Breaking News:Cousins Officially Deregistered from the AFL

[King Elvis]

****ing AFL.

I hope Cousins sues their pants off (when he's done with Diaz).

 

[happy_eagle]

****ing AFL.

I hope Cousins sues their pants off (when he's done with Diaz).

and kills sonny forelli

 

[King Elvis]

and kills sonny forelli

I don't know who he is, but yea, **** him.

 

[roger explosion]

and kills sonny forelli

not many others are going to get that joke... but those that do, will agree - f***ing hilarious.

 

[dogeatdog]

in the states a repeat offender in the NBA gets a 6 game suspension for firing a firearm in public but i guess that's par for the course over there

 

[trippin]

Cousins pass or fail
ii.) Private Behaviour of a Criminal Nature: Miserable Fail

Remembering that this isn't France, and you are innocent until proven guilty here... exactly what criminal behavior has he partaken in?

 

[Dylan12]

Is it no longer a prerequisite to be a lawyer to be even a little literate? You're the one who pretended to be a lawyer. Any graduate of a law school would be ashamed to put their name to the twaddle you wrote in the post in which you described how you were rooting a woman in Ben Cousins' car while he ran away from the police.

Your every attempt at the language, as evidenced above, exposes you as a person who would never be employed in any profession which dealt with words. Then again, maybe you are employed in that profession. If you are, I need provide no further evidence than your own utterances of why I hold that profession in such contempt.

Edit: Is it OK if I call you a moron?

Absolutely imperative that one structures their post as if they are publishing it? I don't post crap, but if you do comment on something that you know is fact, it helps to paint the picture, apologies if it was too graphic for you.

That is a massive generalisation you have for a whole industry and people within it that you need to label everyone within it whores, really says more about you. No problem what you call me, water off a ducks back, you are doing a fine job big noting yourself by getting personal.

 

[BEEarcher]

Marion Jones never failed a drug test. She was still a cheat.

The fact that he never failed a test is largely irrelevant as we know he actively took drugs.

Cousins betrayed his team and his mates. I have little sympathy for his flight, justified or not.

Carlton never failed the the salary cap as we know the 95 premiership is still tainted.

The fact that Pratt failed a business ethics course is largely irrelivant as we know he actively ruined peoples businesses and livelihoods (families).

Carlton betrayed the AFL and their supporters. I have little sympathy for your team, juddified or not

Ben was one part of West Coast (a big one at that) but so was Elliott and now that someone called a Pratt!

 

[Prem87]

With Cousins now deregistered can WC still use Pick 54 now?

 

[BEEarcher]

No he is on the list until after the National Draft.

 

[rusdid24]

You have answered the question yourself: If the "punishment" handed down by the AFL was an indefinite suspension and/or de-registration, would that not constitute a restraint of trade? That would be a clear breach of the TPA in my view.

Because it's a punishment handed down by a body that has ultimate control over its members (of which Cousins is one), I don't think he would ultimately be successful.
For the courts to even listen to him seriously, he would have to go down every road of appeal the AFL provides (don't know what they would be in this instance as the situation is unprecedented) and I still think they would rule that he got a fair go from the AFL. They've done it that many times in the past with previous cases the precedent is set in stone.

Remembering that this isn't France, and you are innocent until proven guilty here... exactly what criminal behavior has he partaken in?

Failure to give a blood test is against the law. Boom.

 

[trippin]

Failure to give a blood test is against the law. Boom.

So is speeding, but thats not a criminal act now is it... as far as I can tell (from reading the bill) the penalty for a first offense is only a fine and 6 months license suspension.

 

[Gunnar Longshanks]

OH please, here we go with "little Benny has never done anything wrong".

Benny Cousins has done plenty wrong.

But everyone was happy to let him play on in 2008 until his most recent episode.

No-one was talking about delistings or disrepute charges after WC lost to Port, or after Juddas skipped town or after Mainwaring died. Cousins was set to play in 2008. I don't see how anyone could disagree with that.

