Hurley looks to admit guilty, but not plead guilty...

[jono25]

You do realise that the EBA the AFLPA agreed is waaaaay different to most? Show me elsewhere that an employer can fine an employee for being picked up pissy in public..

I am a lawyer. You are not.
.

Dare I ask what sort of law you practice and for what type of firm?

If you are indeed a lawyer you could have just explained the concept of an EBA (if you understand it).

Many EBA's, particularly in the mining industry, provide that an employee can be stood down upon being charged with a crime. Where someone was charged for being drunk in public they could be stood down.

Again what sort of law do you practice?

I feel sorry for your clients. Oh and calling someone a redneck because they disagree with you really shows your intellect.

 

[jono25]

What did Carlton do in 2006 when Heath Scotland was charged with recklessly causing serious injury?

What did they do when the same player was charged with assualt and recklessly causing injury when he hit a woman in 2007? They cracked down on him this time and fined him for breaking curfew.

What did your club do when David Teague was charged with careless driving in an incident which left a poor woman a quadriplegic?

I'm interested to hear your thoughts on this.

Mate I am one of the few neutral fans supporting Hurley so I would go easy. I can easily argue the other side if you want.

I wasn't aware of any of those incidents but if the facts are as you state the club should have acted. I think the CFC's attitude to off field behaviour is best demonstrated by the response to Fev, Betts, Walker, Houlihan etc.

Perhaps CFC has realised it needs to be harder and is doing so. Maybe the EFC should be following Carlton's lead?

 

[BlueTouchPaper]

What did Carlton do in 2006 when Heath Scotland was charged with recklessly causing serious injury?

What did they do when the same player was charged with assualt and recklessly causing injury when he hit a woman in 2007? They cracked down on him this time and fined him for breaking curfew.

What did your club do when David Teague was charged with careless driving in an incident which left a poor woman a quadriplegic?

I'm interested to hear your thoughts on this.

Wanna provide links to those (if you can) Jimmy?

I don't read so called newspapers, so most news about footballers goes straight over my head - compounding that is my general disinterest in non-football stories about players.

EDIT : Found the Teague one and that is a huge cheap shot at him. Especially as there is no doubt that an 'assault' took place (taking what the news-media say as gospel) in this case, its just whether he will be found guilty. Teague was driving below the speed limit, and the case was ultimately thrown out (it appears).

 

[Red Black and Blue]

Mate EBA stands for Enterprise Bargaining Agreement. It is a form of agreement and the terms are not standard across the different industries you refer to. The concept is to negotiate an agreement specific to that particular enterprise/industry and as such it differs depending on the business.

I understand the terms are different across the industries. Doesn't change the fact that they are used across many industries and does not make an AFL club differ to many other employers.

 

[Red Black and Blue]

You do realise that the EBA the AFLPA agreed is waaaaay different to most? Show me elsewhere that an employer can fine an employee for being picked up pissy in public..

I am a lawyer. You are not.
.

High up members of big organizations often sign similar performance based contracts to AFL players (e.g. Senior manager of ANZ).

 

[jono25]

I understand the terms are different across the industries. Doesn't change the fact that they are used across many industries and does not make an AFL club differ to many other employers.

But you are missing the point mate. A supply agreement is a comment agreement used in many industries to supply various goods and services. The terms of such an agreement different greatly across different industries.

An EBA is not something with consistent terms, it is like a supply agreement. Its terms depend on what is agreed between the relevant parties.

Yes the AFL/EFC are the employer and as such have to act within the law but if the parties (i.e. the player) agree to such clauses then they are bound by them.

 

[SirJimi05]

Mate I am one of the few neutral fans supporting Hurley so I would go easy. I can easily argue the other side if you want.

I wasn't aware of any of those incidents but if the facts are as you state the club should have acted. I think the CFC's attitude to off field behaviour is best demonstrated by the response to Fev, Betts, Walker, Houlihan etc.

Perhaps CFC has realised it needs to be harder and is doing so. Maybe the EFC should be following Carlton's lead?

I think you will find Carlton are following Essendons lead. Last season we suspended Lovett (twice) and McVeigh. Hurley will be punished once the case is over.

I just find it extremely hypocritical that supporters of Collingwood, Carlton and Richmond seem to be the main ones having a crack yet their club has allowed players to go unpunished for committing very serious crimes.

Why is Scotland still on your list given that he has a repeated history of assauly and also has links with outlaw motorcycle gangs?

Why didn't Richmond punish Krakeouer after he put someone in intensive care and fighting for his life?

What action did Collingwood take against Swan after he kicked a man in the head as he lay unconcious and gave him brain damage?

Why are this questions not being respnded to yet everyone is sinking the boots into a kid for kicking a cabbie in the nads and knocking off his turban? What injuries did the cabbie sustain?

