Scape Goat Alleged SPP incident/broken curfew + malicious and exploitative reporting by Channel 7 news

Remove this Banner Ad

Status
Not open for further replies.
Soon players, coaches, administrators will not be allowed to socialize with the general public unless accompanied by the AFL integrity police. It will be the only way it seems to stop some members of the public making accusations about them to the media, police or a workplace officer. What a sad world, everyone seems to want their 15mins of fame no matter at what cost.
 

Log in to remove this ad.

Footy Classified started off with Ross Lyon Freo stuff but they referred back to SPP's case. The video below misses about 30 seconds of a bit of intro and maybe a minute on the end, but Caro covers most of the main points in it. Bloody Paul Marsh has finally made a statement about it, saying he is concerned about the process, but why hasn't he gone and done a presser rather than just issue a statement. The statement is in the video below.

Sam was not allowed to have a legal representative with him when interviewed by AFL Integrity Officer but did have a club representative there. Its a bloody Star Chamber type process. A bit of hyperbole on my part but bloody hell its a judge jury and executioner type process. KT apparently is going to bring it up at the CEO's meeting next week. Koch has already said he will bring it up at the President's meeting and I reckon Eddie will back him.


 
Has the Sturt investigation into its supporters vilifying SPP and Irra been concluded yet? Where is Seven’s lead story on it? Or is the SANFL and every other club supporters held to a lower standard than Port?
It’s being held up while Norwood conclude the Eugene Warrior racial abuse investigation from 2014.
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

The AFL is still copping heat over its double standards in the handling of SPP and Ross Lyon cases.

The hush money paid to the woman who made the sexual harassment claim against Lyon was the focus of the opening story in the Ch7 news in Melbourne last night. Another example of where a cover-up of an incident can bite you hard on the bum. Gil's and the AFL's reputation has taken another hit, and they've only got themselves to blame. They're wishing the story will blow over quickly, but it still has legs.



 
Last edited:
The SPP case is a hatchet job by the media and the AFL. It beggars belief that such a character assassination was allowed under the watch of the AFL who only wanted to punish and not protect SPP and the AFLPA who's silence will not be forgotten. It's too little too late for the AFLPA to be making a statement now. If I was SPP, I'd want my AFLPA membership fees refunded, they failed him.

Channel 7 is liable for their actions and should face the consequences of their malicious reporting.

SPP had no legal representation during the AFL investigation and the club was not allowed to see the Integrity Unit's report (meaning it probably doesn't exist). As I posted earlier, the AFL is not the judicial system and in their attempt to act as judge, jury and executioner, they denied SPP due process. What a cluster****.
 
Footy Classified started off with Ross Lyon Freo stuff but they referred back to SPP's case. The video below misses about 30 seconds of a bit of intro and maybe a minute on the end, but Caro covers most of the main points in it. Bloody Paul Marsh has finally made a statement about it, saying he is concerned about the process, but why hasn't he gone and done a presser rather than just issue a statement. The statement is in the video below.

Sam was not allowed to have a legal representative with him when interviewed by AFL Integrity Officer but did have a club representative there. Its a bloody Star Chamber type process. A bit of hyperbole on my part but bloody hell its a judge jury and executioner type process. KT apparently is going to bring it up at the CEO's meeting next week. Koch has already said he will bring it up at the President's meeting and I reckon Eddie will back him.



First instance of a new process brought to bear in this particular domain and Head of Integrity unit chooses not to watch the video, creating plausible denial for him/herself. Marvelous corporate culture pointer, that. Along with the other bloody "Star Chamber" clause I pointed at earlier. I didn't see where the process explicitly denies a player having any legal rep present but allows a club rep. Ridiculous. I half suspect someone's off the cuff call amounting to little more than on the spot bluffing/bullying.

Apart from the potential negative impact on SPP's state of mind I'd have loved to see what transpired if he'd refused to co-operate without legal present.

Let's watch Gil make absolutely zero comment about fixing any of the process.
 
I suggest this means every club should have a lawyer on staff to be the club rep.
Looking for a job MM?? Its almost getting to the point that each club does need a full time lawyer and full time doctor.
 
The AFL is still copping heat over its double standards in the handling of SPP and Ross Lyon cases.

The hush money paid to the woman who made the sexual harassment claim against Lyon was the focus of the opening story in the Ch7 news in Melbourne last night. Another example of where a cover-up of an incident can bite you hard on the bum. Gil's and the AFL's reputation has taken another hit, and they've only got themselves to blame. They're wishing the story will blow over quickly, but it still has legs.
An outstanding case about how the AFL, by being far too concerned about their reputation to the exclusion of all else, has again trashed their reputation.
 
I assume every board has at least one.
I know Port's board member who is the legal guy, Jamie Restas, I played footy with him, but he is a commercial law expert and whilst I know he would acquit himself well, the interview process is more like a police interview - there are ex coppers in the integrity unit - and you would be better off with having a criminal lawyer than a commercial lawyer attend the interview.
 
So the only thing in common is that this case is also being severely mishandled by the d***heads at AFL House.

Cheers and best of luck against everyone bar us.


Well yes. The only thing in common is the fact that AFL house does whatever it wants, and it will bring all its power against one club seperately. I dont agree with what they did to Essendon, Swans or Port off the top of my head.

and I hate Essendon.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Remove this Banner Ad

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top