Andrew Lovett - suspended indefinately

Remove this Banner Ad

I certainly wouldn't say I'm a Lyon apologist but my take on it is pretty straight forward. I believe Lovett has been banished not because he allegedly sexually assulted a woman, but because the assult happened in a teamates home/bed & involved a woman who was known to the players. I would think that the reaction from Stkilda may have been different if the incident occured at a different location & had no connection to any other players in the group.

Its a bit like the whole Carey incident. The problem wasn't that Carey had sex with a married woman, the problem was that it was his teamates wife. StKilda backed Milne & Montagna but would they have done the same if it happened in Riewoldt's place to one of Steph's friends & he knew the details of what really happened? I certainly get the impression from Stkilda's reaction that because there was another player present they know a lot more about the story than the media. I believe they have banished Lovett because the players have already decided they don't want him around & Stkilda have rightly determined the groups welfare is more important than an individual player who has brought the scorn upon himself.

Not sure if that covers your search for details but its my take on it & I'm sure its one that some Saints fans will agree with. While I don't agree with the principle of suspending Lovett before the courts have heard the case I think Stkilda has no choice but to keep him away from the rest of the group or risk major disruption & disharmony with other players. Personally I'd love for that group to be in dissarray but I can't criticise them for trying to prevent it.
Good post.

One thing to clarify though, you're post implies by saying "know what really happened" and similar wording that Lovett is guilty. Just want to point out that even if Gram and the victim are friends, and Gram thinks he knows the truth, he might be wrong. (I suspect not, but what the hell do I know!).

However, for your key point it doesn't make much difference. Whether Gram knows the truth, or just a version he believes, he'd act exactly the same and be pretty much against having Lovett play with them.


Which would all mean that if Lovett isn't charged or is found not guilty, that St Kilda could be in one hell of a mess if the playing group wants nothing to do with him but he hadn't trangressed according to the law. Becomes very very messy.
 
I wish people would just stick to the topic and simply come up with reasonable countering arguments when they disagree with somebody, rather than getting obver emotional.

Is that what you call it?

Others would suggest you just make things up.
 

Log in to remove this ad.

So where are we at?

Given the time thats passed a charge seems unlikely.

There are trickles of info that the players and a certain players good friend arent in Lovetts corner. Also coach Egg on his Face hasnt spoken to AL since the 'incident'. A return to the fold seems unlikely.

Any termination would likely mean a payout given the AFLPAs stand via the Grievance Procedure. The mysterious 2nd strike appears to be a figment of the St Kilda sheep imagination.

baaaa


"St Kilda CEO Michael Nettlefold said the sacking was unrelated to the rape charge, but that Lovett's behaviour in the off-season was unacceptable and had brought the club into disrepute."
 
But what about this second strike that the sheep on here have been rabitting on about? The contract clause? Shouldnt have been out drinking? Not elaborating? Why not? Maybe because its poppycock?

baaaa ;)
 
baaaa


"St Kilda CEO Michael Nettlefold said the sacking was unrelated to the rape charge, but that Lovett's behaviour in the off-season was unacceptable and had brought the club into disrepute."
it just so happened - by coincidence of course - that his sacking comes the day after he was charged....
 
it just so happened - by coincidence of course - that his sacking comes the day after he was charged....

I'm sure there's a quote in the preceeding 600 posts about not wanting to prejudice Lovett's Police investigation.
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

i saw a quote that i disagreed with.

Am i not allowed to point that out on a forum?

oh and it's 2 players now :)

Yes you are , and I'm allowed to tell you to get over it. Luke Ball is the subject of many other threads, and nothing at all to do with an Andrew Lovett thread, so I suspect you are simply trolling.

Ohhh woe is StKilda, If only we'd traded for Tyson Goldsack we'd be a genuine shot at the flag this year. :rolleyes:
 
Yes you are , and I'm allowed to tell you to get over it. Luke Ball is the subject of many other threads, and nothing at all to do with an Andrew Lovett thread, so I suspect you are simply trolling.

Ohhh woe is StKilda, If only we'd traded for Tyson Goldsack we'd be a genuine shot at the flag this year. :rolleyes:

I think he means the youngster who could have been picked up with pick 16......
 

Remove this Banner Ad

Andrew Lovett - suspended indefinately

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top