10,000,000 Cousins threads [Merged]

[Rosy]

Re: Cousins charged by AFL bringing game into disrepute

That's a bit condescending momentai. I'm not letting any opinion of Ben as a Tiger cloud my thoughts on Demetriou's actions. I'm merely saying we wouldn't have a clue of the terms and conditions Ben was subject to and how he has breached them. Most of the comments on this thread are made in ignorance of the actual facts, something we're not privy to at this stage.

 

[momentai]

Re: Cousins charged by AFL bringing game into disrepute

Didn't mean to cause offence Rosy.

We do pretty much have the facts though.

Ben runs away from a booze bus, winds up in rehab, meets with Demetriou, returns to the game having missed half the season, WC misses out on prelim final, Ben is picked up leaving a nightclub, : arrested on two charges and has one immediately withdrawn. The second, according to his lawyer, is also in error and will be defended. Note here that the second charge hasn't been adjourned pending a guity plea while Ben gets some rehab so he can appear as a revovering addict, it is adjourned primarily to allow the prosecution time to prepare their case....with the presumption of innocence continueing to apply.

Still no convictions, still no strikes over a 12 year playing career. There is more. Ben leaves for California on a private trip. Overzealous media make all sorts of idiotic remarks, concerning threats to Bens life, while Ben is (probably) actually shaked up, but still in contact with family.

Demetriou now really really angry with the publicity, having previously received legal advice and rightly taken no action, now responds while Ben is out of the Country, with a charge which has the potential to end Ben's career.

This is no small matter.

 

[Rosy]

Re: Cousins charged by AFL bringing game into disrepute

We do pretty much have the facts though.

What you've posted isn't what I was referring to. Ben had strict conditions imposed by his club and I think the AFL too. Can you tell me what those conditions were?

 

[Tigers of Old]

Re: Cousins charged by AFL bringing game into disrepute

Forget this crap about evidence people keep talking about. An AFL hearing is not bound by the same rules as a court hearing so evidence in the form of criminal charges or being found guilty beyond reasonable doubt is not the criteria applied for such a charge.

Forget the evidence the police had in his recent dealings, but I am lead to believe they certainly had a lot more information than has been revealed in the media. Timing may have been off, but this happens heaps in there line of work.

I think you are spot on here gus.

Some here are forgetting Cousins is not only an employee of the WCE but an employee of the AFL as well.

For Demetriou to have taken this stance they must have a fair list on Benny.

 

[Tigerfan]

Re: Cousins charged by AFL bringing game into disrepute

Anyone think Swapper Milne's behaviour has been any better than Cousins?

And if assaulting a barman, or anyone else while overseas representing the AFL isn't bringing the game into disrepute then...You're a lucky man Fev.

And Ling's head alone should get him charged for bringing the game into disrepute

 

[momentai]

Re: Cousins charged by AFL bringing game into disrepute

Rosy,
As I suggested in second last post very strict by club over which they have taken action.

But this is about due process. ullhair

There have been no previous admissions, no previous findings of guilt and yet the AFL are calling on Ben who has the onus of proof on him, (remember the Fraser Brown case,) to show that he hasn't bought the game into disrepute.

 

[KnightersRevenge]

Re: Cousins charged by AFL bringing game into disrepute

HOWEVER having said all that, people are quite correct in saying that if the AFL do adopt this approach in Bens case they will be forcing their own hand in many ways......

:clap

I would agree for the most part, except that I think the AFL is and should be more concerned with clubs than players. It is WC's abject failure to deal with this, and the growing ethos of untouchableness around the club that is ultimately to blame. I'm not saying he should get off scott free, but that what the AFL should be doing is ensuruing that the duty of care that the clubs have to their players, supporters and OUR game is a priority in the boardroom. The Fonz should be sending out the message loud and clear to the clubs - deal with this s#*t or else.

We all know that even here in Melbourne the boys can get away with a bit, especially close to home, but that is small bikkies compared to what goes on in Perth. (the judiciary to hand out a wet lettuce leaf of a judgement regarding the St Kilda and Brisbane boys doesn't help matters!)

 

[momentai]

Re: Cousins charged by AFL bringing game into disrepute

I think you are spot on here gus.

Some here are forgetting Cousins is not only an employee of the WCE but an employee of the AFL as well.

For Demetriou to have taken this stance they must have a fair list on Benny.

Tripe. Ben is being called on to respond to the charge. Demetriou won't be called on to prove anything.

And whatever Ben might say is likely to be leaked, in a manner which could easily prejudice his criminal defence to the outstanding charge. This is why lawyers classicly advise clients to say nothing. The AFL is reponding hysterically to the publicity attached to Bens arrival in the US. Otherwise action would have been taken when WC took theirs.

