 |
|
|
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
David 
to wish impossible things
Joined: 27 Jul 2003
Location: the edge of the deep green sea
|
| Post subject: |  |
|
| King Monkey wrote: | | David wrote: | | think positive wrote: | | Pies4shaw wrote: | | It's good that Collingwood has that other defensive tall to come in to replace Nathan Brown (assuming he is suspended) next week. |
Oh honey I'm sorry to tell you this, the bastards a drug cheat, it ain't happening. But it's ok, we got his back, he will be back in about 18 months, is that ok? |
Can you define 'drug cheat' for me? |
"Someone caught with banned Performance Enhancing Drugs in their body, without the means or inclination to prove they weren't taken intentionally".
How does that differ from your own definition?? |
A cheat is someone who deliberately tries to cheat. The chances that Keeffe and Thomas were trying to cheat are extremely low (see Wokko's post). Therefore they are almost certainly not 'cheats'.
How bloody hard is that to understand?
_________________
"Every time we witness an injustice and do not act, we train our character to be passive in its presence." – Julian Assange |
|
|
|
 |
think positive
Side By Side
Joined: 30 Jun 2005
Location: somewhere
|
| Post subject: | |
|
Yep cos everyone tells the truth all the time! Unfortunately, even if it's the case here, it isn't always, (refer the essendrug saga if you will) and therefore, they go down as drug cheats. They chose to take a chance with those "illicit" drugs of their own free will, they gambled and lost. Thems the breaks.
Up to them now how they seek redemption.
_________________
You cant fix stupid, turns out you cant quarantine it either! |
|
|
|
|
David
to wish impossible things
Joined: 27 Jul 2003
Location: the edge of the deep green sea
|
| Post subject: | |
|
Whatever grinds your gears. I and I think most Collingwood supporters would prefer to give them the benefit of the doubt.
For me, that's an essential part of being a 'supporter'. I don't just support the abstract concept of a team, I support the men who are part of it. It saddens me a little whenever someone gets delisted or hangs up the boots or gets into trouble off field. I'm not inclined to wish Collingwood players harm or cast aspersions on their characters. I would have thought that's what other team's supporters do.
_________________
"Every time we witness an injustice and do not act, we train our character to be passive in its presence." – Julian Assange |
|
|
|
|
think positive
Side By Side
Joined: 30 Jun 2005
Location: somewhere
|
| Post subject: | |
|
You don't seem to think it's their responsibility at all though, all is forgiven, come home. If they deserve to get another chance I'm all for it but only if they can bring something to the team in 18 months time. I'm not convinced Thomas can and we simply can't afford any dead wood.
Take Marley, he served his time away from the game, he's kept his nose clean since, and he's worked bloody hard on his game, be lost without him
If they can do that ok, but we owe them nothing more than encouragement to do their best to make our investment in them worth it
_________________
You cant fix stupid, turns out you cant quarantine it either! |
|
|
|
|
What'sinaname
Joined: 29 May 2010
Location: Living rent free
|
| Post subject: | |
|
| David wrote: | Whatever grinds your gears. I and I think most Collingwood supporters would prefer to give them the benefit of the doubt.
For me, that's an essential part of being a 'supporter'. I don't just support the abstract concept of a team, I support the men who are part of it. It saddens me a little whenever someone gets delisted or hangs up the boots or gets into trouble off field. I'm not inclined to wish Collingwood players harm or cast aspersions on their characters. I would have thought that's what other team's supporters do. |
Blind support of the Bombers and Hird through the drug scandal is what makes Essendon a laughing stock.
Being a supporter isn't about blindly following what Eddie, Bucks etc say. If a player has been a dick, I'd prefer supporters to say so rather than throw out the old "side-by-side" - I'm a better supporter than you - line.
