There is no way that the AFL's manager of Peace, Love & Understanding can engage in multiple acts of thuggery on the football field and keep his job. That would be an appalling double standard and a shocking example for the AFL to set.

 

  On 04/07/2017 at 02:42, jnrmac said:

Wow this is just a terrible post.

1. "There's not a huge different between what Bugg did to what Fahour did" and "Bugg's incident was worse"

Are you for real? Fahour ran 25m and coward punched the bloke. Bugg was bumped and pushed and lashed out. I'm not condoning it or excusing it but there is a world of difference and I am shocked you can't see that

2. Fahour is the AFLs community engagement officer. It is untenable that the AFL have not yet said anything about the punch nor is it tenable that he keeps his job. He is not a clerk in the AFLs payment department.

 

A "terrible post"?  Interesting.  As terrible as purposely leaving out parts of my words to make your argument sound stronger?

And then to shoot down my comment about there not being a huge difference between the two incidents, then in the next breath you are actually showing there wasn't much difference;

- Fahour ran 25m and "coward punched" a bloke who was up to his ears in the middle of a melee, vs

- Bugg punching an unsuspecting Mills 80m off the ball, which hadn't actually been brought back in to play. Yeah, I'm sure when Mills "bumped and pushed" Bugg that he was expecting a punch on the jaw that would knock him out.  FMD.

Actually, thanks for confirming my point that Bugg's incident, IN SOME WAYS (<-- the bit you conveniently left out of my original statement), would be worse.  There would be no AFL level player expecting to be punched in the manner that Bugg did to Mills.  On the flip side, if you are in the middle of a local level all-in-brawl, and having just been in a physical altercation with one opponent yourself, you're an idiot if you weren't expecting someone to come at you. (Nb. this in NO WAY means that I am agreeing with Fahour's incident).

Point 2 - I do believe I said that I thought he would be sacked.  Thanks for agreeing.

I'm happy to continue to discuss this with you, but if you're use the "terrible post" line because my opinion is different to yours, then don't bother replying.  Cheers.

 

  On 04/07/2017 at 02:27, Wrecker45 said:

Fahour has not made a claim for racial tolerance on his tribunal hearing. But he did get his job on those grounds.

Fahour has also been suspended previously for striking and another time for jumping into the crowd and punching. Neither were caught on camera like this incident.

Call me a bigot but I like people getting jobs on merit not sex, race, religion. 

And you know this because??? Obviously you must've been on the selection panel when he applied. 

I'm not calling you a bigot, I'm calling bs. 

I do not condone his horrible coward punch and believe he should lose his job. His position is untenable. 

I think the penalties should be based upon what happened and his tribunal record rather than insinuations or rumour mongering about religion or how he might've got his job.

I'll leave it at that. Said my bit. Keep going if you wish

http://www.afl.com.au/news/2017-07-03/statement-from-ali-fahour

Fahour:  "I accepted a 2-match suspension on Saturday afternoon, and rang my manager at the AFL, Andrew Dillon on my way home from the football match".

Some questions for the AFL:

• Did Fahour only get 2 weeks for a 'cowards punch' because he is an AFL employee? 
• Why did Andrew Dillon not do/say something.
• Why did they not appeal that 2 weeks?
• How can the AFL justify the appeal and demand of 4 weeks for Houli?
• How does the AFL justify the 2 weeks to Fahour if Bugg gets more than the 2 weeks.  
• How does McCarthy get 2 weeks for an in play tackle that went a bit wrong.

I'd like to know why the media is not asking these hard questions of the AFL/Andrew Dillon.

 

  On 04/07/2017 at 03:55, Lucifer's Hero said:

http://www.afl.com.au/news/2017-07-03/statement-from-ali-fahour

Fahour:  "I accepted a 2-match suspension on Saturday afternoon, and rang my manager at the AFL, Andrew Dillon on my way home from the football match".