 

[jono25]

I think you will find Carlton are following Essendons lead. Last season we suspended Lovett (twice) and McVeigh. Hurley will be punished once the case is over.

I just find it extremely hypocritical that supporters of Collingwood, Carlton and Richmond seem to be the main ones having a crack yet their club has allowed players to go unpunished for committing very serious crimes.

Why is Scotland still on your list given that he has a repeated history of assauly and also has links with outlaw motorcycle gangs?

Why didn't Richmond punish Krakeouer after he put someone in intensive care and fighting for his life?

What action did Collingwood take against Swan after he kicked a man in the head as he lay unconcious and gave him brain damage?

Why are this questions not being respnded to yet everyone is sinking the boots into a kid for kicking a cabbie in the nads and knocking off his turban? What injuries did the cabbie sustain?

Mate I totally agree with you and have been defending Hurley for ages.

People in glass houses shouldn't throw stones. No club should be commenting on anothers misfortune. Though we all cop it at times and this is Essendon's time - suck it up and deal with it I guess.

 

[SirJimi05]

Wanna provide links to those (if you can) Jimmy?

I don't read so called newspapers, so most news about footballers goes straight over my head - compounding that is my general disinterest in non-football stories about players.

EDIT : Found the Teague one and that is a huge cheap shot at him. Especially as there is no doubt that an 'assault' took place in this case, its just whether he will be found guilty. Teague was driving below the speed limit, and the case was ultimately thrown out (it appears).

Teague was found not guilty. This is not the point. Think about it. It wasn't a cheap shot btw.

 

[SirJimi05]

Mate I totally agree with you and have been defending Hurley for ages.

People in glass houses shouldn't throw stones. No club should be commenting on anothers misfortune. Though we all cop it at times and this is Essendon's time - suck it up and deal with it I guess.

The funny part about it all is that people don't realise that the easy out for Essendon would have been to do exactly what most are suggesting. Give him a 4 week suspension and rule him out of the NAB cup. Instead i think you will find that the club will end up suspending him after the case is finished and he will most likely miss H&A games.

 

[Red Black and Blue]

But you are missing the point mate. A supply agreement is a comment agreement used in many industries to supply various goods and services. The terms of such an agreement different greatly across different industries.

An EBA is not something with consistent terms, it is like a supply agreement. Its terms depend on what is agreed between the relevant parties.

Yes the AFL/EFC are the employer and as such have to act within the law but if the parties (i.e. the player) agree to such clauses then they are bound by them.

The concept of EBA isn't hard to grasp. Obviously AFL players would get many clauses not applicable to other industries due to many variables not found in the common work environment.

Although I don't really see what either of our points are anymore.

 

[BlueTouchPaper]

Why are this questions not being respnded

People don't like to check their own backyard first, you know that.

The other incidents I'm not sure of

However, just from the Scotland incident - I think the situations barely differ. Scotland's seemed to be provoked however, and with the benefit of hindsight, the CFC wouldn't have had much grounds to deal with him such that there was no admission of guilt and even no admission of an assault whatsoever (at least from what I could gather from this article).

Scotland still remains for one reason - and I think I missed the crux of your post before; but it was simply because he was one of our most talented players. Hurley will remain for the same reason (not that I think he should be sacked anyways).

But he may well come off as an arrogant footballer who thinks his entry into top-flight football excuses him from maintaining decorum like your average citizen.

 

[Mafioso]

Tell me what would have happened to you or me if we had done what your little boy had done?

I'd hazard a guess that we would probably be offered the same deal being discussed with Hurley. The major difference is that newspapers would have very little interest in the story.

I have worked in the legal industry for about 8 years now and not a week goes by that I don't see cases similar to this. I'm not sayin I condone what was done but rather it should be judged on it's merrits. No one was seriously injured, it wasn't premeditated and he did not flee the scene. These are three main factors a judge will use to calculate severity of an incident.

There are too many people here (both Essendon and opposition supporters) who cannot give a truly unbiased opinion. Before commenting, try and detach emotion and base your comments on the facts.

 

[OB1]

In tems of determining whether he is guilty, any punishment Essendon hands down would not be admissable as evidence.

In terms of sentencing, only to the extent that the judge may reduce his sentence.

Therefore, there is nothing stopping Essendon from imposing a punishment. If they were worried (even though without basis) they should impose something strictly based on him being drunk in public.

The silence from the EFC shows a lack of leadership and responsibility to the community.

In saying that, what is with all the Richmond flogs in threads commenting on other clubs? You guys are a basket case - shhh.

I also hope whatever happens Hurley plays on and has a great career. He will be one of the great KPF of the next decade.

