DogDaySonny
Club Legend
- May 4, 2023
- 1,151
- 2,944
- AFL Club
- Hawthorn
For the record, I thought Hawthorn argued the case as well as was possible.
Hawthorn's two points are absolutely correct. But if the AFL is able to respond with "because I said so" to any challenge then there is no way to win in that forum. And I wonder what the AFL constitution and club agreements allow in terms of challenging "because I said so" rulings. It could be that the rules governing the body are so bent that the AFL can do anything it deems appropriate and the clubs have no recourse. I know that Carlton took them to court and won, but I also bet that the AFL changed whatever it was in the charter/constitution that made that possible. And they probably could make those changes without club input, just using the AFL board.
- The AFL didn't consider or explain the classifying as they are supposed to. Response: "Just because we don't say we did doesn't mean it didn't happen."
- The AFL didn't consider the expert testimony. Response: "It doesn't matter if we did or not since we don't believe it would make a material difference, despite not looking at it. Also, past players know better, so there."
Hawthorn's two points are absolutely correct. But if the AFL is able to respond with "because I said so" to any challenge then there is no way to win in that forum. And I wonder what the AFL constitution and club agreements allow in terms of challenging "because I said so" rulings. It could be that the rules governing the body are so bent that the AFL can do anything it deems appropriate and the clubs have no recourse. I know that Carlton took them to court and won, but I also bet that the AFL changed whatever it was in the charter/constitution that made that possible. And they probably could make those changes without club input, just using the AFL board.