I line TP's example with Marley. He was a dick, but he got out of pity city, worked hard and got back to being an integral part of the team. These boys have a chance. They are owed nothing and if they wallow in pity city, then the club should sever ties with them. |
|
|
|
|
King Monkey
Joined: 15 Apr 2009
Location: On a journey to seek the scriptures of enlightenment....
|
| Post subject: | |
|
| David wrote: | | King Monkey wrote: | | David wrote: | | think positive wrote: | | Pies4shaw wrote: | | It's good that Collingwood has that other defensive tall to come in to replace Nathan Brown (assuming he is suspended) next week. |
Oh honey I'm sorry to tell you this, the bastards a drug cheat, it ain't happening. But it's ok, we got his back, he will be back in about 18 months, is that ok? |
Can you define 'drug cheat' for me? |
"Someone caught with banned Performance Enhancing Drugs in their body, without the means or inclination to prove they weren't taken intentionally".
How does that differ from your own definition?? |
A cheat is someone who deliberately tries to cheat. The chances that Keeffe and Thomas were trying to cheat are extremely low (see Wokko's post). Therefore they are almost certainly not 'cheats'.
How bloody hard is that to understand? |
Under the governing code that has jurisdiction over "drug cheating", you are defined as a "drug cheat" as soon as you test positive, unless you can prove mitigating circumstances.
In this case we are talking about a likely but unproven "oops I didn't mean it" story, being used against 100% concrete evidence that there was a Performance Enhancing Drug in their systems.
This is as black and white as it comes.
How's that so hard to understand??
_________________
"I am a great sage, equal of heaven.
Grow stick, grow.
Fly cloud, fly.
Oh you are a dee-mon, I love to fiiight." |
|
|
|
|
stui magpie 
Prepare for the worst, hope for the best.
Joined: 03 May 2005
Location: In flagrante delicto
|
| Post subject: | |
|
| Wokko wrote: | Intentional or not doesn't matter so there's no point even trying to get out of it that way. The only defence is malicious intent of a 3rd party, so they'd have to prove that someone purposefully put Clen into their coke so they'd get busted (so if their dealer dipped off ASADA for example).
For those who missed it, clenbuterol is pretty much useless for a sport like AFL as a performance enhancer, it's used in Wrestling, boxing, MMA etc to cut weight before a fight and unless these guys were rocking KFC skin folds they had no use for it. They didn't cheat, they were stupid, got caught and now cop a whack. |
I saw Thomas at VFL games a few times and looking at him I wanted to ask if he wanted me to buy him a feed. Skinny little farker. If he was buying PED's he should ask for his money back.
_________________
Every dead body on Mt Everest was once a highly motivated person, so maybe just calm the **** down. |
|
|
|
|
AN_Inkling
Joined: 06 Oct 2007
|
| Post subject: | |
|
| think positive wrote: | You don't seem to think it's their responsibility at all though, all is forgiven, come home. If they deserve to get another chance I'm all for it but only if they can bring something to the team in 18 months time. I'm not convinced Thomas can and we simply can't afford any dead wood.
Take Marley, he served his time away from the game, he's kept his nose clean since, and he's worked bloody hard on his game, be lost without him
If they can do that ok, but we owe them nothing more than encouragement to do their best to make our investment in them worth it |
It's not blind support though, it's support.
Neither David or myself are saying it's a great thing that they took the risk of using illicit drugs. Personally, this doesn't greatly change my view of them, I don't have a great deal of interest in the personal lives of players and I'm sure it's something many others in the league have done without the dire consequences.
Had it been proved that they cheated then I'd be less forgiving. If what had gone on at Essendon happened at Collingwood? I'd be expecting both Eddie and Bucks to be gone. So no, not blind support nor blind condemnation and rather than completely relying on my own ill-informed view (I don't know these blokes), I'll defer to Bucks and Eddie who say they are both quality young men.
_________________
Well done boys! |
|
|
|
|
RudeBoy
Joined: 28 Nov 2005
|
| Post subject: | |
|
| AN_Inkling wrote: | | think positive wrote: | You don't seem to think it's their responsibility at all though, all is forgiven, come home. If they deserve to get another chance I'm all for it but only if they can bring something to the team in 18 months time. I'm not convinced Thomas can and we simply can't afford any dead wood.
Take Marley, he served his time away from the game, he's kept his nose clean since, and he's worked bloody hard on his game, be lost without him
If they can do that ok, but we owe them nothing more than encouragement to do their best to make our investment in them worth it |
It's not blind support though, it's support.
