St Kilda sack Watters
Collapse
X
-
Re: St Kilda sack Watters
Despite the evidence and innuendo that has been published, there is no positive test against Essendon (or none released).Life is to be Enjoyed not EnduredComment
-
Re: St Kilda sack Watters
I see your point and agree for the most part, but at the very least, a positive out of this may be that footballers do their own checks and balances going forward. It's not good enough for a cyclist to say, ‘My coach said it was ok’.Comment
-
Re: St Kilda sack Watters
Yep, excatly what the Essendon players should have done, and maybe they did.FFC: Established 1883
Premierships: AFL 1954, 2016 VFA - 1898,99,1900, 1908, 1913, 1919-20, 1923-24, VFL: 2014, 2016 . Champions of Victoria 1924. AFLW - 2018.Comment
-
Re: St Kilda sack Watters
If I understand the facts of the case correctly, what he was taking had an unmarked ingredient, so it wasn't a case of not checking whether the substance was legal.If you kicked five goals and Tom Boyd kicked five goals, Tom Boyd kicked more goals than you.
Formerly gogriffComment
-
Re: St Kilda sack Watters
I'm not 100% sure about this but I remember hearing that Saad taken the drink/concoction before and a club official, probably one of the sport science guys in this case, had told him not to do it again specifically because of the unmarked ingredient.They say Burt Lancaster has one, but I don't believe them.Comment
-
[B][COLOR="#0000CD"]Our club was born in blood and boots, not in AFL focus groups.[/COLOR][/B]Comment
Comment