Official Adam Elliott and Bulldogs part ways

[B-Train]

In this case mutual decision is a euphemistic term for being sacked. He clearly didn't want to leave and was fighting tooth and nail to stay. But when they made it clear he'd be sacked if he didn't agree to a mutual termination then of course he accepted a mutual termination so he could get the rest of his salary this season..

Otherwise why else would he agree to a mutual termination if he had a leg to stand on and could fight it? The mutual termination was a PR move and a gesture from the club.

 

[dogluva]

There in lies the problem and I agree with most of what you've said in that male athletes cop a lot more scrutiny than females NO matter what they've done, it's more often than not, reported a whole lot worse than it actually is and that's not good for any transgressor not matter how trivial the offence in these social media days as mud sticks.

But as someone else mentioned this incident leaves us with more questions than answers as if it were that bad he wouldn't have been given a chance to plead his case and Millie would've been at least fined for being allegedly locked in a toilet with him.

Either he's been hard done by or she's got off lightly. One can't lose so much while the other cops a mere warning yet women bang on about inequality.

We will never really know the full story behind this and we can only assume that the way in which it has been dealt with was the only way it could have gone.
I think that the difference between punishments boiled down to the fact that Elliot has had a chequered past and was on his last warning. He had been in trouble with the courts prior to the Mad Monday incident with the judge making the comment

"Adam Elliot, you have a habit of making poor decisions, inflicted by alcohol.
"This is not your first time before the courts but you have made a valuable contribution to your community and been through enough public shaming.
"https://www.abc.net.au/news/2018-12...dam-elliott-asipeli-fine-escape-jail/10628126

That incident not only cost Elliot a fine but the club $250k fine as well and another round of bad publicity.
The incident with Lichaa was left unpunished by the club as they could not punish him on the basis of his stupidity but that would have been put in the memory banks and he would have been warned to tread warily and sort himself out which it appeared he had done by getting off the alcohol. Then the latest incident.....where he was asked to leave licenced premises..
He was fined by the NRL for a COVID breach..the club then had to work out exactly what form the punishment from them would be. That exercise took them 17 days.....The media reports included reference to a sponsorship that was in the process of being agreed to being lost due to the adverse publicity. There is another that may be saved but that will now depend on the way in which the club has acted being acceptable to the prospective sponsor.

Millie although she was also caught up in the toilet tryst had a clean record , she willingly came forward even before the integrity committee got involved and gave her statement and she was not classed as breaching COVID protocol simply because the women were not in a bubble and had no case to answer for that. Not saying that she was not complicit in it all because she was there but did not breach any rules.

 

[finchie]

Why the feck would u feel sorry for him
He’s a shit stain on the club we love
He’s a disgrace
Sort his problems out???
There’s bigger problems in the world than this kent
He’s being paid 450k a year and people feel sorry for him
Let him go get a real job
If anything he’s over achieved and should be happy he got to play fg in an era where half the nrl aren’t first grade level players
Feel sorry for him
Wake the fcuk up
6/7 years we paid this ***** to do sweet Fcuk all
He made more money this year than 90% of us for doing absolutely nothing yet tarnishing the club we love and support !!!
Fcuk the kent

 

[Kip Drordy]

Why the feck would u feel sorry for him
He’s a shit stain on the club we love
He’s a disgrace
Sort his problems out???
There’s bigger problems in the world than this kent
He’s being paid 450k a year and people feel sorry for him
Let him go get a real job
If anything he’s over achieved and should be happy he got to play fg in an era where half the nrl aren’t first grade level players
Feel sorry for him
Wake the fcuk up
6/7 years we paid this ***** to do sweet Fcuk all
He made more money this year than 90% of us for doing absolutely nothing yet tarnishing the club we love and support !!!
Fcuk the kent

I love it when your crankie!

 

[Ant2611]

He did it to himself. He has no one else to blame.

Are you talking about Utility Half?

 

[hackenbush]

I also feel for him despite his transgressions. The end result certainly is a good result for the club, but I would liked to have seen him moved on due to a club review on his ability & overall cap management. All clubs have double standards when it comes to antics of their star players. I.e. joey john's, Munster, Inglis, Wighton & others

I actually feel for the bloke. Even though I’ve never really rated him as a player it still sad to see him lose his job. I reckon he has some real issues he needs to deal with. Get right. He’ll get a contract somewhere I have no doubt.

 

[mr j]

After his previous misdemeanours you’d think he did everything possible to keep his nose squeaky clean. But he couldn’t help himself so I don’t feel sorry for him whatsoever. He had plenty of chances and kept screwing up. Good riddance to that shit stain of a human being. Bad decisions come with penalties. You’d think he learnt from previous issues but clearly isn’t capable of being a role model.

 

[Tassie Devil]

What are the 'real' reasons behind him leaving? Tbh, who really cares at this point?

He's gone. Clearly he was a disruptive influence on the playing group. We move on

 

[Vlasnik]

12 months too late should have never been re sighed.