I know your not just trolling like many others but I wanted to address your bolded point because its a sentiment i've read a bit lately. So what your saying is that if Hurley hadn't decided to get a burger & the taxi driver just drove him home without incident the club should still impose a punishment just because he was drunk on his holidays? Should Carlton have suspended every player on the boat who was drunk? Do we really think it was only the players who got into trouble later who were intoxicated? Should all clubs have breath test at the brownlow & B&F's for example or do we just get to the point where we only serve water? We all know what Fev got up to (or at least some of it) but going by what your saying he should have been suspended even if he hadn't got out of hand. Do the players even know their not allowed to get drunk in their holidays (I'm sure its news to them). Surely this means that all players who attended their clubs mad monday drinks & had more than a few shandy's should qualify for suspension. Perhaps we need to have a .05 limit or something for players. I'm sure I saw plenty of Geelong players who had had a lot to drink after the GF so should they all be suspended (round 1 please)or do we only suspend those who get into trouble & break team rules?

When you consider it that way I'm sure you can see that suspending him simply for being drunk is silly. What the club will rightfully look at is the fact that he was arrested for assult. Now as has been pointed out, the assult charge is still a matter for the courts to decide so the club would be irresponsible to pass any judgements by way of punishments until that process is complete.

Just another reminder too for those comparing this to StKilda & Lovett. Stkilda have stated that Lovett was being stood down because it was his second breach of team rules in that he failed to notify the club that he was in trouble with the police. They have not publicly commented on his guilt or innocence of the charges & would be stupid to even consider imposing any sanctions relating to the claims of rape.

 

[yaco55]

No they are not. However they have a player on their list that is bringing the club and the game into disrepute. I'm sure you're sponsors are happy with this "publicity" as well as the fact that this and other incidents involving Indians in our community are being broadcast over there.

I am certain that EFC will deal with the matter as they see fit.

You or I wont influence their decision.

 

[yaco55]

What a load of rot.

I wonder how many poor unknown kids from the western suburbs that don't have 5 QC's working for them, get considered for this program?

The rich get richer, the poor get the picture.

I am curious !

Did you have the same opinion when Suzan Alberti ( WB Board ) sued Channel 9 and The Footy Show for defamation.

This was another case of the rich get richer, the poor get the picture.

And a great quote from a Midnight Oil song.

 

[yaco55]

Mate I totally agree with you and have been defending Hurley for ages.

People in glass houses shouldn't throw stones. No club should be commenting on anothers misfortune. Though we all cop it at times and this is Essendon's time - suck it up and deal with it I guess.

I understand where you are coming from but some issues need to be considered.

- The AFL has been keep fully informed of the developments from the Hurley case since Day 1.

- I suggest that the AFL will lean on EFC if they deem the club's punishment inappropriate

- EFC has a good track record of managing player misbehaviour - At least in the eyes of the AFL

- Carlton is still leaving behind the stigma of Fevola's antics on Brownlow Medal Night - He managed to piss off the AFL and the HUN.

- Carlton was slow at conveying information to the AFL about the Boat Trip on the 19/12/2009 resulting in a terse email from the AFL on the 24/12.

- Carlton will be in the gun from the HUN in the foreseeable future.

 

[Wooljay]

I'm still waiting on a response from Wooljay. How is the alleged assault by Hurley in any way similiar to what Swan was convicted and plead guilty to?

One guy had his turban knocked off whilst the other ended up brain damaged. This tends to happen when you kick someone in the head as he is lying on the ground unconcious.

I wonder if you would have started this thread if you had of known about this prior.

Sorry for the delayed response, play indoor soccer Wednesday nights

You honestly can't find any similarities between both of those assaults? Okay for starters they were both talented footballers in the very first season of their careers, secondly alcohol was of course involved in both of the assaults, and thirdly in both cases it seems likely due to their status as footballers, both have managed to avoid immediate sanctions seemingly. Obviously the Swan case was more severe, but paralels are easily drawn unless you're obsurdly thick.

Considering I have extremely limited knowledge of any of the actual details of the Swan case 6 years ago now, I can't comment a huge amount further on it, only to say that Dane Swan up until recently has been one of the more maligned characters of the club and had to really take stock when he was on the brink of getting delisted. And even if I did have knowledge of the 2004 event, it would have had no bearing on whether or not I posted a HUN article with my opinion attached

Honestly I have no vendetta against the EFC, half my family supports them and aside from ANZAC day I have a great deal of respect for them both on and off the field, but I have absolutely no tolerance for what is happening in Victoria regarding the drunken assaults which happen weekly. Have had close friends of mine hospitalized this weekend after having been beaten half to death for laughing at someone on the dancefloor at some random club, so personally I have a problem with what Hurley did.