 

[Rosy]

Re: Cousins charged by AFL bringing game into disrepute

There have been no previous admissions, no previous findings of guilt and yet the AFL are calling on Ben who has the onus of proof on him, (remember the Fraser Brown case,) to show that he hasn't bought the game into disrepute.

Yet again we don't know what the charge is for momentai. It could be for sustained efforts, it could be for one incident or it could be in regard to breaching clauses in his contract. We don't know.

If you can believe what was written in the Age The AFL did not say whether the charge related to a specific incident involving the 29-year-old, or to his behaviour over a sustained period and said no further comment would be made before the hearing.

 

[Bill James]

Re: Cousins charged by AFL bringing game into disrepute

I find it amusing people are getting so het up about Ben Cousins either way. We don't know the terms of his contract or his AFL registration and wouldn't have a clue about what would constitute a breach or not. Ben would have known the terms though so I hope he had the sense not to breach them if he wants to play again.

Here's two facts we know:

1. Ben has a substance abuse problem on his own admission.
2. Ben developed a substance abuse problem while playing under the AFL's illicit drug testing program without ever being tested positive.

A reasonable question that can be asked on these facts.

How can the AFL possibly charge him for bringing the game into disrepute for actions related to an addiction when its own drug policy was incapable of identifying him or educating him in the early stages of developing a substance abuse problem?

Ben's problem is no longer a behavioural issue of recreational drug use. His problem is now a long term health issue of addicition. The AFL is effectively charging him for having a health problem when its drug policy was incapable of identifying the preceding behaviour problem that let to the addiction.

 

[Tigers of Old]

Re: Cousins charged by AFL bringing game into disrepute

Here's two facts we know:

1. Ben has a substance abuse problem on his own admission.
2. Ben developed a substance abuse problem while playing under the AFL's illicit drug testing program without ever being tested positive.

A reasonable question that can be asked on these facts.

How can the AFL possibly charge him for bringing the game into disrepute for actions related to an addiction when its own drug policy was incapable of identifying him or educating him in the early stages of developing a substance abuse problem?

Ben's problem is no longer a behavioural issue of recreational drug use. His problem is now a long term health issue of addicition. The AFL is effectively charging him for having a health problem when its drug policy was incapable of identifying the preceding behaviour problem that let to the addiction.

Definitely agree that the entire drug policy needs to be reviewed.

It's been a clear failure in this instance.

It could be for sustained efforts, it could be for one incident or it could be in regard to breaching clauses in his contract. We don't know.

If you can believe what was written in the Age The AFL did not say whether the charge related to a specific incident involving the 29-year-old, or to his behaviour over a sustained period and said no further comment would be made before the hearing.

Good post. Plenty to come out and as gus said in an earlier post this could get very ugly for all involved if Cousins wants to go to court.

 

[Rosy]

Re: Cousins charged by AFL bringing game into disrepute

Here's two facts we know:

1. Ben has a substance abuse problem on his own admission.
2. Ben developed a substance abuse problem while playing under the AFL's illicit drug testing program without ever being tested positive.

That doesn't tell us what Ben's charges relate to though. Can't answer your question because we don't know the details of Ben's charge or any breaches of clauses he's previously agreed to if that's applicable.

What we think about the AFL drug policy is a different matter to Ben's actual charges and the AFL's stance on him personally.

 

[nackers]

Re: Cousins charged by AFL bringing game into disrepute

I think the AFL and the rules committy should be put on charges for the way they have completly stuffed up our game, but you may as well bang your head against a wall because they answer to nobody. The only way you can hurt them is to stay away from games, but that won,t happen either. So i don,t see that we have any choice

 

[Willo]

Re: Cousins charged by AFL bringing game into disrepute

Just hafta wait and see what "they"do have on Benny, as nothing else has been said only a charge "of bringing the game into disrepute" could encompass everything or anything, could be Vlad just being a vindictive bastard (nooo). Will the same rule be used for all offenders, I wonder...Nth Melb be aware if Vlad doesn't get his own way.

 

[Bill James]

Re: Cousins charged by AFL bringing game into disrepute

That doesn't tell us what Ben's charges relate to though. Can't answer your question because we don't know the details of Ben's charge or any breaches of clauses he's previously agreed to if that's applicable.

What we think about the AFL drug policy is a different matter to Ben's actual charges and the AFL's stance on him personally.

Very true Rosy, and it further illustrates the hypocrisy of the AFL.

