North Melbourne

[bornadog]

Apparently this isn't a police matter so I'm a bit confused as to why he's receiving a massive suspension.

Bringing the game into disrepute? Not sure how if he doesn't get charged by Police.

[Grantysghost]

Bringing the game into disrepute? Not sure how if he doesn't get charged by Police.

Good question.

I'm not really across his story, however in this instance I feel it's odd.

[Before I Die]

Bringing the game into disrepute? Not sure how if he doesn't get charged by Police.

From Ralph's article: The current allegation against Thomas is not believed to have involved a police complaint, and he escaped conviction after charges were downgraded last year.

If the victim chooses not to make a formal complaint to the police (which is absolutely their prerogative) then he wouldn't be charged.

[Grantysghost]

From Ralph's article: The current allegation against Thomas is not believed to have involved a police complaint, and he escaped conviction after charges were downgraded last year.

If the victim chooses not to make a formal complaint to the police (which is absolutely their prerogative) then he wouldn't be charged.

So why is he in trouble? They complained to the AFL? IF he is guilty then, worst of the worst, and the weight of incidents lends itself to that belief...However, if we are being judged outside of the legal system I kind of have an issue with that.

Guess there is some precedent there with drug strikes; this just seems far more character destroying. If we aren't innocent until PROVEN guilty we are in big trouble.

[D Mitchell]

Bringing the game into disrepute? Not sure how if he doesn't get charged by Police.

I really wish commercial, sporting (including, especially including, the AFL), educational, political, charitable organisations would get on with their core activities, what's in their respective constitutions and leave crime to the legal system and morals to ...

[Before I Die]

So why is he in trouble? They complained to the AFL? IF he is guilty then, worst of the worst, and the weight of incidents lends itself to that belief...However, if we are being judged outside of the legal system I kind of have an issue with that.

Guess there is some precedent there with drug strikes; this just seems far more character destroying. If we aren't innocent until PROVEN guilty we are in big trouble.

I don't agree. If the AFL is taking this action they must believe, at least on reasonable grounds that he has done something wrong. He may have admitted to it, there may be clear proof etc. If North or the AFLPA believed he wasn't been given a fair hearing, they would appeal. Beyond all reasonable doubt is not a thing outside a criminal court, and I suspect he would rather stay outside one.

[Before I Die]

I really wish commercial, sporting (including, especially including, the AFL), educational, political, charitable organisations would get on with their core activities, what's in their respective constitutions and leave crime to the legal system and morals to ...

I disagree with this on so many levels, but I'll just leave it at that and move on.

[Grantysghost]

I don't agree. If the AFL is taking this action they must believe, at least on reasonable grounds that he has done something wrong. He may have admitted to it, there may be clear proof etc. If North or the AFLPA believed he wasn't been given a fair hearing, they would appeal. Beyond all reasonable doubt is not a thing outside a criminal court, and I suspect he would rather stay outside one.

So you're ok in principal for an organisation the has questionable decision making (AFLx says hello) being judge, jury and executioner with out actually knowing anything about the case?

I get the emotional leanings here, I too am disgusted by this type of behaviour. However, god help us if the AFL is the decision maker on someone's reputation.

[chef]

Hes such a grub, should be booted for good.

[D Mitchell]

I disagree with this on so many levels, but I'll just leave it at that and move on.

No worries. There's room on this earth, and especially on this forum, for us all.

[D Mitchell]

So you're ok in principal for an organisation the has questionable decision making (AFLx says hello) being judge, jury and executioner with out actually knowing anything about the case?

I get the emotional leanings here, I too am disgusted by this type of behaviour. However, god help us if the AFL is the decision maker on someone's reputation

G, please. Spot on.

[Bulldog Joe]

So you're ok in principal for an organisation the has questionable decision making (AFLx says hello) being judge, jury and executioner with out actually knowing anything about the case?

I get the emotional leanings here, I too am disgusted by this type of behaviour. However, god help us if the AFL is the decision maker on someone's reputation.

While the principle you espouse is valid, I think this case is a little different.

They have opted not to go to the courts (and we know the courts effectiveness on DV is poor).

Thomas would have representation via his agent and AFLPA with ample opportunity to get highly qualified legal counsel.

If the Thomas camp are then accepting the punishment handed down, I don't see there is too much to complain about.

They would certainly be entitled to take it to legal means if they desired.

[Topdog]

.

They would certainly be entitled to take it to legal means if they desired.

Its this part for me, if he has genuinely done nothing and gets booted the AFL open themselves up to a huge lawsuit and another unwanted distraction.

I'm certainly not OK with the AFL in general being in charge of much but will reserve judgement based on the outcome and reaction to said outcome by the parties involved.

RE: Bringing the game into disrepute, that can involve many things that arent police matters. I'm not sure why police chargers are being seen as needed here.

[bulldogtragic]

Side note. Is the boys club BS game up with Laura Kane’s appointment? First she laid a charge to the tribunal during the finals when the usual thing is put your AFEL head in the sand and claim it’s a contact sport between men. Then pushed the rule change over the bump when there was no suspension for it. Now this action from the AFEL.

I’m confused. If the boys club can’t look after itself what will happen?

TT can remain presumed innocent to a criminal standard. But we aren’t talking about that. It’s effectively the standard an employer would hold us all to. Or he can contest everything and presumably sit down with the footy media and explain why the AFEL have got it wrong. I don’t trust the AFEL. But if all the parties do sign off on this, the AFEL might finally be on the right side of one of these issues.

[Axe Man]

'Would do again': Tarryn Thomas' shocking text messages exposed

Damning texts sent by Tarryn Thomas have emerged on social media as the AFL is set to hand down sanctions to the North Melbourne player over fresh allegations of domestic violence.

A screenshot of a message, circulating on Instagram and obtained by the Herald Sun, showed Thomas speaking about abusing women.

?And for them girls I abuse I would do again,? he wrote to a woman.

?After what they did to me if you do me wrong I will let you have it.?

It comes as a source close to another woman, who was previously linked to Thomas, detailed his allegedly abusive nature.

?He harassed, stalked, abused and made threats against her,? they said.

?He made her feel worthless and small with his nasty words.?

The source said the woman was ?fearful? of Thomas and isolated her from family and friends.

Thomas? career at the Kangaroos could be over within days with the AFL expected to suspend him of up to 18 weeks.

On Monday, the AFL said its investigation into the new allegations of domestic violence was not yet resolved.

But it?s understood a suspension of that length had been raised in discussions with the AFL and North Melbourne.

Last year, Thomas escaped conviction after threatening to share an explicit video of his ex-partner Jamai Curran.

Instead, he was ordered to pay $1000 to charity.

At the time, Ms Curran told the Herald Sun that she believed Thomas never faced harsh consequences for his behaviour.

?I think he believes the way he treats women is justified because of his status and power,? she said.

?I think he believes he?s entitled to treat women however he wants.

?North Melbourne and the justice system not punishing him just reinforces it is OK because he never faces consequences.?

Ms Curran said the AFL were ?letting women down? by prioritising players and their reputations.

?I think the AFL are letting women down and at this point, need to be held responsible,? she said.

?The AFL and clubs talk so much about domestic violence and taking it seriously but when push comes to shove they don?t do anything about it because it?s more important to protect players and reputations.

?It will be interesting to see how this plays out and if AFL finally matches its actions with its words.?

An 18-week suspension could give the Kangaroos cause to cut ties with Thomas.

He is in the last season of a lucrative contract, currently being paid between $600,000 to $700,000.