| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
Woods 
Joined: 21 Aug 2013
Location: Melbourne
|
| Post subject: Should Coll. ask AFL to lift prov. ban on JT & LK for Rn |  |
|
Josh Thomas and Lachlan Keefe are now provisionally suspended as a result of testing positive for a banned drug (Note: B sample still to be tested - results expected mid-April).
As I understand the rules, the AFL has discretion to temporarily lift the provisional suspension if asked by the players' club.
So, should Collingwood make such a request to the AFL. The two players can then be selected to play against Brisbane in Rnd1? |
|
|
|
 |
Bob Sugar
Joined: 11 Feb 2010
Location: Benalla
|
| Post subject: | |
|
Is Buckley good looking?
_________________
Defender...........
On the day before the first, Daicos created God.
You like this. |
|
|
|
|
Piesnchess
piesnchess
Joined: 09 Jun 2008
|
| Post subject: | |
|
Innocent until proven guilty, wheres a good smooth talking QC when you need one ??
_________________
Poverty exists not because we cannot feed the poor, but because we cannot satisfy the rich.
Chess and Vodka are born brothers. - Russian proverb. |
|
|
|
|
Collingwood Crackerjack
Joined: 28 Jul 2008
Location: Canberra
|
| Post subject: | |
|
I've consulted my magic 8-ball......
"All signs point to no"
_________________
"The last thing he expected WAS THE FIRST THING HE GOT!!!!!"
© Collingwood Crackerjack, 1992 |
|
|
|
|
stui magpie 
Prepare for the worst, hope for the best.
Joined: 03 May 2005
Location: In flagrante delicto
|
| Post subject: | |
|
| Defender wrote: | | Is Buckley good looking? |
Coff {head like bashed crab} coff
_________________
Every dead body on Mt Everest was once a highly motivated person, so maybe just calm the **** down. |
|
|
|
|
melliot
Joined: 07 Apr 2006
Location: Bendigo
|
| Post subject: | |
|
No.
Why would we? Last time I looked we were black and white. Not black and red. |
|
|
|
|
swoop42 
Whatcha gonna do when he comes for you?
Joined: 02 Aug 2008
Location: The 18
|
| Post subject: | |
|
No.
_________________
He's mad. He's bad. He's MaynHARD! |
|
|
|
|
Darkstranger
Joined: 06 Jun 2012
|
| Post subject: | |
|
Frankly my dear I don't give a dam!
_________________
There is Collingwood and then the rest. |
|
|
|
|
Dave The Man 
Joined: 01 Apr 2005
Location: Someville, Victoria, Australia
|
| Post subject: | |
|
They are not Best 22 Players and Would not play RD 1 Anyway
_________________
I am Da Man |
|
|
|
|
mattys123
Joined: 07 Jul 2009
Location: Narre Warren, VIC
|
| Post subject: | |
|
I think the provisional ban should stand, it's only for 2 games and then the B sample will come back.
Yes they have the right to the presumption of innocence, but there's also a problem with drugs in sport, more importantly drugs in this sport.
If they get off their may be legal options for them for reimbursement but just let them sit out the next 2 games until this is finished.
The joke to all this is Crowley, the AFL and ASADA knew about his painkiller problem at round 17 last season, yet he was only provisionally banned a few weeks ago. |
|
|
|
|
stoliboy 
Joined: 15 Aug 2003
Location: Sydney, NSW
|
|
|
|
|
Az
Joined: 25 Sep 2013
|
| Post subject: | |
|
Because they never tested positive for anything. Not defending them, but that's why.
I'm guessing in Crowley's case, he opted for his name not to be released, and the club must have fought to have his provisional suspension lifted while they were on the eve of finals? After all, his was only in a painkiller on match day. I'm lead to believe whatever Thomas and Keeffe have tested positive for is on the much more serious end of the PED scale. |
|
|
|
|
Proud Pies 
Joined: 22 Feb 2003
Location: Knox-ish
|
| Post subject: | |
|
requirement of WADA for the provisional ban
_________________
Jacqui © Proud Pies 2003 and beyond |
|
|
|
|
roar
Joined: 01 Sep 2004
|
| Post subject: | |
|
No.
_________________
kill for collingwood! |
|
|
|
|
Deja Vu
Joined: 20 Apr 2008
|
|
|
|
|
|
The Rules
FAQ
Usergroups
Calendar
Search
Log in
Register