And then he got arrested in Perth. That episode changed everything. It was the catalyst for his delisting and this disrepute charge. That one incident swung Cousins from required, AFL-approved player to disreputable delistee.

But what did he actually do on that occasion?

The drugs charges were dropped.

So how can that particular incident justify the dramatic shift in attitude towards Cousins, from both the AFL and the Eagles?

It's as though both the AFL and the Eagles have said, "We've worn so much heat over Cousins already, we don't even need to know the facts or observe due process when dealing with his arrest."

Regardless of Cousins' form, both league and club should have made sure that Cousins actually did something wrong in his latest episode before ending his career. Cousins was on his last chance. All the more reason to verify that he actually messed up.

The AFL and the Eagles look like they crossed their legs for as long as they could, and then blew their loads the moment a mosquito landed on their crotch.

 

[lazy]

I must admit, setting a dangerous precedent here - It could be argued that other players should also be up on this charge. What about the woman beaters? They are given the big thumbs up to play on. Nice work AFL.

I think the soccer Mums would be more concerned about them than Little Benny who keeps us all entertained all off season. AFL should pay him for keeping them in the news here in Sydney.

 

[Vinnie Vegas]

How could you prove such a thing in court? There is no way to accurately and legitimatley measure that.
This idea of bringing down the reputation of the game is such an abstract concept that to de-register anyone on the basis of it is a laugh.

Not really - It basically conforms to the same burden of proof as defamation cases, and those are "proven" all the time. Essentially the idea is along the lines that Ben Cousin's actions, and the media coverage they drew "defamed" the AFL.

what pisses me off about this is they charge cousins but you could easily charge fev, didak, farmer etc etc and they'd all be guilty on these grounds, but the AFL pick and choose who to charge, depending on whether it suits their agenda

Yes, it's discretionary - Ben Cousins is the only one of those players who has consistently had the SAME criminal charges being levelled at him, and has had everyone in the world of sport talking about drugs in the AFL for the last 12-18 months constantly.

So when does Demetrispew get charged for that, letting 7 have the rights is his first crime under that theory with more to come

Don't you remember - Everyone was in favour of Channel 7 getting the rights back because Channel Eddie's coverage was SO intolerable

 

[Adrian1]

he has not been deregistered.

in fact at this stage he has not even be delisted from the Eagles officially. List lodgements were put in and he has not been taken off as yet because they are unsure of how to handle it all in the cap if he sues them.

 

[evo]

I move that KB and his rules commitee also be charged with bringing the game into disrepute over his recent implementaion of the in -the-back/touching an arm when spoiling rule.

And furthermore Matthew Lloyd also be charged with the same offense for repeatedly and malicously diving without cause over a protracted period.

 

[skilts]

Absolutely imperative that one structures their post as if they are publishing it? I don't post crap, but if you do comment on something that you know is fact, it helps to paint the picture, apologies if it was too graphic for you.

That is a massive generalisation you have for a whole industry and people within it that you need to label everyone within it whores, really says more about you. No problem what you call me, water off a ducks back, you are doing a fine job big noting yourself by getting personal.

You won't be offended if I call you a moron then? If you can't stand the heat, don't start namecalling you twerp. Your initial post was indecipherable and contributed nothing to the thread.

FWIW, the highlighted sentence should, in fact, be two sentences, if you were thinking of writing for publication. The industry to which you purport to belong has let its standards slip abysmally, if one were to take you at face value.

 

[likka]

I move that KB and his rules commitee also be charged with bringing the game into disrepute over his recent implementaion of the in -the-back/touching an arm when spoiling rule.

Add the goal of the year selection to his list of charges too... disgraceful.

 

[likka]

Benny Cousins has done plenty wrong.

Agree, and the damage done to the game and AFL brand has been cumulative. Each indescretion has dug him into a deeper hole.

