-
AFLW 2024 - Round 10 - Chat, game threads, injury lists, team lineups and more.
Can Mike Sheahan do that?
- Thread starter Butane
- Start date
- Tagged users None
The Old Dark Navy's
Moderator
- Moderator
- #52
Mother Teresa. John Howard is a cartoon character so doesn't fit here and the other three are runners?Can anyone pick the odd one out?
Tony Mokbel, Carl Williams, John Howard, West Coast Footballer, Mother Teresa.
WC are a smart club, they will just let this go through to the keeper. Dont dignify Sheehan with a response. You would lose out more than you would gain by challenging this halfwit. If he challenged the whole of Australia would know and it would be big news, even if Fletch did win. Also would upset the club through the season (it would be dragged out for months and months).
- Thread starter
- #54
Yea, sort of a different topic though. I agree they were treated unfairly. But Fletcher gets named for something that 'supposedly' happened and 3 players that were blatantly broke the rules don't.
James_Best
Senior List
because it happened overseas maybe sheahan isnt bound by any aussie media rules...
i could be wrong tho. :/
The Old Dark Navy's
Moderator
- Moderator
- #56
Not sure it is because they got caught either, and being out with someone does not mean you were taking drugs with them. Even Angwin said they were out with them but it is common for teammates to go out to the same places. He didn't get done for being out.
Fact is they turned up under the influence to training, and not for the first time the senior players were sick of Angwin getting away with things. The players apparently went to the club and demanded his axing, rather than going along with the club's enforcement action.
I dont think so, there could have been an issue if Fletcher was overseas now mainly which court would get jurisdiction.
It is bigger than that now. This isn't a minor issue, it won't go away and eventually the eagles and the afl will have to confront it. The head in the sand approach won't work on this issue anymore - as I say, it's bigger than that now.
- Banned
- #59
So you don't think there were senior players out with him that night also under the influence of drugs?
jim boy
Umpires Association Head
- Admin
- #60
True, but that defence doesn't apply to cases where the defendant lies about the circumstances. If WCE lied aboutvomiting due to yellow fever innoculation then they can't sue for someone correcting them.
Boils down to Sheahan and the HUN being confident enough about the allegations, especialy as they were made before in The Age, that they think they can successfully defend any action brought against them. In other words, they are prepared to call WCE's bluff. This isn't a luxury that BigFooty can afford.
Tony Mokbel, Carl Williams, John Howard, West Coast Footballer, Mother Teresa.
Mother Teresa's dead. What do I win?
The Old Dark Navy's
Moderator
- Moderator
- #62
Would call for speculation wouldn't it? If someone is out taking drugs, does that mean that everyone in that group is taking drugs? I can guarantee that my own personal experiences prove this not to be true. Maybe yes, maybe no. I think Angwin has only said that he was out with senior players, not that they were taking them too.
It's not important anyway. I have stated that this is an AFL issue, not a club issue and that no higher moral ground is to be had here.
- Banned
- #63
There is a massive difference.
On one hand, you have a tall from Port, Freo and West Coast who each failed a CONFIDENTIAL drugs test (on more than one occasion)
None of them had broken the law. All they had done was pee in a bottle and have their results leaked.
Then you have another footballer who collapsed from a drug OD while on an end of season trip and was taken to hospital.
Why should he be treated any differenty to Jason Donovan or Anna Nicole Smith?
Personally, I don't care. None of this is news to me. I KNOW what these guys get up to.
But I can see that this is deemed newsworthy by other people.
The real story here is the culture of denial / cover-up / protect the sponsorships by the AFL and its 16 clubs.
They should quit the charade - it's bad for the game.
Here's a pop quiz: since they introduced tests for performance-enhancing drugs, how many footballers have tested positive for steroids?
Just two. Charles and Lynch (let off the hook)
Yeah, riiiiight. Because the AFL is soooooo clean. And they would have no reason to sweep anything under the rug.
It's all bullsh1t... People worried more about their image and money, just like the IOC, who have overseen the Olympics turn into a farce over the past 2 decades.
Allegedly.
All we have at this stage is hearsay. ****e Mike probably just got his info off Andrew Rule's article. We all knew that Fletch got into some trouble in Vegas.
Lets not confuse performance enhancing drugs with recreational drugs.
Recreational drugs are illegal and should not be taken however they do not influence to any great degree (certainly not in the off season) a player in his course of employment as an AFL player.
Recreational drugs are illegal and should not be taken however they do not influence to any great degree (certainly not in the off season) a player in his course of employment as an AFL player.
- Thread starter
- #66
Most performance enhancing drugs are illegal aswell. Plus sometimes recreational drugs can be used to hide the use of performance enhancing ones. Which is why the world doping ageny banned recreational drugs aswell.
- Banned
- #67
Pretty sure Angwin said other senior players were taking drugs too.
They dropped him like a hot potato which when you think about it, not much else they could do.
- Banned
- #68
Source please.
- Dec 7, 2001
- 23,449
- 8,525
- AFL Club
- Brisbane Lions
Exactly......
Mike Sheehan is a wily old fox.He would not run a story like this without knowing he is solid in his proof.
Maybe there are photos before of the party etc, and time stamped etc, and then during. Who knows.
he's gay now?
JeffDunne
TheBrownDog
I reckon the HeraldScum are throwing down the challenge to the Eagles. Like other gutter media organisations in this country they love nothing more than becoming the story.
The Old Dark Navy's
Moderator
- Moderator
- #73
No doubt. They are having a best each way though. Hiding behind the Age story and then using the 'supposedly' wording rather than an outright accusation. Fletcher has denied the rumours, now the HUN want to force him to seek legal action, go for the weaker re-deny option or admit guilt through silence. Putting it fairly and squarely back on the Eagles to respond.
The Old Dark Navy's
Moderator
- Moderator
- #74
If you would think before firing, you would realise that BigFooty will allow things that are already in the public domain. If the Herald Sun print it, BigFooty can comment openly on it and any potential defamation suit is filed against the HUN not BigFooty, as BigFooty are merely commenting on a public article. If it is untrue, BF can be asked to remove it but they would be hard pressed to file defamation claims against the site.
A poster hiding behind a username who comes out and names names before the mainstream media does, can not EVER be considered a credible source ... not enough for BigFooty to take the risk at least. The mainstream media wait for sites like BigFooty to make these things public so they can run stories naming BigFooty as the source and absolve themselves of responsibility. That is how the game is played.
There is but one reason Mike has run with this story and has actually gone with the name.
Because News Ltd are spitting chips that they were gazumped by Fairfax with Andrew Rule's story - they can't believe they didn't run with something similar themselves first.
Similar threads