If it is good enough to publicly charge him then surely it is good enough to say on what grounds he is being charged.

The AFL is not prepared to publicly name players when they have evidence of drug abuse, but they are prepared to publicly charge players without specifying on what basis they are being charged.

This is a reactionary administration that gives every appearances of acting on the basis of what was in the newspaper the day before rather than on the basis of carefully considered policy implementation.

 

[Bill James]

Re: Cousins charged by AFL bringing game into disrepute

:clap

I would agree for the most part, except that I think the AFL is and should be more concerned with clubs than players. It is WC's abject failure to deal with this, and the growing ethos of untouchableness around the club that is ultimately to blame. I'm not saying he should get off scott free, but that what the AFL should be doing is ensuruing that the duty of care that the clubs have to their players, supporters and OUR game is a priority in the boardroom. The Fonz should be sending out the message loud and clear to the clubs - deal with this s#*t or else.

We all know that even here in Melbourne the boys can get away with a bit, especially close to home, but that is small bikkies compared to what goes on in Perth. (the judiciary to hand out a wet lettuce leaf of a judgement regarding the St Kilda and Brisbane boys doesn't help matters!)

Not a fan of the West Coast or Ben Cousins attitude for that matter, but to be fair to the WC they are a little hamstrung. As I understand it the clubs are not allowed to drug test players which makes it very difficult to prove drug behaviour and take action. The onus for drug testing and thefore evidence than can exact mandatory penalties or education programs, rests with the AFL not the WC.

 

[Hayfever]

Re: Cousins charged by AFL bringing game into disrepute

Cousins greatest crime is embarrassing Vlad Putout over the AFL drug policy. One of the codes most celebrated and elite players has shown up the policy and its policing as being like the Keystone Cops run by Noddy.

Poor old Dementrious was enjoying his overseas sojourn only to be interrupted by minor matters like bad boy Benny and the naughty Kangaroos. Not to mention the unmentionable but very visible Visy biz.

 

[gustiger12]

Re: Cousins charged by AFL bringing game into disrepute

Here's two facts we know:

1. Ben has a substance abuse problem on his own admission.
2. Ben developed a substance abuse problem while playing under the AFL's illicit drug testing program without ever being tested positive.

A reasonable question that can be asked on these facts.

How can the AFL possibly charge him for bringing the game into disrepute for actions related to an addiction when its own drug policy was incapable of identifying him or educating him in the early stages of developing a substance abuse problem?

Ben's problem is no longer a behavioural issue of recreational drug use. His problem is now a long term health issue of addicition. The AFL is effectively charging him for having a health problem when its drug policy was incapable of identifying the preceding behaviour problem that let to the addiction.

Your spot on Bill and the reason they now find themselves in the position they are is because they tried to sweep the whole drugs in sport thing under the carpet instead of tackling the issue head on in the first place. It just astounds me that people continue to argue that Cousins can't have a problem because he has never tested positive, yet he himself and his family have openly admitted he has a "Subtance abuse" problem or however you want to put it.

Vlad was stupid enough to beat his chest that Andrew Johns would have been picked up under the AFL system, whilst ignoring the mess in his own back yard.

As mentioned in one Media article today Cousins lawyers will argue that their are players on two strikes still playing in the AFL yet Cousins who has no strikes, and has sought help for his problem (regardless of motives) and yet the AFL is trying to prevent him from playing the game.

I am not a fan of Cousins, don't get me wrong, but the AFL have tried to sweep things under the carpet for too long and now it has come back to bite them.

This could open a nasty can or worms for them and the West Coast Eagles.

 

[mjb]

Re: Cousins charged by AFL bringing game into disrepute

Here's two facts we know:

1. Ben has a substance abuse problem on his own admission.
2. Ben developed a substance abuse problem while playing under the AFL's illicit drug testing program without ever being tested positive.

Actually, I think that you'll find that Ben Cousins has never admitted having a substance abuse problem. From what I recall of the interview/press conference he said he used drugs, but never mentioned "abuse".

At the time (before the rest of the excrement hit the oscillating rotary ventilation device) I thought "You smug prick, you won't even admit you've got a problem".

Michael

 

[checkside]

Re: Cousins charged by AFL bringing game into disrepute

Actually, I think that you'll find that Ben Cousins has never admitted having a substance abuse problem. From what I recall of the interview/press conference he said he used drugs, but never mentioned "abuse".

At the time (before the rest of the excrement hit the oscillating rotary ventilation device) I thought "You smug prick, you won't even admit you've got a problem".

Michael

I thought when he had the interview before/after he went to rehab the first time he said he went to rehab with illness related to substance abuse.