Jake Carlisle Updates

Remove this Banner Ad

gringo2011 said:
I just saw this over at SS. It pretty much backs what I say but says Finnis was pissed off not to be told. The AFL have control over pretty much everything and the AFLPA is a AFL funded group. Why is it it such a conspiracy?

But it still seems a breach of trust for the manager, who had been in regular contact with the Saints' list manager Ameet Bains for weeks and often on an hourly basis to go quiet at such a crucial time. The allegations, after all, came from the Nine Network and not some unidentified troll.
And, of course, in Carlisle's second serious error, the player lied to McConville when the agent first contacted him. It was on that crucial Tuesday that the trade with Essendon was being finalised with the papers lodged at AFL headquarters on Tuesday night.
Still they had not been ratified early on Wednesday when McConville was worried enough to take his concerns to Ian Prendergast and Brett Murphy from the AFL Players Association.
Prendergast and Murphy are respected and diligent as well as popular individuals among the industry. Prendergast's achievement alongside the AFL's Mark Evans in negotiating the new significantly improved illicit drugs policy deserves more commendation than it has received.
But he and his colleague were wrong to keep the allegations from St Kilda. That decision has deeply offended the Saints and hurt the relationship with club chief Matt Finnis and his former players union colleagues.
That they advised McConville to say nothing to the Saints at such a crucial time has been regarded by other clubs as a breach of trust despite the AFLPA's insistence that the manager's priority had to remain his client. Sometimes when it feels wrong it is wrong.
And the timing was more than unfortunate. It was catastrophic for St Kilda. Finnis had arrived at AFL headquarters on the Wednesday believing he had a good news story to tell as the Carlisle trade was made official only to walk out to A Current Affair doorstop. All this before McConville or Prendergast had had the chance to contact him, having realised the vision was genuine and due to run publicly that night.
It is the widespread view of the AFL community that St Kilda should not have been kept in the dark, even for a day, regarding Carlisle. That the players' association overstepped the mark in their zeal to protect the footballer.
Prendergast on Friday described the confluence of events as a perfect storm. He insisted he slept soundly with his decision to stay silent until more information came forward. The AFLPA pointed to the fact that St Kilda has indicated it would have called off the deal had it known.
Whether or not this is true, it should have been the Saints' right. The multi-million-dollar investment from a cash-strapped club, not to mention the sacrifice it had elected to make in terms of young talent along with the accompanying damage to its only recently repairing reputation, made the suppression of information completely unreasonable. As it would have been for any club. They deserved to have all the information available.
Several clubs on Friday held the view that the league's integrity bosses should have questioned the AFLPA for its role in the saga, however that will not happen and would not be appropriate. But the union should analyse its handling of such cases. Clearly the Player Agents Accreditation Board will not penalise McConville given he was acting on that body's guidance.
Carlisle still faces a penalty from the competition but the punishment is expected to come from St Kilda with some behind-the-scenes negotiating with head office. He has indicated that he will accept a drug strike and could also be suspended from playing at the start of the 2016 season.
And with the removal of the marketing money and some other key clauses from his contract, Carlisle will finish up losing a six-figure sum, making him the most heavily penalised player in AFL history for having taken illicit drugs on one known occasion.
The AFLPA has lost the upper hand in the bitter bargaining over the contract revisions through its poor advice to McConville but tensions between club and union have risen further with the Saints playing hardball.


Read more: http://www.theage.com.au/afl/afl-news/j ... z3q2l8E9aM
Follow us: theage on Twitter | theageAustralia on Facebook
Click to expand...

None of that supports your conspiracy theory that "We were a sacrificial lamb to help build Essendon."

Nowhere does it say that the AFL knew of this and kept it from us.
 
Periphery said:
None of that supports your conspiracy theory that "We were a sacrificial lamb to help build Essendon."

Nowhere does it say that the AFL knew of this and kept it from us.
Click to expand...

I reckon it shows how we were kept in the dark deliberately. The AFLPA and AFL are very close. You would be surprised how small the AFL world is in administration. Someone at AFL level would have been advising the AFLPA.

The sacrificial lamb bit is personal opinion but if I was an administrator and had to choose between the Saints copping the drama and the further trashing of Essendon, I'm reckoning you protect your business first. The Essendon saga can't end soon enough for the AFL.
 

Log in to remove this ad.

gringo2011 said:
I reckon it shows how we were kept in the dark deliberately. The AFLPA and AFL are very close. You would be surprised how small the AFL world is in administration. Someone at AFL level would have been advising the AFLPA.

The sacrificial lamb bit is personal opinion but if I was an administrator and had to choose between the Saints copping the drama and the further trashing of Essendon, I'm reckoning you protect your business first. The Essendon saga can't end soon enough for the AFL.
Click to expand...
Sorry, this doesn't make sense.

How does one AFL club inheriting one of the problems of another AFL club help the AFL with their business. Its as easy to argue the reverse: its better for the AFL if all all their problems were contained in one club that they can pass off as 'the bad apple', than have loads of different clubs with issues, which points to failure of the system.

Whether Carlisle stayed at Essendon or not, their drug scandal won't be forgotten in a hurry.

The AFL and the AFLPA are not synonymous and though the former finances the latter, there is no way the recent AFLPA actions were a directive of the AFL, I just can't see it.

