Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
AFLW 2024 - Round 10 - Chat, game threads, injury lists, team lineups and more.
I think there have to be some concessions made in this case. Not to benefit Essendon. They can incur all costs and GAGF. But I'm happy for the AFL to concede a little if it means St Kilda & GWS get a decent hit out. Other clubs need not be disadvantaged by this nonsense.Salary cap/Level playing field.
I've even read that Essenscum will employ a seperate coaching panel for this top up team.
Will that come under football department spending?
Will they be subject to the footy department tax?
Or is that tax just for clubs like us and Hawthorn that play by the rules?
Serious questions that must be raised by our club.
http://www.heraldsun.com.au/sport/a...or-nab-challenge/story-fni5f6kv-1227222670897Western Bulldog Stewart Crameri and Port Adelaide’s Patrick Ryder and Angus Monfries will not play NAB Challenge given infraction notices.
Have they recruited a top up coach yet?
Being provisionally suspended is a choice. So if found guilty they would be crazy to play whilst waiting for the sanctions as it is likely to lead to a suspension and any backdating will disappear.Once thing that isn't clear at this point. In all likelihood, the Essendon doping players will get found guilty. Then we wait for sanction hearings that can be on an individual basis, if requested.
Are the players provisionally suspended or otherwise until the sanctions hearings are finalised ?
Once sanctions are handed down, no doubt, the Essendon doping players will appeal the sanction. Do they remain suspended and unable to play, until the appeal hearing is heard ?
I know previously sports people have been suspended immediately, not provisionally suspended, but was that only due to a positive test ? That isn't he case here.
James Hird still coach? That seems quite odd...
This is bit like what is Happening at the Peptide Bombers
Not really.
"Scabs" is a reference to people who fill in for workers who are on strike. Workers sometimes strike to protest against something (pay, working conditions, safety) and by the "scabs" coming in to do their job, it undermines the protest.
This is not at all what is happening at Essendon.
The 2012 Essendon players aren't protesting; they're not on strike, they're not refusing to play as a protest against something.
The 2012 players aren't playing simply because (a) they're banned from playing by ASADA or (b) they want to protect the anonymity of those who are.
Here's the test: Are the 2012 Essendon players unhappy with the state league players who are coming in to fill their spot during the NAB cup? Doubt it.
I think there have to be some concessions made in this case. Not to benefit Essendon. They can incur all costs and GAGF. But I'm happy for the AFL to concede a little if it means St Kilda & GWS get a decent hit out. Other clubs need not be disadvantaged by this nonsense.
The inside scoop at bomber land.....funny!
see paul little, toll, melbourne docks, dispute, scabs
coincidence ?
Corrigan the Patrick,s boss at the time of the waterfront dispute cut his teeth under Little at Toll and remained good friends,Little if given the chance would have done the exact same thing Chris Corrigan did they were birds of the same feather and had the same philosophical bent.Yes.
Besides, wasn't Melbourne docks Patricks?
And in other news, Count Hirdula has announced that he won't be appealing to the High Court:
Looks like some Toorak lawyers will be singing for their supper tonight... #standbythelawyers