etc, and was always going to be on a tight leash.

Twice he stuffed up within a month of walking in the door, he also reportedly failed to contact the relevant people at the club, and spat in the face of a football club that gave him a second chance.

It's different not because he is black (and when ever someone's skin colour is different, the race card automatically gets played). It is different because it is different.

Just pointing out some of the differences in the way the two cases were handled HD. Its up to others to draw their own conclusions.

You are relying on information leaked from the club or implied from their official statement in your reply. It would be only natural for the club to back up their position by releasing a few rats under the floorboards. They will after all, probably have to defend their actions in the Supreme Court.

Lovett will have to wait until his court case to give his version of events, in the meantime, the club will continue to blacken (no pun intended) his name at every opportunity.

The captain and the leadership group should come clean on the reasons for their ultimatum to the club, that forced this action.

There is one huge difference between the M and M incident and the AL incident. There may have been an independent witness to the Al incident. No such thing in the other incident and since then one has been charged and the other 2 were never. cannot believe you brought up the colour of their skin. Ridiculous.

[saintspremiers]

TIm Lane needs to start listening back to some of his calls of Carlton games..and wake up that his bias is close to Eddie-esque now. Just one example from last night. Brad Fisher (I think) grabs the ball, runs 3-4 steps, takes on 3 Sydney opponents, gets tackled, drops the ball and gets pinged.

Tim: "Ohh thats harsh..gee he was making the play"

You really must have been bored to have watched that game....or you can always use the excuse "so I heard from someone!".

[GrumpyOne]

i don't see how a rational person can bring the Milne & Monty saga into this.

You can't paint all sexual assualts under the 1 brush

Unless you are a complete and total moron.

As we saw on this site last week.

Of course you can't compare the M&M matter to this.

After all, M&M are white.

And they had the backing of the Saints Franchise Player.

They had the backing of the then coach.

And they corroborated each others evidence.

No similarity really.

So you honestly think colour is an issue?

Race issue is not usually created by those in the incident, but by people who jump and shadows whilst observing from the outside.

Milne and Montagna had been on the list for 3 and 4 years respectively.

They had credits in the bank, were respected members of the team, and went straight to the club's management and coaching staff with the problem they were confronted with, co-operated fully.

Lovett came to the club with several players reportedly unsure of the merits of it, he had several "priors" at Essendon for lack of discipline etc, and was always going to be on a tight leash.

Twice he stuffed up within a month of walking in the door, he also reportedly failed to contact the relevant people at the club, and spat in the face of a football club that gave him a second chance.

It's different not because he is black (and when ever someone's skin colour is different, the race card automatically gets played). It is different because it is different.

Just pointing out some of the differences in the way the two cases were handled HD. Its up to others to draw their own conclusions.

You are relying on information leaked from the club or implied from their official statement in your reply. It would be only natural for the club to back up their position by releasing a few rats under the floorboards. They will after all, probably have to defend their actions in the Supreme Court.

Lovett will have to wait until his court case to give his version of events, in the meantime, the club will continue to blacken (no pun intended) his name at every opportunity.

The captain and the leadership group should come clean on the reasons for their ultimatum to the club, that forced this action.

There is one huge difference between the M and M incident and the AL incident. There may have been an independent witness to the Al incident. No such thing in the other incident and since then one has been charged and the other 2 were never. cannot believe you brought up the colour of their skin. Ridiculous.

There may have been my maiden Aunt Dorothy waving her wooden leg in the air for all we are sure about Plugger.

As for colour, as I replied to HD, I just listed the differences. It is up to each individual to accept or reject any of the differences as being relevant, as you yourself have done.

[evertonfc]

I actually felt Lane made some reasonable points.

I mean, let's be honest, we've judged bloke before the matter has gone to court - it leaves us open to all kinds of liability.

And my guess is that the club will take the payout of Lovett from our own bottom line. I doubt very much that those who sacked him will be paying it from their own pockets.

We've lost so badly on this deal that the subsequent analysis of it all pretty much washes over me. We've lost, badly.

There is no silver lining for this from St Kilda. If we win the flag, it's not because of this.

As far as I'm concerned, the recruitment of Andrew Lovett will cost the club around $2 million and a first-round draft pick.