Some questions for the AFL:

• Did Fahour only get 2 weeks for a 'cowards punch' because he is an AFL employee? 
• Why did Andrew Dillon not do/say something.
• Why did they not appeal that 2 weeks?
• How can the AFL justify the appeal and demand of 4 weeks for Houli?
• How does the AFL justify the 2 weeks to Fahour if Bugg gets more than the 2 weeks.  
• How does McCarthy get 2 weeks for an in play tackle that went a bit wrong.

I'd like to know why the media is not asking these hard questions of the AFL/Andrew Dillon.

 

it's called accrediation, luci

btw where did the 2 weeks suspension bit come from? is this some automatic minimum when you get red-carded or was this as a result of some on the same day mrp-like body.? why ithen s it going to the local comp tribunal? did someone appeal? who?

confused.

  On 04/07/2017 at 04:05, daisycutter said:

it's called accrediation, luci

btw where did the 2 weeks suspension bit come from? is this some automatic minimum when you get red-carded or was this as a result of some on the same day mrp-like body.? why ithen s it going to the local comp tribunal? did someone appeal? who?

confused.

My apologies dc and other posters.  I went hunting further and found his statement which actually does quote the 2 weeks and the phone call.  So I was incorrect about a cover up by someone and the media editing a video. But certainly the AFL have gone into hiding and avoiding some hard questions.

I have edited my original post to not derail the discussion and further confuse. 

It might help if you could edit/delete your post for my changes.  Cheers

  On 04/07/2017 at 04:08, Lucifer's Hero said:

My apologies dc and other posters.  I went hunting further and found his statement which actually does quote the 2 weeks and the phone call.  So I was incorrect about a cover up by someone and the media editing a video. But certainly the AFL have gone into hiding and avoiding some hard questions.

I have edited my original post to not derail the discussion and further confuse. 

It might help if you could edit/delete your post for my changes.  Cheers

As we know, Dill doesn't like hard questions...

The first thing he will do is hope that the police or the local tribunal make a move that takes it out of his hands.

The next thing is see which way the wind is blowing...not so well at the moment.

...and then if possible.

This AFL have consistently shown no courage to lead on real social issues...

Dills courageous leadership begins and ends with refusing to go to the Carbine Club lunch...big deal.

  On 04/07/2017 at 04:08, Lucifer's Hero said:

My apologies dc and other posters.  I went hunting further and found his statement which actually does quote the 2 weeks and the phone call.  So I was incorrect about a cover up by someone and the media editing a video. But certainly the AFL have gone into hiding and avoiding some hard questions.

I have edited my original post to not derail the discussion and further confuse. 

It might help if you could edit/delete your post for my changes.  Cheers

changed my qupte of your post to match your amendment

Just watched it for the first time. What a piece of s**t.

Heard SEN play an interview of him crying (literally) about it yesterday.

I despise seeing (hearing) grown adults cry when they are caught out for doing something wrong.

Maybe the AFL was just making a instructional video on what not to do on the field.

  On 04/07/2017 at 03:55, Lucifer's Hero said:

http://www.afl.com.au/news/2017-07-03/statement-from-ali-fahour

Fahour:  "I accepted a 2-match suspension on Saturday afternoon, and rang my manager at the AFL, Andrew Dillon on my way home from the football match".

Some questions for the AFL:

• Did Fahour only get 2 weeks for a 'cowards punch' because he is an AFL employee? 
• Why did Andrew Dillon not do/say something.
• Why did they not appeal that 2 weeks?
• How can the AFL justify the appeal and demand of 4 weeks for Houli?
• How does the AFL justify the 2 weeks to Fahour if Bugg gets more than the 2 weeks.  
• How does McCarthy get 2 weeks for an in play tackle that went a bit wrong.

I'd like to know why the media is not asking these hard questions of the AFL/Andrew Dillon.

 

This could be true, every league has standard sentencing that you can accept on match day, I dare to say if this was offered he would have jumped on it, it is wrong but not may umpires want to visit the tribunal and if we didn't have this a lot of acts wouldn't be reported.  He may have been offered on Saturday the standard 2 weeks for striking which is pretty common in most leagues.  I dare to say though once the league saw the footage they would have charged him to face the tribunal.

