by Brodlach » Sat Aug 15, 2015 10:48 am
Brodlach wrote:Rory Laird might end up the best IMO, he is an absolute jet. He has been in great form at the Bloods
by Wedgie » Sat Aug 15, 2015 2:27 pm
Brodlach wrote:Was still co captain when the alleged incident happened
Armchair expert wrote:Such a great club are Geelong
by StrayDog » Sat Aug 15, 2015 3:12 pm
Dogwatcher wrote:It would be on pretty thin ground. A waste of money.
They would argue that he was captain at the time of the alleged incident.
They would also argue that the story indicated the measures South had taken.
Wedgie wrote:Brodlach wrote:Was still co captain when the alleged incident happened
Irrelevent.
by Dogwatcher » Sat Aug 15, 2015 4:47 pm
Wedgie wrote:johntheclaret wrote:Is there grounds to sue the newspaper for misrepresentation? You would assume that South Adelaide FC, being a member of the state's national league would have some standing in the public domain and could argue that the newspaper's failure to include "Former" in its headline is detrimental to the clubs public image.
I'm assuming B&W's post is just confirming another headline that fails to use "Former"
Don't worry, if it was the other way around the journos would be lining up to sue, most precious creatures in the world.
by Wedgie » Sat Aug 15, 2015 5:32 pm
Dogwatcher wrote:Wedgie wrote:johntheclaret wrote:Is there grounds to sue the newspaper for misrepresentation? You would assume that South Adelaide FC, being a member of the state's national league would have some standing in the public domain and could argue that the newspaper's failure to include "Former" in its headline is detrimental to the clubs public image.
I'm assuming B&W's post is just confirming another headline that fails to use "Former"
Don't worry, if it was the other way around the journos would be lining up to sue, most precious creatures in the world.
I doubt they would be lining up to sue over that - they know the defamation laws. They know there's nothing in it.
But, yes, some journos are precious.
Armchair expert wrote:Such a great club are Geelong
by saintal » Wed Sep 07, 2016 8:11 pm
by vics01 » Wed Sep 07, 2016 8:23 pm
by saintal » Wed Sep 07, 2016 8:44 pm
vics01 wrote:A non unanimous decision is not innocent or guilty it just means a jury could not agree..
by pompy » Wed Sep 07, 2016 9:16 pm
by pompy » Fri Sep 09, 2016 12:18 pm
by heater31 » Fri Sep 09, 2016 12:23 pm
pompy wrote:So now he been found not-guilty, would South welcome him back?
Or would any other SANFL club be interested? Seems like he lives in North Adelaide.
Sounds like he may have some issues with recreation use, however probably no different to a fair proportion of society his age these days.
by pompy » Fri Sep 09, 2016 12:37 pm
heater31 wrote:pompy wrote:So now he been found not-guilty, would South welcome him back?
Or would any other SANFL club be interested? Seems like he lives in North Adelaide.
Sounds like he may have some issues with recreation use, however probably no different to a fair proportion of society his age these days.
Would you like a bloke at your club that kept this serious incident hidden from everyone for months only speaking up when your first court appearance is days away....
by Wedgie » Fri Sep 09, 2016 12:42 pm
pompy wrote:heater31 wrote:pompy wrote:So now he been found not-guilty, would South welcome him back?
Or would any other SANFL club be interested? Seems like he lives in North Adelaide.
Sounds like he may have some issues with recreation use, however probably no different to a fair proportion of society his age these days.
Would you like a bloke at your club that kept this serious incident hidden from everyone for months only speaking up when your first court appearance is days away....
No, I wouldn't personally. But I was asking if South or any clubs would be interested?
Armchair expert wrote:Such a great club are Geelong
by heater31 » Fri Sep 09, 2016 1:39 pm
pompy wrote:heater31 wrote:pompy wrote:So now he been found not-guilty, would South welcome him back?
Or would any other SANFL club be interested? Seems like he lives in North Adelaide.
Sounds like he may have some issues with recreation use, however probably no different to a fair proportion of society his age these days.
Would you like a bloke at your club that kept this serious incident hidden from everyone for months only speaking up when your first court appearance is days away....
No, I wouldn't personally. But I was asking if South or any clubs would be interested?
by Panther Pack » Fri Sep 09, 2016 1:43 pm
pompy wrote:heater31 wrote:pompy wrote:So now he been found not-guilty, would South welcome him back?
Or would any other SANFL club be interested? Seems like he lives in North Adelaide.
Sounds like he may have some issues with recreation use, however probably no different to a fair proportion of society his age these days.
Would you like a bloke at your club that kept this serious incident hidden from everyone for months only speaking up when your first court appearance is days away....
No, I wouldn't personally. But I was asking if South or any clubs would be interested?
Competitions SANFL Official Site | Country Footy SA | Southern Football League | VFL Footy
Club Forums Snouts Louts | The Roost | Redlegs Forum |