If you want to continue having a cry, feel free.

 

[kwame]

up the guts......loved your attempt to try to play the race card.....it was not a racially motivated crime the cabbie just happened to be indian. its called probability. really enjoyed reading level headed posts from opposition supporters as opposed to those calling for his head and posting utter crap.

 

[UpTheGuts]

up the guts......loved your attempt to try to play the race card.....it was not a racially motivated crime the cabbie just happened to be indian. its called probability. really enjoyed reading level headed posts from opposition supporters as opposed to those calling for his head and posting utter crap.

You loved it? Odd

Hurley apparently belted a cabbie - who was Indian. Bit of a hot topic right now wouldn't you think?

And seriously, who kicks someone in the nuts????

Doubt there will be sponsors' livery behind hurley when his sanction is announced, if it ever is

Shame on him

 

[jono25]

You loved it? Odd

Hurley apparently belted a cabbie - who was Indian. Bit of a hot topic right now wouldn't you think?

And seriously, who kicks someone in the nuts????

Doubt there will be sponsors' livery behind hurley when his sanction is announced, if it ever is

Shame on him

If you are indeed a lawyer, and I doubt it based on your comments and because you won't provide details of the type of law you practice, type of firm etc, then I really think the relevant law society needs to revisit your qualification.

For a crime to be racially motivated it requires the offender to target the victim because of their race. It is not simply the case where if someone hits an Indian that will be racially motivated. The statute looks at the intent of the victim. To adopt the approach you advocate would be to create a class of victims based solely on race, which would cause many many problems.

You have a tendency to be moralistic. I suggest you are either a Professor in a small university (which is not practising law mind you) or some pompus little hick lawyer in a small town who drafts wills and handles conveyances for a living.

Either way you are a failure. Don't come on here and try to be superior because we real lawyers will call you on your boolshit. Run along little boy time to do a title search.

 

[SirJimi05]

However, just from the Scotland incident - I think the situations barely differ. Scotland's seemed to be provoked however.

Which time? The time where he belted a bloke in a pub or the time that he belted a defensless woman? Always provoked. Always in the wrong place at the wrong time. Just like when his bikey mate was beaten and tortured in front of him by a rival outlaw motorcycle gang.

Stand up guy that is just unlucky i guess. As opposed to Hurley who is an obvious thug.

 

[SirJimi05]

You honestly can't find any similarities between both of those assaults? Okay for starters they were both talented footballers in the very first season of their careers, secondly alcohol was of course involved in both of the assaults, and thirdly in both cases it seems likely due to their status as footballers, both have managed to avoid immediate sanctions seemingly. Obviously the Swan case was more severe, but paralels are easily drawn unless you're obsurdly thick.

The only similiaraties is that they are both footballer and alcohol was involved. Other than that they can't even be compared and anyone who attempts to do so is obsurdly thick. It very much sounded like you were suggesting the incidents themselves were similiar and i'm not the only person who drew this conclusion.

I hope Swan does the right thing and actually pays out the 100k he owes. You would think that if he was really sorry for giving this poor guy brain damage he would have paid it by now. And this is the guy that you declared is the least likely on COllingwoods list to assault anybody.

 

[UpTheGuts]

If you are indeed a lawyer, and I doubt it based on your comments and because you won't provide details of the type of law you practice, type of firm etc, then I really think the relevant law society needs to revisit your qualification.

For a crime to be racially motivated it requires the offender to target the victim because of their race. It is not simply the case where if someone hits an Indian that will be racially motivated. The statute looks at the intent of the victim. To adopt the approach you advocate would be to create a class of victims based solely on race, which would cause many many problems.

You have a tendency to be moralistic. I suggest you are either a Professor in a small university (which is not practising law mind you) or some pompus little hick lawyer in a small town who drafts wills and handles conveyances for a living.

Either way you are a failure. Don't come on here and try to be superior because we real lawyers will call you on your boolshit. Run along little boy time to do a title search.

Do you care that much? Wow, I'm flattered.

BComm (Hons), LLB. Admitted to Vic SC, High Court and Partner (since 03) in a firm of 407 last count (Melb). We go OK, thanks!

Should I scan my practising certificate? Crumbs... you're not going to stalk me are you?

Read back and you'll see at no time did I say Hurley had assualted this cabbie on race grounds - just that it is a very topical issue and the cabbie's race is, thus, an issue at the very least in the court of public opinion.

Back on topic... how is Hurley's hand?

 

[SirJimi05]

Back on topic... how is Hurley's hand?

It's fine. Thanks for your concern.

What were your thoughts on Richmond failing to take any action against Krakeour after the incident where he left a man in intensive care?

What was the charge again? Grievous bodily harm or something?