 

[chisdog]

MUTUAL DECISION. HE WAS NOT SACKED.

So are you happy that a player was forced to leave because he supposedly kissed a girl? That doesn't make sense.

 

[chisdog]

We have no legal right to know, and he has a legal right to privacy.

He is no longer contracted to Dogs so they also have no legal right releasing any private info about him.

Just like if someone calls up a past employer of a potential employee they are unable to say anything negative. That’s why when I have called them in the past it’s always what someone doesn’t say not what they do say.

A bit different a standard workplace & a public football team don't you think?

 

[Tassie Devil]

So are you happy that a player was forced to leave because he supposedly kissed a girl? That doesn't make sense.

Get what you're saying mate but you've gotta trust the club and the processes they went through to get to this point.

He's gone. We move forward

 

[chisdog]

We will never really know the full story behind this and we can only assume that the way in which it has been dealt with was the only way it could have gone.
I think that the difference between punishments boiled down to the fact that Elliot has had a chequered past and was on his last warning. He had been in trouble with the courts prior to the Mad Monday incident with the judge making the comment

"Adam Elliot, you have a habit of making poor decisions, inflicted by alcohol.
"This is not your first time before the courts but you have made a valuable contribution to your community and been through enough public shaming.
"https://www.abc.net.au/news/2018-12...dam-elliott-asipeli-fine-escape-jail/10628126

That incident not only cost Elliot a fine but the club $250k fine as well and another round of bad publicity.
The incident with Lichaa was left unpunished by the club as they could not punish him on the basis of his stupidity but that would have been put in the memory banks and he would have been warned to tread warily and sort himself out which it appeared he had done by getting off the alcohol. Then the latest incident.....where he was asked to leave licenced premises..
He was fined by the NRL for a COVID breach..the club then had to work out exactly what form the punishment from them would be. That exercise took them 17 days.....The media reports included reference to a sponsorship that was in the process of being agreed to being lost due to the adverse publicity. There is another that may be saved but that will now depend on the way in which the club has acted being acceptable to the prospective sponsor.

Millie although she was also caught up in the toilet tryst had a clean record , she willingly came forward even before the integrity committee got involved and gave her statement and she was not classed as breaching COVID protocol simply because the women were not in a bubble and had no case to answer for that. Not saying that she was not complicit in it all because she was there but did not breach any rules.

So did the sponsor want to leave because Elliott kissed a girl in a toilet cubicle? I don't believe that's what happened but that is what we are being led to believe. Did Millie lie to the integrity committee? It would seem so because I don't think Elliott would have been asked to leave for that.

 

[chisdog]

What are the 'real' reasons behind him leaving? Tbh, who really cares at this point?

He's gone. Clearly he was a disruptive influence on the playing group. We move on

Don't we need to know what line was crossed for consistency?

 

[chisdog]

Get what you're saying mate but you've gotta trust the club and the processes they went through to get to this point.

He's gone. We move forward

Why? Did they just use this as an excuse to get rid of a player because the new management thought he was overpaid? I'm trying to look at it from a point of view of a prospective player. Would I go to a club that sacked a player because he kissed a girl in a toilet cubicle? (Again, I don't believe that is what happened, but that is the inference from the club & the NRL). So if another player does this do they get kicked to the curb too?

 

[Dawain87]

I feel the club knew something from the most recent incident that he didn’t disclose at the time as it was reported new information was given at his final defense to the board. They paid him out his last 2 months of his 2021 contract sounds to me like they got him to sign a deed of release so he doesn’t end up suing the club along with a non-disclosure agreement.

 

[Apercots]

got to laugh at the newbies on the forum and welcome!

the poll had like 50 votes yesterday

 

[Tassie Devil]

Don't we need to know what line was crossed for consistency?

No

 

[Tassie Devil]

Why? Did they just use this as an excuse to get rid of a player because the new management thought he was overpaid? I'm trying to look at it from a point of view of a prospective player. Would I go to a club that sacked a player because he kissed a girl in a toilet cubicle? (Again, I don't believe that is what happened, but that is the inference from the club & the NRL). So if another player does this do they get kicked to the curb too?

Wouldn't you say that "said player" would do their research and understand the kind of reasons he got let go for?

You seem pretty focused on the "kissed a girl in the toilet line" rather than mentioning other issues that occurred before this. Is there a reason why?

At the end of the day the club decided to pay him out. If prospective players see that as a bad thing and don't want to join, then so be it. Doubt anyone will give it a second thought personally

 

[bradyk]

All it should come down to in these situations is if the player is worth to us what they're on in the salary cap. Unless it's a repeat offender for serious things and the club has no choice. If you can use something as an excuse to sack a a player on a bad deal you do it. The Dragons did it with Vaughan and we've done it with Elliott (I guess both repeat offenders too, Curtis Scott another). If it's a top/star player on a good deal that's a different story. You protect them as much as possible and they get special treatment. That's how the game and life works.