by Jim05 » Tue Jan 12, 2016 12:53 pm
by whufc » Tue Jan 12, 2016 12:54 pm
by Spargo » Tue Jan 12, 2016 12:55 pm
by Q. » Tue Jan 12, 2016 12:58 pm
by Jim05 » Tue Jan 12, 2016 1:01 pm
Q. wrote:I'm guessing they'll get to keep their #2 draft pick* at the end of year?
*Carlton will still finish last
by Jim05 » Tue Jan 12, 2016 1:01 pm
Spargo wrote:Watson's Brownlow to be reviewed by the commission.
by hollywood7477 » Tue Jan 12, 2016 1:02 pm
stan wrote:Feel gor the players. But not Essendon. They did this to themselves.
The players pay the price now. And its a big price.
by Jim05 » Tue Jan 12, 2016 1:03 pm
hollywood7477 wrote:stan wrote:Feel gor the players. But not Essendon. They did this to themselves.
The players pay the price now. And its a big price.
why do you feel for the players. they had plenty of opportunities to tell ASADA when they were drug tested. ASADA asked them if they had taken any supplements Not one came forward.
by gadj1976 » Tue Jan 12, 2016 1:06 pm
Jim05 wrote:No further punishment from the AFL.
All 5 Rookies can join the main list just like a LTI, this applies to other clubs affected also.
Essendon will be allowed an extra 10 player signings from other leagues, these players payments will go towards our salary cap but the AFL has given the club extra on its cap
by Jim05 » Tue Jan 12, 2016 1:07 pm
gadj1976 wrote:Jim05 wrote:No further punishment from the AFL.
All 5 Rookies can join the main list just like a LTI, this applies to other clubs affected also.
Essendon will be allowed an extra 10 player signings from other leagues, these players payments will go towards our salary cap but the AFL has given the club extra on its cap
IMO, Essendon should also have to include ex players in their salary cap - because the Saints, Port, Melbourne etc have to find money in the salary cap to pay for Carlisle et al's replacements.
by GWW » Tue Jan 12, 2016 1:09 pm
Jim05 wrote:Spargo wrote:Watson's Brownlow to be reviewed by the commission.
It's gone.
by Jim05 » Tue Jan 12, 2016 1:10 pm
GWW wrote:Jim05 wrote:Spargo wrote:Watson's Brownlow to be reviewed by the commission.
It's gone.
No decision made yet, apparently.
To be reviewed in February, when he can apparently address the Commission.
by Spargo » Tue Jan 12, 2016 1:11 pm
GWW wrote:Jim05 wrote:Spargo wrote:Watson's Brownlow to be reviewed by the commission.
It's gone.
No decision made yet, apparently.
To be reviewed in February, when he can apparently address the Commission.
by RustyCage » Tue Jan 12, 2016 1:21 pm
by Booney » Tue Jan 12, 2016 1:34 pm
Spargo wrote:GWW wrote:Jim05 wrote:Spargo wrote:Watson's Brownlow to be reviewed by the commission.
It's gone.
No decision made yet, apparently.
To be reviewed in February, when he can apparently address the Commission.
Hopefully not in a denim shirt/jeans combo...
by Fricky » Tue Jan 12, 2016 1:34 pm
by Q. » Tue Jan 12, 2016 1:35 pm
Suri wrote:With Essendon being a sub-par side this season can we have someone else play Collingwood on ANZAC Day.
by Fricky » Tue Jan 12, 2016 1:37 pm
Q. wrote:Suri wrote:With Essendon being a sub-par side this season can we have someone else play Collingwood on ANZAC Day.
**** no.
by Coach Bombay » Tue Jan 12, 2016 2:02 pm
by stan » Tue Jan 12, 2016 2:04 pm
Coach Bombay wrote:probably a stupid question but can the AFL say to the court "too bad, we are going to let them play."?
Competitions SANFL Official Site | Country Footy SA | Southern Football League | VFL Footy
Club Forums Snouts Louts | The Roost | Redlegs Forum |