Who picks up the tab? Your loyal members.

That's so very hard to swallow.

[plugger66]

I actually felt Lane made some reasonable points.

I mean, let's be honest, we've judged bloke before the matter has gone to court - it leaves us open to all kinds of liability.

And my guess is that the club will take the payout of Lovett from our own bottom line. I doubt very much that those who sacked him will be paying it from their own pockets.

We've lost so badly on this deal that the subsequent analysis of it all pretty much washes over me. We've lost, badly.

There is no silver lining for this from St Kilda. If we win the flag, it's not because of this.

As far as I'm concerned, the recruitment of Andrew Lovett will cost the club around $2 million and a first-round draft pick.

Who picks up the tab? Your loyal members.

That's so very hard to swallow.

And you have judged what it will cost us before it has cost us anywhere near the 2 million you speak of. I fail to see how it can cost anything like that anyway.

[GrumpyOne]

I actually felt Lane made some reasonable points.

I mean, let's be honest, we've judged bloke before the matter has gone to court - it leaves us open to all kinds of liability.

And my guess is that the club will take the payout of Lovett from our own bottom line. I doubt very much that those who sacked him will be paying it from their own pockets.

We've lost so badly on this deal that the subsequent analysis of it all pretty much washes over me. We've lost, badly.

There is no silver lining for this from St Kilda. If we win the flag, it's not because of this.

As far as I'm concerned, the recruitment of Andrew Lovett will cost the club around $2 million and a first-round draft pick.

Who picks up the tab? Your loyal members.

That's so very hard to swallow.

And when we lose the Next Grand Final by less than a goal........ there will be two decisions by the Footy Dept that will be questioned.

[evertonfc]

And you have judged what it will cost us before it has cost us anywhere near the 2 million you speak of. I fail to see how it can cost anything like that anyway.

Well, let's be frank - it could be anything from a year's salary (which I assumed pretty much has to be paid out - and we've been paying it since November, anyway) to something far more substantial.

I just feel like it hasn't been a worthwhile distribution of our membership funds. I know the club couldn't have predicted what happened, etc

I'm not pointing the finger, I'm just feeling a touch sour about how things have been handled.

Well done to the club for making a statement. Not so good for moving before the courts have completed their due process. As Lane said, damned if you do/don't.

[GrumpyOne]

And you have judged what it will cost us before it has cost us anywhere near the 2 million you speak of. I fail to see how it can cost anything like that anyway.

Well, let's be frank - it could be anything from a year's salary (which I assumed pretty much has to be paid out - and we've been paying it since November, anyway) to something far more substantial.

I just feel like it hasn't been a worthwhile distribution of our membership funds.

I don't think that's unfair.

The final result will be somewhere between zero (St Kilda's preferred outcome), and $2M (Lovett's preferred outcome).

Far to early to say which end of that scale it will fall at. Until the criminal case is heard, any amount is as suppositional as any other.

[HarveysDeciple]

And you have judged what it will cost us before it has cost us anywhere near the 2 million you speak of. I fail to see how it can cost anything like that anyway.

Well, let's be frank - it could be anything from a year's salary (which I assumed pretty much has to be paid out - and we've been paying it since November, anyway) to something far more substantial.

I just feel like it hasn't been a worthwhile distribution of our membership funds.

I don't think that's unfair.

The final result will be somewhere between zero (St Kilda's preferred outcome), and $2M (Lovett's preferred outcome).

Far to early to say which end of that scale it will fall at. Until the criminal case is heard, any amount is as suppositional as any other.

correct.

[evertonfc]

Until the criminal case is heard, any amount is as suppositional as any other.

correct.

Hence, wouldn't you wait until the court has made the findings?

Guilty = Sack (must be strong grounds for us not paying out here)
Not guilty = trade/settlement/tribunal/etc?

[Richter]

And you have judged what it will cost us before it has cost us anywhere near the 2 million you speak of. I fail to see how it can cost anything like that anyway.

Well, let's be frank - it could be anything from a year's salary (which I assumed pretty much has to be paid out - and we've been paying it since November, anyway) to something far more substantial.

I just feel like it hasn't been a worthwhile distribution of our membership funds.

