#2 Jordan De Goey

[Pies4shaw]

That brings us back to the question why he is presently banished from the Club, doesn't it? If it's just about criminal guilt for the latest incident, there isn't any, yet. Doesn't that suggest that the Club is doing something else - or is it just OK that everyone accused of a crime is banished, pending the determination of their criminal charges?

[stui magpie]

If what De Goey is saying in this morning’s edition of the Herald-Sun is true in that the man and woman were stealing their drinks in the roped off area of the nightclub, his version of events will completely exonerate him, while De Goey’s friend has some explaining to do for attacking the guy with a bottle. This will all come out if it goes to court, but I suspect it won’t and the remaining charges will be withdrawn. As others have been saying De Goey needs to watch what he drinks when he goes out and he needs to be careful of the company he keeps.

Newsflash - Defendant's version of events, if believed, would completely exonerate him/her.

A couple of things confirm De Goey’s version of events to me. If De Goey is guilty why did De Goey and his friend continue drinking when the couple left? The fact no one required medical attention if my reading of the events is correct. De Goey’s vehement denials of what he’s being accused of. There’s two things here. His ethical behavior and any criminal behavior. I don’t see any criminal behavior. In the wash it’ll all come out.

The fact that security allowed them to resume drinking suggests they didn't do anything wrong in the eyes of security which supports DeGoeys version of events

[princem007]

A week is a long time in footy…But I don’t think an apology from the Media circus and Maclure will come anytime soon they will hang onto this entitled brat theme. If he is , is it a crime ?

As his lawyers said he was falsely accused , he was not the instigator, he was out minding his own business and 2 people went into his roped off area stealing drinks and then The male pushed degoey over twice .

Degoey defended himself and a scuffle occurred.

The bouncers evicted the 2 people who rang police from outside the night club and made up A story that degoey had touched her.

So the only crime is he defended himself , was he suppose to just stand there and take a beating ?

Is wearing a white robe a crime ?

Is having a few drinks during the off season a crime ?

[jackcass]

Do Collingwood supporters much care whether he's guilty or not in the criminal sense? That's a problem for a judicial system on the other side of the world.

Yes. Yes they do. Because if this is true he’s done bugger all wrong and should line up round 1.

Disagree. I’m not fussed if he’s guilty of assault or not. Caveat being that a guilty verdict doesn’t result in a period of incarceration.

Not condoning violence in any way shape or form, but a footballer being guilty of some push and shove in a nightclub is hardly earth shattering news. Nor should it necessarily require a suspension that impacts the H&A season too much.

[PyreneesPie]

That brings us back to the question why he is presently banished from the Club, doesn't it? If it's just about criminal guilt for the latest incident, there isn't any, yet. Doesn't that suggest that the Club is doing something else - or is it just OK that everyone accused of a crime is banished, pending the determination of their criminal charges?

Yep, it possibly does suggest that the club administration "is doing something else".
What that could be is really anyone's guess. It could be a multitude of reasons, from trying to relieve salary cap issues by driving JDG out, to being seen to do the 'right thing" by sponsors. Who would know because other than stating that they are disappointed and have banished JDG, they haven't given any hints as to their actual, solid reasons why.
They've just let the members and supporters stew and argue amongst themselves for the time being, whilst they maintain a closed shop..... just like any other form of political governance

[MJ23]

I don't have a view either way. I am just asking questions to try to tease out what it is that people are actually saying, so that I can consider it.

That said, I think your rhetorical flourish comparing De Goey with "half the players in the comp" is probably not useful - he plainly seems to be an outlier, doesn't he? No doubt plenty of players get caught in the wrong place at the wrong time occasionally. It seems to be a bit more of an issue with De Goey, though. The suggestions are that he's been on his last chance at Collingwood and given the spotlight on him on and off for a long period, now, you'd think that he might be less likely to have found himself in these most recent circumstances than other players. Yet, here we are - it isn't anybody else on our list or on another team's list. It's him, in the wrong place at the wrong time, yet again.

Covid aside - you dont think at least half 18-26yr old players in the off season do not go to bars and nighclubs with their mates ?

And History would suggest there have been many elite player in "circumstances". Harder to avoid now that everyone has a camera.

And again, he could have created a situation he shouldn't have been in OR he could actually be a victim.

[MJ23]

So, why is he stood down by Collingwood and not allowed to train, play or use the facilities? If it’s just about criminal penalty, does that make the Club itself part of the Collingwood-hating horde about which you express concern?

1. He was stood down when the sexual assault charge came out. There was massive debate about why players are not automatically stood down or if they should be able to continue to play until a court case. I have no problem with the club taking this action to deflect the club hating horde of journos, opposition and Collingwood supporters.

2. What has "standing him down" actually done - he's training on his own in the US in is own time as he has been for a few weeks.

3. The club may think it gets them a discount in the negotiations for a new contract. He can accept it or not and in the end the market will give him an idea as other clubs will want him.

4. Right now the ONLY way we recoup value in trade, FA or new contracxt with him is for him to play and play well next year.

IF the charges are dropped or significantly reduced and its proven he only defended himself Id suggest there will be more supporter backlash if we dont do everything we can to get max value for him.