My understanding of AFL rules that if you are suspended you cant have an official role.  From memory when Clarkson had is issue at local football, if he had been suspended he was unable to coach Hawthorn for the period he was suspended.  If that is the case if he gets 10-18 weeks which he should he should be suspended from the AFL for that period with out pay. 

Have they sacked him yet ?

  On 04/07/2017 at 06:50, beelzebub said:

Have they sacked him yet ?

Gil is OS on holidays. iMO it won't happen till he returns.

No can make a decision when the Emperor is away.

  On 04/07/2017 at 07:04, old dee said:

Gil is OS on holidays. iMO it won't happen till he returns.

No can make a decision when the Emperor is away.

maybe he should stay away permanently too?

  On 04/07/2017 at 07:07, daisycutter said:

maybe he should stay away permanently too?

You have my vote dc.

  On 03/07/2017 at 06:49, jumbo returns said:

Should be sacked - gone for all money

Behaviour unbecoming in bringing an organisation into disrepute

If a corrupt cop gets the sac

If a corrupt teacher behaves inappropriately with students and gets the sac

If a banker behaves inappropriately and embezzles money and gets the sac

Then a high ranking AFL OFFICIAL who behaves inappropriately and has a responsibility to the game to me, leaves little or no room for the AFL to move. What do other posters think??

  On 04/07/2017 at 07:34, picket fence said:

If a corrupt cop gets the sac

If a corrupt teacher behaves inappropriately with students and gets the sac

If a banker behaves inappropriately and embezzles money and gets the sac

Then a high ranking AFL OFFICIAL who behaves inappropriately and has a responsibility to the game to me, leaves little or no room for the AFL to move. What do other posters think??

I agree and think he should do the right thing and resign. I also think it's a bit of a mickey mouse position anyway.

  On 04/07/2017 at 05:39, drdrake said:

This could be true, every league has standard sentencing that you can accept on match day, I dare to say if this was offered he would have jumped on it, it is wrong but not may umpires want to visit the tribunal and if we didn't have this a lot of acts wouldn't be reported.  He may have been offered on Saturday the standard 2 weeks for striking which is pretty common in most leagues.  I dare to say though once the league saw the footage they would have charged him to face the tribunal.

My understanding of AFL rules that if you are suspended you cant have an official role.  From memory when Clarkson had is issue at local football, if he had been suspended he was unable to coach Hawthorn for the period he was suspended.  If that is the case if he gets 10-18 weeks which he should he should be suspended from the AFL for that period with out pay. 

Yes the Northern League boss said he was offered the automatic 2 match ban by the umpires who saw the act, then when the the guys in charge saw the footage they withdrew the offer of 2 matches and sent him straight to the tribunal

  On 03/07/2017 at 23:03, jnrmac said:

So the AFL have said they will wait until the outcome of the tribunal before making comment.

How is that for a cop out. WTF is a local footy tribunal gong to make any difference to what the AFL do about their employee?

They need to make a stand. For the record this is way different to TBugg. This Fahour guy has run 25m and coward punched an unsuspecting player who is very lucky he is not worse.

Fahour has form having been suspended before and been involved in a very unsavoury incident in 2012 where he left the playing field to become involvedf in a brawl between spectators (including a relative of his).

He also was involved in another unsavoury incident where he and Jason Mifsud (the National Community Engagement Manager  - wtf do we need these leeches?) reported on Matt Rendell's comments regarding indiginous players.

The AFL for all of their bluster look very weak for not saying a word before now.

Was he employed by the AFL before or after this?

Did they not do due diligence?

 

  On 04/07/2017 at 02:42, jnrmac said:

Wow this is just a terrible post.

1. "There's not a huge different between what Bugg did to what Fahour did" and "Bugg's incident was worse"

Are you for real? Fahour ran 25m and coward punched the bloke. Bugg was bumped and pushed and lashed out. I'm not condoning it or excusing it but there is a world of difference and I am shocked you can't see that

2. Fahour is the AFLs community engagement officer. It is untenable that the AFL have not yet said anything about the punch nor is it tenable that he keeps his job. He is not a clerk in the AFLs payment department.

