a player who bumps someone slightly to high doesn't qualify for the Brownlow, but players guilty of systematic cheating and use of performance enhancing substances do. 

 

the sporting world will treat the AFL as more of a joke if they allow him to keep it.

 

This is my take, but I'm sure it's been said thousands of times before on Demonland, and the fan sites of 16 other AFL clubs:

The only appropriate course of action available to Watson, is to return his medal to the AFL.

It seems however, that this is unlikely to happen, so surely the AFL must intervene.  Without this, the good name of the Brownlow will forever be stained by the inclusion of Watson's name amongst the list of winners. This would be an enormous slur on the AFL and the competition itself.  'Charlie' would be devalued for all past and future winners.  

Surely the powers that be at the AFL must see this.  If they are so naive as to let Watson retain his medal, they deserve to be pilloried by the media, and all lovers of Aussie Rules, for bringing the very integrity at the heart of our great game into disrepute.

39 minutes ago, Deeoldfart said:

This is my take, but I'm sure it's been said thousands of times before on Demonland, and the fan sites of 16 other AFL clubs:

The only appropriate course of action available to Watson, is to return his medal to the AFL.

It seems however, that this is unlikely to happen, so surely the AFL must intervene.  Without this, the good name of the Brownlow will forever be stained by the inclusion of Watson's name amongst the list of winners. This would be an enormous slur on the AFL and the competition itself.  'Charlie' would be devalued for all past and future winners.  

Surely the powers that be at the AFL must see this.  If they are so naive as to let Watson retain his medal, they deserve to be pilloried by the media, and all lovers of Aussie Rules, for bringing the very integrity at the heart of our great game into disrepute.

Jobe has already held it illegally for 4 years. The rightful winners, Cotchin and Mitchell have been deprived of their glory and potential earnings. I hope they sue the pants off the AFL

Wonder if the deal has been done already for Watson to return to the AFL being contingent upon him keeping the Brownlow according to Gil?

Would we put it past them?

3 hours ago, beelzebub said:

Any which way. I do concur Mr Lane. The AFL has no real decision to make. Its really made for them. What is the question is do they have the moral fibre to carry it out?

In letting it get this far, the AFL have already shown the strength of their moral fibre.

 

46 minutes ago, Deeoldfart said:

The only appropriate course of action available to Watson, is to return his medal to the AFL.

One thing that might explain his failure to do so could be that someone at AFL headquarters has told him they'll swing things so he can keep it. However that in turn exposes Jobe's moral fibre ... he shouldn't need to be told by anyone what he should do. There is one course of action.

 

 

I have heard that athletes competing in Olympic sports here in Oz are stupefied by the entire EFC saga and the non-actions of the AFL. A 16 year old gymnastic had a gold medal stripped for taking two cold tablets. But Jobe can keep his Charlie? The AFL will rightly be a laughing stock.

I am amazed that it wasn't clear to Jobe and all involved that if the appeal failed he'd have to hand it back, there is no reason to hear from Jobe and even less to hear from Cotchin or Mitchell. 

a convicted drug cheat in 2012 cannot also be the "fairest" and best player in the very same year. 

the AFL just seems to lack the backbone to make the decision

19 hours ago, Abe said:

I am amazed that it wasn't clear to Jobe and all involved that if the appeal failed he'd have to hand it back, there is no reason to hear from Jobe and even less to hear from Cotchin or Mitchell. 

a convicted drug cheat in 2012 cannot also be the "fairest" and best player in the very same year. 

the AFL just seems to lack the backbone to make the decision

Surely the AFL and Essendon can negotiate an outcome that is satisfactory to both parties ?

1 minute ago, DemonFrog said:

Surely the AFL and Essendon can negotiate an outcome that is satisfactory to both parties ?

That is what worries me DF.

21 hours ago, Deeoldfart said:

This is my take, but I'm sure it's been said thousands of times before on Demonland, and the fan sites of 16 other AFL clubs:

The only appropriate course of action available to Watson, is to return his medal to the AFL.

It seems however, that this is unlikely to happen, so surely the AFL must intervene.  Without this, the good name of the Brownlow will forever be stained by the inclusion of Watson's name amongst the list of winners. This would be an enormous slur on the AFL and the competition itself.  'Charlie' would be devalued for all past and future winners.  

Surely the powers that be at the AFL must see this.  If they are so naive as to let Watson retain his medal, they deserve to be pilloried by the media, and all lovers of Aussie Rules, for bringing the very integrity at the heart of our great game into disrepute.

Not your fault Deeoldfart, but this wording has been thrown around a lot since this came to head. It is not up to Watson to give the medal back. The AFL are in a position where they should take it off him.

26 minutes ago, DemonFrog said:

Surely the AFL and Essendon can negotiate an outcome that is satisfactory to both parties ?

I reckon that's what will happen, i just think it would be nothing short of embarrassing 

there is no deal required. it's not a hard or difficult decision. it's an easy decision. all they have to do is apply the rules. qed.

