Don't want, (or need) to start a new thread - still want to post it though

[Markfs]

Did they sign him to a 5 year deal? Ouch.


On iPhone using BigFooty.com mobile app

Its a shame that the media doesnt interview stepho about his post pie years, as they have with adam treloar. I'd like to hear about how he is going and whether he is achieving his goals and whether small children down the shop tell him that he is still their favourite pie player.....

 

[VinnieB]

Did they sign him to a 5 year deal? Ouch.


On iPhone using BigFooty.com mobile app

Yeah a pity at $500k pa. He is just such an outside player that he is basically useless unless he is in a team that have players who can win the ball and get it out to him.

It's no surprise he played his best footy when the Pies were firing in 2018 and 2019. When we slowed down he was useless.

 

[stormskye]

It’s great reading stevos thread on their board, the first few pages of excitement and “steal”

 

[Black_White]

Good doco about the Big Ben restoration project on SBS.
If only I could see it….

 

[35Daicos]

The VFL team has been named: VFL Teams Round 10

 

[Maggie5]

Just to follow up my post in the preview thread, I didn't forget the brothers of the two kids that I convinced to be a Pie.

I bought hats for them as well. Yuk Carlton and Richmond.

 

[Lings of Geelong]

The circular results thingy is now complete!

 

[Markfs]

i'm watching robbovision...and i think the disconnect that I'm feeling is also being experienced by Whateley...

Do we watch this purely for the rants...the mindless rants?...i'm just eating dinner thats my excuse..

 

[35Daicos]

I thought this was funny enough to plonk it here (it is a joke BTW)!:

 

[Timmy from Thomastown]

Good to see the AFL crack down on the emotive language over-used by legal counsel on both sides of the fence at the AFL Tribunal. Next step… banning lawyers completely.

 

[Markfs]

Good to see the AFL crack down on the emotive language over-used by legal counsel on both sides of the fence at the AFL Tribunal. Next step… banning lawyers completely.

and tthen move onto banning lawyers in other aspects of australian life.... like parliaments and board rooms. Limit them to courts of law where their twisted view of life can be managed by judges.

 

[Timmy from Thomastown]

and tthen move onto banning lawyers in other aspects of australian life.... like parliaments and board rooms. Limit them to courts of law where their twisted view of life can be managed by judges.

I’d be happy with banning adjectives.... sticking with facts and arguing over points of law rather than it being a competition of who can throw in the best insult.

 

[sideswipe]

Good to see the AFL crack down on the emotive language over-used by legal counsel on both sides of the fence at the AFL Tribunal. Next step… banning lawyers completely.

I seem to remember a time when players weren't allowed to be represented by lawyers at the Tribunal? And there were just "player advocates" instead, who were essentially bush lawyers. These days there is enough "legalism" in the rules and procedures that lawyers are definitely needed. Once in a while there are lawyers who get themselves into tribunal hearings who get a bit emotional or are looking to make a bit of a name for themselves - that they copped an indirect whack from the AFL should be a good warning to them going forward.

 

[Markfs]

I’d be happy with banning adjectives.... sticking with facts and arguing over points of law rather than it being a competition of who can throw in the best insult.

I just dont think the extra law schools of the last couple of decades and the consequential extra graduates has produced done much positive for society.

In more football related matters, I think the legalistic interpretation of the AFL rules hasn't improved clarity....in fact it has made the various contact rules appear pretty stupid.

In the old days lay people used to make general judgements about guilt and punishments and I think they did a better job.

 

[Markfs]

I seem to remember a time when players weren't allowed to be represented by lawyers at the Tribunal? And there were just "player advocates" instead, who were essentially bush lawyers. These days there is enough "legalism" in the rules and procedures that lawyers are definitely needed. Once in a while there are lawyers who get themselves into tribunal hearings who get a bit emotional or are looking to make a bit of a name for themselves - that they copped an indirect whack from the AFL should be a good warning to them going forward.

There is a comparison to be made with employment law where lay people have been replaced by lawyers and the end product is legalistic outcomes and employment contracts that can only be interpreted by the lawyers that wrote them....and more work....and more expense...

I think the great thing about having bush lawyers is that the bush can understand the outcomes of tribunal decisions. After all, the game is there for the great unwashed.....well it used to be at least.

 

[sideswipe]

I just dont think the extra law schools of the last couple of decades and the consequential extra graduates has produced done much positive for society.

In more football related matters, I think the legalistic interpretation of the AFL rules hasn't improved clarity....in fact it has made the various contact rules appear pretty stupid.

In the old days lay people used to make general judgements about guilt and punishments and I think they did a better job.