[Ronnie McKeowns boots]

You reckon cruising around a night club in nothing other than a hotel robe isn’t enough to make yourself noticeable?

Absolute flog.

AND the vision of his eyes popping out of his head….. he was flying I reckon!!

So....????

What is it to you in all honesty?

Since when was being a footy player the same as being the Pope?

The comments going around here, if I was JDG I'd request a trade to go to Carlton and I would haunt people like you burnsy, haunt your nightmares for the next 7 to 8 years

I would want to bury this backstabbing black and white mob with at least 5 goals per game everytime we meet.

Enough dramas going on in the world without the fanbase of a sporting team who support Gladiators but turn on Thier Gladiators when they have a little fun with a couple of drinks in the off season

I tend to agree with our colleague of 1,000 aliases; have you seen some of the pictures of Buddy munted out of his brain? This was during his peak as well, there was one from Darwin where he looked about 5 pingers in!

[Quincy]

So a new version - from Degoey has come out and would change the original story and charges considerably. Yes, still a version and I’d suggest evidence to support one way or another would still come out.

Again, no medical for anyone involved and Degoey was not kicked out and allowed to stay and keep drinking.

Some who were very quick to believe the worst of him and the original version, are quick to dismiss now Degoey and his “version”

I will never understand why supporters hate some of our players so much they actually want him to be guilty.

I am tipping the guy with the swollen lip avoided medical attention because he did not want to be involved in criminal charges because of the fight he was in. He allegedly refused medical attention.

[Mr Miyagi]

Again, no cctv, no witness testimony by now. Bit weird for the prosecutor. I wouldn’t be surprised if there was someone involved who recognised JDG and thought they could get some mileage out of it.

And ditto re: Buddy. Geez I have stories about Hodge as well and that whole golden team. Richmond in the Qld hub, kept very quiet by media. And let’s not forget what Swanny got up to and how he gamed the system.

[Piesnchess]

AND lest we never forget Dusty and his chopsticks incident, rammed them into a wall next to a womans head in a restaurant, and two Tigers who got into an all in brawl in a nightclub, that Dimma totally defended them.. ? All teams have dickheads at times, but like Dusty , Swannie, they help u win Premierships, and thats the n ame of the game.

[eddiesmith]

JDG is 'stood down' until his court case which isn't due until about the same time he's due back at the club for training, so standing him down has **** all effect other than keeping the sooks happy that the club is doing something.

If he's found not guilty in a court of law, what possible reason would Collingwood have for terminating his contract?

The fact was they had to act quickly more due to the first charge that was quickly dropped because that's life in 2021, the fact the charge was thrown out within a day means nothing in the public court of opinion.

If the do gooders had their way, JDG would have been suspended for nearly 2 years for a frivolous charge that was eventually thrown out, we should be glad the New York Cops are less interested in dragging it out than the wonderful people of VicPol...

[think positive]

Jordy put himself in position for this to happen, I’d say it was clear by the predrinks video he was off his face. The club stood him down when they heard about serious felony charges. That is a more than fair response. Especially since it seems they were not contacted for several hours. He’s not sacked, he’s still getting paid.

So facts: lot of em! His story, her story, where is the other guys story? Or Dysons story? Any witnesses, CTV, or at least iPhone footage? He got himself some very expensive renown lawyers, I reckon he will walk, and I would not be at all surprised if he paid out a couple of non disclosure contracts. TBH I doubt the truth will ever come out now. Not one everyone agrees on anyway.

I’ve been away a few days, I’m not reading back. For me the club has handled this beautifully. As for DeGoey I have my doubts, there is just too much similar history. I guess time will tell if it’s the making of him or not. Regardless of guilt, you’d think he’s on his last chance.

[BazBoy]

Apart form the fraca and when I say 25 yr olds have different conceptions of behaviour in public to me an 80 yr old so this is not condemning him

The pre incident fun JDG thought was fine and caught on camera will not be judged by us but AFL have strict protocol on any thing it perceives damages their “brand”

Who has the biggest call on punishment AFL or us

[E]

That brings us back to the question why he is presently banished from the Club, doesn't it? If it's just about criminal guilt for the latest incident, there isn't any, yet. Doesn't that suggest that the Club is doing something else - or is it just OK that everyone accused of a crime is banished, pending the determination of their criminal charges?

Yep, it possibly does suggest that the club administration "is doing something else".
What that could be is really anyone's guess. It could be a multitude of reasons, from trying to relieve salary cap issues by driving JDG out, to being seen to do the 'right thing" by sponsors. Who would know because other than stating that they are disappointed and have banished JDG, they haven't given any hints as to their actual, solid reasons why.
They've just let the members and supporters stew and argue amongst themselves for the time being, whilst they maintain a closed shop..... just like any other form of political governance

i am of the combined view that

1. Jordan will ultimately be cleared as his conduct, while not smart, is not the type of conduct (contrary to first reports) requiring any discipline.

2. The club is doing absolutely the right thing by standing him down (with pay), until he is formally exonerated (or until the club has finished an investigation to its satisfaction). The "punishment" to Jordan is minimal since he is actually training independently right now and reputationally, the club cant really stand by a player prematurely as they have taken big hits to their credibility by doing this in the past (Heath Shaw ring any bells).