Finally, if Finnis is an AFL plant, surely the AFL has a vested interest in the improved position of St Kilda, unless you imagine they are trying to take down our club and ex-AFLPA boss Finnis in one go. But that would point to a bad relationship between the AFL and their apparent puppet, the AFLPA. doesn't add up.
 
Last edited:
Winners Only said:
Does anyone know what Carlisle's reduced contract will looks like?
Click to expand...
AAEAAQAAAAAAAANyAAAAJGY5ZjdmOWYzLWUwZWItNDYzNS04ZWQwLTY4N2ViNmJmMzhiMQ.jpg
 
Winners Only said:
Does anyone know what Carlisle's reduced contract will looks like?
Click to expand...

The contract can't be torn up in its entirety, likely scenario is that third party deals / marketing /"additional extras" packages that were included will either be stripped entirely or reduced by a sizable percentage, which then lessens the overall contract coin.

So in effect, say club & Carlise agreed on 700kpa total, 200k of that would be third party pa, of that 200k, 75-100k might be stripped. Carlisile still gets 600k, but won't then be at that "deal that trumped everyman's dog" level.
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

Winners Only said:
Does anyone know what Carlisle's reduced contract will looks like?
Click to expand...


what they should do is take away the marketing component entirely, then on completion of contract should no other drug issues arise pay him.
 
I'm of the view that us suspending Carlisle won't achieve much. Our team suffers and there's not much Jake will get from that.....he'll still get paid, albeit slightly reduced if reports of the contract being rewritten.
I think a stint volunteering at a drug rehab centre would be a far more appropriate consequence to apply. It may also be the making of Jake as an advocate for clean living.
Whatever the penalty is, the club will announce it in their own time. Too many in the press, esp in SEN land, want this to be played out publically. As the trade period showed, that's not how we do things these days. That's more than you can say about us over some other clubs.
 
Sooner this goes away the better.

Hopefully come round 1 next year Jake Carlisle is in the team, puts in a performance that gets him up there with the best on ground and people can start to celebrate the footballer. I think the media stuff coupled with having to front up to Finnis and the senior leadership group is punishment enough. I’m sure he will work hard within the club to help change his reputation.

He’s a young guy that made a mistake, whilst letting his hair down off season.
 
Yep, we've wet our bed, and now we lie in it. I definitely don't see any point in him being suspended. It only gives him more time on his hands, which is probably part of the reason he got into trouble in the first place. The other thing is, the biggest problem Jake will have now, is being made to feel part of the club and especially part of the team. The best place for that to improve for him, is on the field. If he plays well out there, then the whole "band of brothers" thing will go a long way to solving any resentment the others have towards him.
 
I've said it before, there's no point in kicking Jake while he's down. He'll cop his wack from the club and it's time to move on. If we put him to the outer he could end up in a much worse position. It's important he feels a part of the club - as it's clear he didn't feel that way with Essendon. For all we know the drug use was his way of dealing with the shit that was going down there, his way of clearing his mind. Can't say I've never dosed myself when I've dealt with some tough times.
Not making any excuses for him, but there's no point in crucifying him. Give him a fair dinkum chance to prove himself, and we may find him repaying the club for sticking with him.
 
Lol, good stuff Jake!!

http://www.heraldsun.com.au/sport/a...e/news-story/cdff58d09a1ff061f5073260d2802d82

"TWEETS posted by Jake Carlisle on his worldwide end-of-season jaunt cost Essendon a $2500 fine under the AFL’s anti-doping code.



Carlisle’s calamitous Snapchat drugs video will this week cost the disgraced St Kilda recruit a chunk of his new four-year contract worth $600,000-plus a season.

But it emerged today the Bombers are also out of pocket after Carlisle failed to inform the club of his post-season travel plans, which he openly documented on Twitter and Instagram in September and October.

Australian Sports Anti-Doping Authority staffers saw the social media posts from London, Belfast and Paris, triggering the financial sanction.

Players are required to notify their club of their whereabouts at all times, information that is relayed to ASADA.

Essendon did not know Carlisle was heading overseas and therefore did not notify ASADA."
 
Last edited:
Remember the paywall when linking, also include the herald scum article header.

I assume lol at him costing the Bombers $2500 for not updating his location with them or ASADA?

Wouldn't be throwing stones in this instance, I believe us and another club got a direct caution to keep in line with the drug code to go with our fines for similar.
 
StFly said:
Remember the paywall when linking, also include the herald scum article header.

I assume lol at him costing the Bombers $2500 for not updating his location with them or ASADA?

Wouldn't be throwing stones in this instance, I believe us and another club got a direct caution to keep in line with the drug code to go with our fines for similar.
Click to expand...
Weird, I didn't copy it because I thought it must be a free article as I also don't have a sub. Have edited it in.
 
StFly said:
Remember the paywall when linking, also include the herald scum article header.

I assume lol at him costing the Bombers $2500 for not updating his location with them or ASADA?

Wouldn't be throwing stones in this instance, I believe us and another club got a direct caution to keep in line with the drug code to go with our fines for similar.
Click to expand...

I think 6 clubs in total have been busted for that. This is less about Carlisle and more about clubs not having the right structures in place to fulfill their responsibilities.
 
I think its mainly player onus thats the issue. Mind you I think reporting constant player location is beyond a reasonable level. Yeah yeah, they could be taking PEDs or whatever but I think thats pushing credibility when you dont report a change of country whilst on holiday when ASADA cant even reliably test you anyway.
 

Remove this Banner Ad

Jake Carlisle Updates

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top