Neither David or myself are saying it's a great thing that they took the risk of using illicit drugs. Personally, this doesn't greatly change my view of them, I don't have a great deal of interest in the personal lives of players and I'm sure it's something many others in the league have done without the dire consequences.
Had it been proved that they cheated then I'd be less forgiving. If what had gone on at Essendon happened at Collingwood? I'd be expecting both Eddie and Bucks to be gone. So no, not blind support nor blind condemnation and rather than completely relying on my own ill-informed view (I don't know these blokes), I'll defer to Bucks and Eddie who say they are both quality young men. |
+1. |
|
|
|
|
David
to wish impossible things
Joined: 27 Jul 2003
Location: the edge of the deep green sea
|
| Post subject: | |
|
| King Monkey wrote: | Under the governing code that has jurisdiction over "drug cheating", you are defined as a "drug cheat" as soon as you test positive, unless you can prove mitigating circumstances.
In this case we are talking about a likely but unproven "oops I didn't mean it" story, being used against 100% concrete evidence that there was a Performance Enhancing Drug in their systems.
This is as black and white as it comes.
How's that so hard to understand?? |
Sorry, I didn't realise that "drug cheat" was an official term found in the WADA code of conduct. I thought it was an informal term used to refer to people who were found to have deliberately engaged in doping in order to get an advantage over their competitors.
Still, as I said, if it makes you feel like a top bloke calling two of our boys "drug cheats", go right ahead.
_________________
"Every time we witness an injustice and do not act, we train our character to be passive in its presence." – Julian Assange |
|
|
|
|
think positive
Side By Side
Joined: 30 Jun 2005
Location: somewhere
|
| Post subject: | |
|
OMG! Yep let's leave it to Eddie to tell the truth. Now I love Eddie, buts he's a media hoare, and the best in the business, and bucks is the best public speaker in coaching land, probably ever! I'd love to hear what they are saying behind closed doors
Bone em comes to mind!
_________________
You cant fix stupid, turns out you cant quarantine it either! |
|
|
|
|
think positive
Side By Side
Joined: 30 Jun 2005
Location: somewhere
|
| Post subject: | |
|
| David wrote: | | King Monkey wrote: | Under the governing code that has jurisdiction over "drug cheating", you are defined as a "drug cheat" as soon as you test positive, unless you can prove mitigating circumstances.
In this case we are talking about a likely but unproven "oops I didn't mean it" story, being used against 100% concrete evidence that there was a Performance Enhancing Drug in their systems.
This is as black and white as it comes.
How's that so hard to understand?? |
Sorry, I didn't realise that "drug cheat" was an official term found in the WADA code of conduct. I thought it was an informal term used to refer to people who were found to have deliberately engaged in doping in order to get an advantage over their competitors.
Still, as I said, if it makes you feel like a top bloke calling two of our boys "drug cheats", go right ahead. |
See that's what shits me
Your using the good old side by side I'm a better supporter than you line, as monkey put it above. Bullshit. You see everyone like that from pediphiles to mass murderers! The fact is, they are now publicly known as, wait for. It.........DRUG CHEATS! The fact of the matter is, if their story is true, and they got it along with the illicit drugs they purchased or received, they STILL DID THE STUPID THING! That's fact. They were not held done and injected.
For gods sake, no one is saying, **** em, (ok a couple but their is always the delusional) we are just saying, don't be so forgiving, because it bloody well is not ok. We have needed another defender in how many games lately? We just lost 6 from 5, I believe Keeffe could have been the difference. And he certainly would be next week when brown isn't playing. This has cost us finals experience for our bunch of young kids. It's a business. It's a sporting club. It's a TEAM. Sport, and they let that team down BIG TIME! What is so hard to understand about that?
It ain't ok. It never will be. And they have no one to blame but themselves. And we have every right to also blame them.
If they want back in, they earn it. Just pretend for a minute your paying their salary. They are still getting their base salary this. Year, and they are not allowed to set foot in the place. Pretty $£$%^%%$ good if you ask me! Bullshit. They should knock back the money. Or offer to earn it through other means.
I'm really over this your a shit supporter because you won't invite them For dinner and a hug because they made a little boo boo shit! They are old enough to vote, drive, and make a hell of a lot of money playing footy. It's called taking responsibility for your actions. And quite frankly, in my opinion that's what's wrong with this $£$%^%%$ world right now, let alone our footy club.
