The comments on his instagram page is disgusting. 

Social media could be the worse thing that has ever come out.

11 hours ago, dee-eee said:

My Essendon supporting sister has done a 360 on Tom after taking her grandson to a kids football clinic at Caulfield Grammar today (his old school) . He was one of the instructors and she thought he showed guts to appear in public so soon after such massive negative publicity . She sought him out and told him such as she shook his hand .

 

I presume you mean she's done a 180. If she's done a 360 she's back where she started. But it's nice to see some humanism shine through.

12 hours ago, Lord Ivanhoe said:

Let he who has committed no sins cast the first stone.

So many perfect people on this site! You are a supporter or a criticiser.

The latter is more a reflection of the comment within oneself.

Are you suggesting a person can be only one but not the other? If so, I can't agree. In fact, just read Demonland. It's full of supporters who are willing to criticise the club and players. Sometimes the criticism is warranted, and sometimes it's probably not.

10 minutes ago, dazzledavey36 said:

The comments on his instagram page is disgusting. 

Social media could be the worse thing that has ever come out.

You do realise that Demonland is a form of social media?

I know this will sound a bit like the "guns don't kill people, people kill people" argument. But technically it's the users of social media rather than the medium itself which is the problem. Particularly the ability to be anonymous and physically removed. (I recognise the irony posting under a pseudonym.)

Edited July 6, 20178 yr by La Dee-vina Comedia
Added para

2 minutes ago, La Dee-vina Comedia said:

You do realise that Demonland is a form of social media?

According to AFL news, Callum Mills has changed his name to Bugg victim. 

2 minutes ago, Demon77 said:

According to AFL news, Callum Mills has changed his name to Bugg victim. 

Very good Demon77

Not saying it is right

but Tommy bought on all the Social Media Backlash entirely by his own actions. 

He provoked reaction the week before, so belting a player in the head 4 minutes into a friday night match is going to send Social Media into meltdown. 

What makes me really angry is that Barry "festival" Hall has just been put into the AFL Hall of Fame. 

Outrageous Decision

31 minutes ago, Sir Why You Little said:

Not saying it is right

but Tommy bought on all the Social Media Backlash entirely by his own actions. 

He provoked reaction the week before, so belting a player in the head 4 minutes into a friday night match is going to send Social Media into meltdown. 

What makes me really angry is that Barry "festival" Hall has just been put into the AFL Hall of Fame. 

Outrageous Decision

Where do we stop with this though, SWYL?  Take a look through the list of names that are HOF members, there's many a thug on the list.  But also look at some of the other names that have been involved in offield events, such as Carey, Ablett, Lockett.

If we are to question the right of Hall being in the HOF, we have to be consistent and question anyone that has priors.  Consistency is what we are asking of the AFL, it's only fair that they could ask the same of us.

Just now, The Chazz said:

Where do we stop with this though, SWYL?  Take a look through the list of names that are HOF members, there's many a thug on the list.  But also look at some of the other names that have been involved in offield events, such as Carey, Ablett, Lockett.

If we are to question the right of Hall being in the HOF, we have to be consistent and question anyone that has priors.  Consistency is what we are asking of the AFL, it's only fair that they could ask the same of us.

Point taken. I am still very angry that Hall was allowed to play in the 2005 GF. Let alone hold up a cup. My brother was at the Prelim when Barry let his punch go on McGuire, he heard it connect 10 rows back

Staker was belted on Prime Time TV

It is a disgrace. 

Chris Judd is another, anyone who eye goughes should be charged with assault

eye surgery is not fun i assure you

2 hours ago, Demon77 said:

According to AFL news, Callum Mills has changed his name to Bugg victim. 

I saw that...utter garbage sensationalism. 

4 hours ago, Demon77 said:

According to AFL news, Callum Mills has changed his name to Bugg victim. 

And is likley to play this week.

21 hours ago, The Chazz said:

I look forward to your next post when you will claim he suffers from tourettes, or a Neeld-like twitch.

How about the fact that he was charged, by the MRP, with intentional striking. The fact that Bugg had a lawyer representing him, who would've used his professional judgement when supporting Bugg''s guilty plea.

These lawyers are good. If they can see any remote possibility of a sentence reduction and/or the case being thrown out due to an incorrect charge, they feast off it with brilliance. The fact they didn't in this case clearly shows that the charge, and wording of it, was 100% accurate.

To dumb it down, which is clearly what needs to happen here, Bugg pleaded guilty of intentionally striking the kid. That means your view that it wasn't intentional or deliberate is totally wrong. But keep believing that the MRP is corrupt, or that Bugg is following a company line, or whatever other fantasy yout dream up.