 

Bugg's action was stupid and off the ball but al least (not excusing him in the slightest) they were both engaged in jockeying for position for a possible ball contest: Fahrour's was just an blatant act of thuggery, by a thug with a history of thuggery.

Very different: neither excusable but this was far far worse.

 

Pity Gil is such a weak excuse for a leader who can't make a hard decision (actually should be a very easy one - this guy should NOT represent the AFL in any way, IF they are serious about stamping out thuggery).   And WTF is he doing taking leave during the business part of the season anyway, to swan around schmoozing the rich and famous on Le Tour?  Can't he take leave in the off season - his is (supposedly) running a multi million dollar business.

I'd like to see him paraded through the streets in chains and give the public a chance to pelt him with rotten fruit and then put him in stocks force him to watch Kingswood country from start to finish.

Then I'd like him tarred and feathered.Its been years since they actually tarred and feathered somebody.

I think waterboarding might even be in order.

  On 04/07/2017 at 07:55, Biffen said:

I'd like to see him paraded through the streets in chains and give the public a chance to pelt him with rotten fruit and then put him in stocks force him to watch Kingswood country from start to finish.

Then I'd like him tarred and feathered.Its been years since they actually tarred and feathered somebody.

I think waterboarding might even be in order.

Was the two weeks given automatically on the red card?  Expect the league tribunal to throw the book at him.  He will also get a civil suit for damages, and may have a please explain from marshmellowland (AFL house).

Jimmy Bartel doesn't hold back:

"He sought him out. It wasn't spur of the moment, it wasn't a brain fade. It was calculated. He ran 30 metres, he skimmed the edges and he sucker punched someone like a coward.

"And he has got history. This is not just a one-off; he has already been reported this year for striking – go back a couple of years [2012] and he belted a spectator.

"He should be deregistered. If you get 16 weeks in local football you are deregistered.

"The apology falls on deaf ears for me."

http://www.theage.com.au/afl/afl-news/ali-fahour-guilty-of-cowardice-at-best-hang-up-the-boots-at-worst-sacked-20170704-gx4gh0.html

Anyone who thinks that was the same as the Bugg incident needs to have another look at it and their own value system.. 

If he is still playing football he can't be more than early mid 30s... to have a senior executive role at that age is amazing... 

 

dont get me started on xavier Campbell as essendons CEO at 34 

  On 04/07/2017 at 08:27, Lucifer's Hero said:

Jimmy Bartel doesn't hold back:

"He sought him out. It wasn't spur of the moment, it wasn't a brain fade. It was calculated. He ran 30 metres, he skimmed the edges and he sucker punched someone like a coward.

"And he has got history. This is not just a one-off; he has already been reported this year for striking – go back a couple of years [2012] and he belted a spectator.

"He should be deregistered. If you get 16 weeks in local football you are deregistered.

"The apology falls on deaf ears for me."

http://www.theage.com.au/afl/afl-news/ali-fahour-guilty-of-cowardice-at-best-hang-up-the-boots-at-worst-sacked-20170704-gx4gh0.html

Anyone who thinks that was the same as the Bugg incident needs to have another look at it and their own value system.. 

I was the main (perhap's only) one that said this, so I will reply. Anyone that rates someone punching someone in the head, 80m away from the ball, with sufficient enough force to knock the bloke out, who would absolutely have been unsuspecting, if they rate that "better" than a bloke who runs 30m in to an all in brawl and punches a bloke that was also unsuspecting, then I would equally say that they need to check their own value system.

Both are acts of thuggery, which I have previously said.  What Fahour did, sadly, happens most weekends at various levels. We are only hearing about this case because of who did it. If it wasn't him, this would have no air play whatsoever, like the umpteen other incidents like it each weekend.

What Bugg did belongs in low grade stuff. Actually, like Fahour''s, it doesn't belong there either. That's why I think, IN SOME WAYS, the Bugg incident is worse.