I don't think that's unfair.

The final result will be somewhere between zero (St Kilda's preferred outcome), and $2M (Lovett's preferred outcome).

Far to early to say which end of that scale it will fall at. Until the criminal case is heard, any amount is as suppositional as any other.

My understanding is that if he had not been sacked then the club would continue to pay his wages, whilst being sacked those wages are not being paid. Agreed that there may need to be a settlement but at least it starts from the position of us not having paid any more money to a man now charged with rape.

Most important reason for the sacking was brought home to me when I turned on the TV news on Friday evening. The headline

SACKED Saint Andrew Lovett charged with rape

From the club's point of view how much better does that sound than...

SAINT'S player Andrew Lovett charged with rape

Whilst every situation can theoretically be seen to have overdetermined causes, for all practical logic one person can only really be held responsible and accountable for Andrew Lovett's behaviour (whatever that was) on Christmas Eve 2009. His name is Andrew Lovett.

In what has happened since I feel pretty comfortable with the club's actions and statements.

[Dr Spaceman]

i don't see how a rational person can bring the Milne & Monty saga into this.

You can't paint all sexual assualts under the 1 brush

Unless you are a complete and total moron.

As we saw on this site last week.

Of course you can't compare the M&M matter to this.

After all, M&M are white.

And they had the backing of the Saints Franchise Player.

They had the backing of the then coach.

And they corroborated each others evidence.

No similarity really.

So you honestly think colour is an issue?

Race issue is not usually created by those in the incident, but by people who jump and shadows whilst observing from the outside.

Milne and Montagna had been on the list for 3 and 4 years respectively.

They had credits in the bank, were respected members of the team, and went straight to the club's management and coaching staff with the problem they were confronted with, co-operated fully.

Lovett came to the club with several players reportedly unsure of the merits of it, he had several "priors" at Essendon for lack of discipline etc, and was always going to be on a tight leash.

Twice he stuffed up within a month of walking in the door, he also reportedly failed to contact the relevant people at the club, and spat in the face of a football club that gave him a second chance.

It's different not because he is black (and when ever someone's skin colour is different, the race card automatically gets played). It is different because it is different.

Just pointing out some of the differences in the way the two cases were handled HD. Its up to others to draw their own conclusions.

You are relying on information leaked from the club or implied from their official statement in your reply. It would be only natural for the club to back up their position by releasing a few rats under the floorboards. They will after all, probably have to defend their actions in the Supreme Court.

Lovett will have to wait until his court case to give his version of events, in the meantime, the club will continue to blacken (no pun intended) his name at every opportunity.

The captain and the leadership group should come clean on the reasons for their ultimatum to the club, that forced this action.

There is one huge difference between the M and M incident and the AL incident. There may have been an independent witness to the Al incident. No such thing in the other incident and since then one has been charged and the other 2 were never. cannot believe you brought up the colour of their skin. Ridiculous.

There may have been my maiden Aunt Dorothy waving her wooden leg in the air for all we are sure about Plugger.

As for colour, as I replied to HD, I just listed the differences. It is up to each individual to accept or reject any of the differences as being relevant, as you yourself have done.

Racial discrimination is easy to allege but difficult to prove.

Do you, or anyone else who believes AL's colour may have been a factor, really believe if the Saints had've picked up a white player with similar ability; with a similar history on and off the track and who had acted in a similar way since his arrival, that the action taken by the club would have been any different? If you do you are being delusional.

You say you have only mentioned AL's colour as being one of the differences, however the fact you have mentioned it all suggests you believe it was a factor. And in doing so you are casting serious slurs against persons involved at the Club.

AL’s history and actions are to blame; not Black AL’s history and actions!

[ace]

i don't see how a rational person can bring the Milne & Monty saga into this.

You can't paint all sexual assualts under the 1 brush

Unless you are a complete and total moron.

As we saw on this site last week.

Of course you can't compare the M&M matter to this.

After all, M&M are white.

And they had the backing of the Saints Franchise Player.

They had the backing of the then coach.

And they corroborated each others evidence.

No similarity really.

And the alleged victim's friend denied any assault took place didn't help the 'case' either.

AND they were innocent, never charged, so never found guilty.