Congrats. You are equating an elite sportsmans instinctive reaction with a medical condition. Genius.

Interesting comment from Gill (in The Age) that if Bugg's penalty doesn't deter further hits to the head they will have to crank up the weeks given to the next one. Makes sense, as you'd have hoped and thought after Houli got 4 week from an AFL appeal to INCREASE the penalty, that players would get the message that the head is sacroscant. 

Unfortunately, Bugg missed the memo... 

And I agree with the AFL's intention to stamp out high hits.

Edited July 7, 20178 yr by PaulRB

56 minutes ago, PaulRB said:

Interesting comment from Gill (in The Age) that if Bugg's penalty doesn't deter further hits to the head they will have to crank up the weeks given to the next one. Makes sense, as you'd have hoped and thought after Houli got 4 week from an AFL appeal to INCREASE the penalty, that players would get the message that the head is sacroscant. 

Unfortunately, Bugg missed the memo... 

And I agree with the AFL's intention to stamp out high hits.

Clayton Oliver says hello

Just now, jnrmac said:

Clayton Oliver says hello

Sorry Jnr, what's your point? 

50 minutes ago, PaulRB said:

Interesting comment from Gill (in The Age) that if Bugg's penalty doesn't deter further hits to the head they will have to crank up the weeks given to the next one. Makes sense, as you'd have hoped and thought after Houli got 4 week from an AFL appeal to INCREASE the penalty, that players would get the message that the head is sacroscant. 

Unfortunately, Bugg missed the memo... 

And I agree with the AFL's intention to stamp out high hits.

Don't disagree with what you said, do disagree with the bile towards Bugg and MFC and after the horse has bolted attitude.

Presumably there has been major correspondence to all Clubs as soon as, (on that day) Houli got his wack.....

9 minutes ago, willmoy said:

Don't disagree with what you said, do disagree with the bile towards Bugg and MFC and after the horse has bolted attitude.

Presumably there has been major correspondence to all Clubs as soon as, (on that day) Houli got his wack.....

I also disagree with the bile towards Bugg, however it was clear to any follower of AFL that the AFL was cracking down on high hits from it's appeal of the Houli case. Whether there was correspondence (I suspect not) is irrelevant, they gave the competition to message by bumping Houli's penalty up.

It raises the interesting question of whether Bugg (and other players who hit high off ball etc...) are capable of rational thought and control in those moments. As Bugg would have know almost at the moment he connected with Mills' head that he was in deep [censored].

Edited July 7, 20178 yr by PaulRB

15 minutes ago, PaulRB said:

I also disagree with the bile towards Bugg, however it was clear to any follower of AFL that the AFL was cracking down on high hits from it's appeal of the Houli case. Whether there was correspondence (I suspect not) is irrelevant, they gave the competition to message by bumping Houli's penalty up.

It raises the interesting question of whether Bugg (and other players who hit high off ball etc...) are capable of rational thought and control in those moments. As Bugg would have know almost at the moment he connected with Mills' head that he was in deep [censored].

 Again, in relation to your second paragraph. Bugg's demeanor after, was cognisant acknowledgement of the situation. There was no hint of fear, probably more resignation. Rational thought and rational control two different things of course, but i do remember the time i was told i was not going to get an invitation to a birthday party because i didn't have a father and i lashed out in a controlled manner......

16 minutes ago, willmoy said:

 Again, in relation to your second paragraph. Bugg's demeanor after, was cognisant acknowledgement of the situation. There was no hint of fear, probably more resignation. Rational thought and rational control two different things of course, but i do remember the time i was told i was not going to get an invitation to a birthday party because i didn't have a father and i lashed out in a controlled manner......

That sounds like a tough situation (re birthday), but I suspect there's a self delusion that we (or players) when we "lash out" are at that point capable of doing it "in a controlled manner". It may only be a fraction of a second loss of control, but in that fraction a lot can occur, that was not controlled.

I suspect Bugg didn't mean to hit Mills so well, but by lashing out he dropped the restraints on his body, and as a coordinated trained athlete who's undoubtedly boxed a bit, his body punched well. Too well.

Bugg's remorse and shock at what he'd done were genuine and I suspect he's confused and perplexed as to why he did it, and wishes he had his time again.

Its interesting when Jones talks of Bugg burning trust with the group, I suspect that Bugg has also burnt trust with himself, that he'll no doubt be contemplating over his time off.

 

Edited July 7, 20178 yr by PaulRB

If the AFL don't want an immediate unreviewed decision to send off the culprit, make it for the next game the perp plays.  4 weeks off and down to 21 players for quarter/half in the next match that he plays.  That will incentivate them all.