Can you show us where the lawyers hurt you?

Suggesting to go back to some sort of "old timey" tribunal is just silly. You know why the tribunal/appeals process appears more legalistic now compared to say 20/30 years ago? Because the old system was too loose and when the stakes got high enough (eg. suspensions in finals), clubs would take challenges to court. You want to go back to that?

 

[Markfs]

Can you show us where the lawyers hurt you?

Suggesting to go back to some sort of "old timey" tribunal is just silly. You know why the tribunal/appeals process appears more legalistic now compared to say 20/30 years ago? Because the old system was too loose and when the stakes got high enough (eg. suspensions in finals), clubs would take challenges to court. You want to go back to that?

They can still take it to court, as players can take clubs to court for not being allowed to move clubs freely. But they dont do it because the clubs abide by the system, not because the lawyers are delivering a better product.

And yes I must be silly and I suppose I'm a coward too.... it seems you use similar strategies as your lawyer mates to make your arguments.

The problem with lawyers entering the field - well one of the problems - is that they dont clarify things, they just complicate them unnecessarily. And while a murderer on death row might want that level of detail, this is footy.

 

[sideswipe]

They can still take it to court, as players can take clubs to court for not being allowed to move clubs freely. But they dont do it because the clubs abide by the system, not because the lawyers are delivering a better product.

And yes I must be silly and I suppose I'm a coward too.... it seems you use similar strategies as your lawyer mates to make your arguments.

The problem with lawyers entering the field - well one of the problems - is that they dont clarify things, they just complicate them unnecessarily. And while a murderer on death row might want that level of detail, this is footy.

No. The tribunal and appeals board process has been established in such a way to prevent a court action from being effectively launched. The restraint of trade area has been pretty much kiboshed by the CBA, but that is too big a topic to get into.

As to the rest of it, well, once the money gets big enough, parties want to protect/enforce their rights. That's where the lawyers come in. Don't be a crybaby if your wish for a non-legal tribunal system is called silly. Because that is exactly what it is.

 

[Markfs]

No. The tribunal and appeals board process has been established in such a way to prevent a court action from being effectively launched. The restraint of trade area has been pretty much kiboshed by the CBA, but that is too big a topic to get into.

As to the rest of it, well, once the money gets big enough, parties want to protect/enforce their rights. That's where the lawyers come in. Don't be a crybaby if your wish for a non-legal tribunal system is called silly. Because that is exactly what it is.

i'm not crying. To me, it would be like getting upset by a video game...

And as for your informative display of knowledge, whatever the process and the rules or the boards established yada yada yada, might be stuff of legal masturbation but who cares.... the clubs dont use the courts.

And yes i do agree that when the money gets big, the lawyers come in. Unfortunately, we cant go back to the semi-amateur days because that would mean that there would be no money in the game and lawyers wouldnt be interested....of course..

At any rate, you can have another post to do your lawyer routine ...and i'll go to spotlight to buy a quilt cover..

 

[Timmy from Thomastown]

Not sure there’s any evidence that going back to the old tribunal ways is better. Generally they come out with the right result these days.

But lawyers need to remember it’s not a courtroom. Courtroom antics are not needed and not welcome.

Present your case, leave the adjectives and personality analysis out of it, and then shut up and leave it to football people make football decisions.

 

[Dynamics]

The reaction has been pretty universal - both parties used OTT personal language that no one besides those lawyers wants to hear in relation to what was actually being discussed.

Following the AFL's apology I'd be mildly surprised if those tactics aren't very much wound back. At least for a while. And here's hoping that's just what happens.

 

[sideswipe]

Not sure there’s any evidence that going back to the old tribunal ways is better. Generally they come out with the right result these days.

But lawyers need to remember it’s not a courtroom. Courtroom antics are not needed and not welcome.

Present your case, leave the adjectives and personality analysis out of it, and then shut up and leave it to football people make football decisions.

It's by no means perfect, and many might not agree with the actual penalties set out, but the Grading Table makes things a lot more predictable.

 

[Earl Hickey]

For anyone that follows the horses, I black booked the horse Floreat Pica a while back and it managed to salute up in Darwin today. Thought I would put it out there if anyone else wants to follow it.
Please gamble responsibly*


On iPhone using BigFooty.com mobile app

 

[CaptainHowdy87]

It’s great reading stevos thread on their board, the first few pages of excitement and “steal”

They're having a meltdown about him in their gameday thread at the moment

 

[Timmy from Thomastown]

Congratulations to Michael Taylor for being inducted as member of the AFL Hall of Fame for his 94 games with Collingwood in the 70s 80s including the 81 grand final.

Apparently he also played for Norwood.