20 hours ago, Abe said:

I am amazed that it wasn't clear to Jobe and all involved that if the appeal failed he'd have to hand it back, there is no reason to hear from Jobe and even less to hear from Cotchin or Mitchell. 

a convicted drug cheat in 2012 cannot also be the "fairest" and best player in the very same year. 

the AFL just seems to lack the backbone to make the decision

I've found a loophole for the AFL. He wasn't found guilty of taking any illegal substances in the same year as he won the Brownlow. Therefore he wasn't ineligible for breaching the 'fairest' provision in that year. Therefore he can keep his Brownlow.

(Just in case anyone is taking me seriously, don't.)

 

 

1 minute ago, La Dee-vina Comedia said:

I've found a loophole for the AFL. He wasn't found guilty of taking any illegal substances in the same year as he won the Brownlow. Therefore he wasn't ineligible for breaching the 'fairest' provision in that year. Therefore he can keep his Brownlow.

(Just in case anyone is taking me seriously, don't.)

 

 

I've heard Bombers supporters claim that because the "AFL" tribunal found them "not guilty" the WADA ruling is irrelevant and he should keep it.

clearly they're delusional beyond words, but it seems the AFL may be just as bad simply because he still holds that medal.

Thank god we are not going to be the poor ba##ards that have to put up with their 10 stars (from the Age) being hailed and returned to the fold for the "walk against persecution" day.

1 hour ago, Abe said:

I've heard Bombers supporters claim that because the "AFL" tribunal found them "not guilty" the WADA ruling is irrelevant and he should keep it.

clearly they're delusional beyond words, but it seems the AFL may be just as bad simply because he still holds that medal.

There's a difference between the AFL making a decision and the timing of that decision. I can't see how the AFL could have acted until all legal avenues were exhausted.  

Just now, La Dee-vina Comedia said:

There's a difference between the AFL making a decision and the timing of that decision. I can't see how the AFL could have acted until all legal avenues were exhausted.  

for sure, but i can't see how they wouldn't have told Jobe that if the appeals failed they'd have to strip the medal, why they're letting him plead a case baffles me, he's now a convicted cheat. 

Rory Sloane could have missed out on a Brownlow for a slightly late bump this year... 

1 minute ago, La Dee-vina Comedia said:

There's a difference between the AFL making a decision and the timing of that decision. I can't see how the AFL could have acted until all legal avenues were exhausted.  

So why now four weeks later is there still no decision?

4 minutes ago, old dee said:

So why now four weeks later is there still no decision?

That's reasonably easy to answer. The Commission has to meet. It's only part-time, so it has to wait for a meeting.

6 minutes ago, Abe said:

for sure, but i can't see how they wouldn't have told Jobe that if the appeals failed they'd have to strip the medal, why they're letting him plead a case baffles me, he's now a convicted cheat. 

Rory Sloane could have missed out on a Brownlow for a slightly late bump this year... 

I suspect it's a "legal thing". The AFL Commission would likely have advice that making a decision prior to all the facts being known (including anything that might have been uncovered throughout all the legal actions) may prejudice their final decision. Hence, better to wait until everything needed to make a decision is available. 

Just now, La Dee-vina Comedia said:

I suspect it's a "legal thing". The AFL Commission would likely have advice that making a decision prior to all the facts being known (including anything that might have been uncovered throughout all the legal actions) may prejudice their final decision. Hence, better to wait until everything needed to make a decision is available. 

But surely they do, he's been found guilty and lost on appeal, i'm not sure what information they could possibly need at this point. 

8 minutes ago, La Dee-vina Comedia said:

That's reasonably easy to answer. The Commission has to meet. It's only part-time, so it has to wait for a meeting.

LDC they  knew for nine months that there was a good chance the appeal would be rejected. So why did they not have a plan for this eventuality?  

It is like the WADA decision there was no plan in place for the chance of a guilty result.

They simply spent nine months ignoring the situation.

Either Gil is a poor CEO or the AFL are poor planners. Probably both.

 

Edited November 7, 20168 yr by old dee

11 minutes ago, Abe said:

But surely they do, he's been found guilty and lost on appeal, i'm not sure what information they could possibly need at this point. 

Agree Abe.

The simple fact is Gil does not want to take the medal off him he has said so on 3AW.

Gil and the AFL show why a sporting body should not be in charge of applying their own drug penalties.

Edited November 7, 20168 yr by old dee

Just now, old dee said:

Agree Abe.

The simple fact is Gil does not want to take the medal off him he has said so on 3AW.

Gil and the AFL show why a sporting body should not be in charge of apply their own drug penalties.

They needed to keep this as simple as possible in my opinion, let Jobe know that if the appeal failed he'd lose the medal, that simple, if there is some sort of information out there that makes jobes case different from the rest of the players, the time to use it has been and gone, now the AFL just has to act. 

Just now, Abe said:

They needed to keep this as simple as possible in my opinion, let Jobe know that if the appeal failed he'd lose the medal, that simple, if there is some sort of information out there that makes jobes case different from the rest of the players, the time to use it has been and gone, now the AFL just has to act. 

 

Just now, Abe said:

They needed to keep this as simple as possible in my opinion, let Jobe know that if the appeal failed he'd lose the medal, that simple, if there is some sort of information out there that makes jobes case different from the rest of the players, the time to use it has been and gone, now the AFL just has to act. 

Based on the speed that the AFL has done things in the past please do not hold your breath

Perhaps if Jobe had a Russian or Chinese name the AFL may have done the right thing.