But everyone was happy to let him play on in 2008 until his most recent episode.

Only under the strictest of conditions, even the slightest slip and he was gone. He was aware of this. He agreed with this. He signed off on this. He went into the off season with his eyes wide open.

No-one was talking about delistings or disrepute charges after WC lost to Port, or after Juddas skipped town or after Mainwaring died. Cousins was set to play in 2008. I don't see how anyone could disagree with that.

Only under the strictest of conditions, even the slightest slip and he was gone. I doubt there were clauses within these conditions that excused his behaviour due to "personal circumstances".

And then he got arrested in Perth. That episode changed everything. It was the catalyst for his delisting and this disrepute charge. That one incident swung Cousins from required, AFL-approved player to disreputable delistee.

But what did he actually do on that occasion?

Fraternising with his bikey gang criminal mates, and refusing a blood test in which there was a very high likelyhood he had an illicit drug in his system.

FFS he has a close association with organised crime figures and in the past has protected them in a murder investigation. The gang crime task force were following Ben because he was still involved with these proven criminals.

When you hang with criminals you get closely watched by law enforcement, simple logic but Ben doesn't seem to care. The AFL does though and rightly so as it is a blight on the game's image and invested stakeholders.

The drugs charges were dropped.

Immaterial. Still refused a drug test and has not broken ties with organised crime figures in WA.

So how can that particular incident justify the dramatic shift in attitude towards Cousins, from both the AFL and the Eagles?

What part of last chance do you not understand. The agreement to allow him to play had very strict conditions, of which refusing a blood test and maintaining organised crime links violated those conditions.

It's as though both the AFL and the Eagles have said, "We've worn so much heat over Cousins already, we don't even need to know the facts or observe due process when dealing with his arrest."

Those looking at the situation through rose coloured glasses would see it this way.

Regardless of Cousins' form, both league and club should have made sure that Cousins actually did something wrong in his latest episode before ending his career. Cousins was on his last chance. All the more reason to verify that he actually messed up.

He did mess up. Refused a blood test when very high probability of drugs in his system, and maintaining organised crime links to a level where a police task force were following him.

The AFL and the Eagles look like they crossed their legs for as long as they could, and then blew their loads the moment a mosquito landed on their crotch.

No, they have afforded Ben every opportunity to fix up his life and keep playing footy. Probably too many given what a mess of his life he has made. Nobody else playing today would have received as many "last chances" after serious off field indescretions. He should not complain, but the arrogant, selfish twat still will.

AFL is required to protect the image of the game and the investment of their stakeholders. This was the main reason for the strictest of conditions outlined before Ben was allowed back into the game. Ben broke those conditions and now the club and AFL must act.

Face it people, Ben blew it and only has himself to blame for ending his AFL career. Hopefully he can beat his addictions and successfully rebuild his life... time will tell.

 

[rockape]

what i wanna know is how much did the eagles board pay the afl to back them up. cousins has done nuffin. drug charges were dropped against him. whay did the eagles want cousins out of the afl so bad?? did they have something to hide or did benny uncover somethin. either way this poor guy has been rail roaded. its pathetic and i hope he sues both west coast and the afl. where is the players association in all of this ?? why aint they backing ben cousins and talking care of him. now i know that the players association is a made up organisation for ex footballers so they have a income.

 

[rockape]

juytyu

 

[likka]

cousins has done nuffin.

LOL, the defense rests its case

 

[campbell]

LOL, the defense rests its case

mmm , exactly.

The AFL has full power in this sort of charge, they can bring any penalty down, on both him, and club. It depends on exactly what he says as to how this affects West Coast.

 

[drjimminez]

I think we as fans should charge the AFL administration with bringing the game into disrepute!!!

*hands in the back
*17th licence
*stand over tactics
*making the game like netball
*taking out the biff



Lets take vlad on!

The players association have backed cousins and said they will support him in his efforts to play again.