It ain't my fault. Well who's it it then?
_________________
You cant fix stupid, turns out you cant quarantine it either! |
|
|
|
|
King Monkey
Joined: 15 Apr 2009
Location: On a journey to seek the scriptures of enlightenment....
|
| Post subject: | |
|
| David wrote: | | King Monkey wrote: | Under the governing code that has jurisdiction over "drug cheating", you are defined as a "drug cheat" as soon as you test positive, unless you can prove mitigating circumstances.
In this case we are talking about a likely but unproven "oops I didn't mean it" story, being used against 100% concrete evidence that there was a Performance Enhancing Drug in their systems.
This is as black and white as it comes.
How's that so hard to understand?? |
Sorry, I didn't realise that "drug cheat" was an official term found in the WADA code of conduct. I thought it was an informal term used to refer to people who were found to have deliberately engaged in doping in order to get an advantage over their competitors.
Still, as I said, if it makes you feel like a top bloke calling two of our boys "drug cheats", go right ahead. |
I would've thought getting suspended for taking Performance Enhancing Drugs is fairly automatic in regards to the terminology -
being convicted for theft doesn't make you a "thief"????
Separate the emotion -
they were caught with a Performance Enhancing Drug in their systems, without being able to provide evidence they didn't take it to enhance their performance.
Most of us probably believe their story about St Kilda Fest, but that doesn't help in the eyes of the policing authority, it's nothing more than a story without any evidence to back it up.
This has nothing to do with whether you or I think they "cheated".
This is called dealing with facts David, not here say. You seem to be struggling with that concept.
_________________
"I am a great sage, equal of heaven.
Grow stick, grow.
Fly cloud, fly.
Oh you are a dee-mon, I love to fiiight." |
|
|
|
|
David
to wish impossible things
Joined: 27 Jul 2003
Location: the edge of the deep green sea
|
| Post subject: | |
|
So what's happened to giving them the benefit of the doubt? You yourself have said that you're inclined to believe the story about St. Kilda festival. As Collingwood supporters, I would have thought we'd be just a little bit more inclined (you know, loyalty and all that) to back our players.
As I said a few pages back, it's more like you being found with stolen goods. In this case, being found with stolen goods and offering an extremely plausible story that people in the know accept. Would that make it reasonable for people to call you a 'thief'?
The conviction they received here (not a 2 year ban for being 'drug cheats', but merely for having the substance in their systems – we all know how WADA operates) is the result of a kind of Alford plea. Look up the West Memphis Three. Only a prize turkey would still call those boys murderers now, even though they officially pled guilty.
Anyway, my point is, it's stupid and vindictive to use these pejorative descriptions when you're not in command of the facts. How you refer to Keeffe and Thomas is up to you, but I'm not sure what good you think you're doing if you choose to refer to them as drug cheats.
_________________
"Every time we witness an injustice and do not act, we train our character to be passive in its presence." – Julian Assange |
|
|
|
|
AN_Inkling
Joined: 06 Oct 2007
|
| Post subject: | |
|
| think positive wrote: | OMG! Yep let's leave it to Eddie to tell the truth. Now I love Eddie, buts he's a media hoare, and the best in the business, and bucks is the best public speaker in coaching land, probably ever! I'd love to hear what they are saying behind closed doors
Bone em comes to mind! |
This makes no sense. If Bucks and Eddie had no respect for these men they'd not be offering them a lifeline. They know them far better than we do and know more about what other players at the club get up to. With this knowledge, they feel they deserve another chance, I don't think any of us are in a position to second guess that.
And based on what has been presented to us, they are definitely not "cheats". As a supporter I'm more likely to give our guys the benefit of the doubt when the facts aren't clear, in this case I don't even think that is necessary, even an objective look at the facts suggests that this was not about cheating. What we can definitely say is that no cheating has been proven. Calling them cheats might be something I'd do as an opposition supporter, but it's not a fair or accurate label.
_________________
Well done boys! |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
You cannot attach files in this forum
You can download files in this forum
|
|
The Rules
FAQ
Usergroups
Calendar
Search
Log in
Register
