When you consider some of the things i've heard yelled out by crowd members at footy games, this is, believe it or not, quite tame in comparison.

One fo the best way to react to sledges is to do nothing. It fires up the sledger even more and distracts them from their game.

  sideshowbob said:

When you consider some of the things i've heard yelled out by crowd members at footy games, this is, believe it or not, quite tame in comparison.

One fo the best way to react to sledges is to do nothing. It fires up the sledger even more and distracts them from their game.

I think the reason we spend so much time here talking about Headland's behaviour is because the fact of the matter is comments like that occur quite regularly in combat, over drinks, etc... and most people don't react that way, rightly or wrongly. I bet Josh Carr, who Des no doubt rates as a "good bloke" (because he's a team mate) has never said anything offensive to anyone!

I have a work colleague who lives in the country and is bringing up an Aboriginal girl. This girl cops racial abuse at school. Her foster Mum said to me that she wants to tell her daughter to "punch the other kid", but "of course that's not going to solve anything". Same with Des. Revenge is a dish best served cold. And let me tell you, racism is different. It's recognised as different in our legal system, and it's casting dispersion based on inferiority over an entire people, as distinct from an isolated comment about a 6 year old.

Yes, that sort of comment is awful. I think all of us would hope never to emulate it. I would hate for it to be said around me. But I do admit to seeing a Melbourne player line up an opponent and screaming in the seconds before impact "Smash him", and then "Stay down, you maggot" in the heat of battle - and I'm not even out there!

I think the public shame is a big punishment for Selwood, and he will probably get fined too. But the media is paid to get ratings, and the longer this storm and hypocritical "standards" talk continues, the more successful the commentator.

Id be quite interested to know ...of those who dont think the comments made by Selwood are anyworse than other inane sledges, or think this is just part of the game etc... who has a young daughter ? ( or son )

I do.. I dont play footy any more.. and only play competitive sport at a very very amatuerish level. There is still much argy bargy...and the occasional and obligatory silly words said. Most would be like water off a ducks back.. would be laughed at. However..should someone be so stupid to suggest anything along the lines of Selwood they would soon be wishing that they hadn't.

I have no idea how an indigeous person feels about being villified, and almost hypocritically i will open myself to criticism here and suggest its no worse than being called any other of a 100 names about ancestry or nationality as many of us were at school...and yes it hurt but we got through it.

But i will put comments of a sexual nature about a minor in a very different category. I dare say the community as a whole would. At best it displays an immaturity and naivity by Selwood, at worst an absolutely disgusting desensitivity to innapropriate sexual behaviour.

I think Selwood needs to learn a lot from this, as does WCE and the league in general. Yes a lot of 'stuff' goes on on a sporting arena, some is just ( like it or not ) part of the game, and some is just vile and reprehensible. Anyone who condones it might have a good long llook at themselves too.

Selwood your dead lucky it wasnt me or a few of my sporting FRATERNITY...as you'd still be picking yourself off the grass...if you were lucky !!.. Does that make us equally irresponsible and immature.. thats a possible barb that might be hurled, but I bet it wouldnt be said by any parent of a young child !!

  belzebub59 said:

Id be quite interested to know ...of those who dont think the comments made by Selwood are anyworse than other inane sledges, or think this is just part of the game etc... who has a young daughter ? ( or son )

I certainly think its out of line. A lot is said in footy...i only played for 2 years but i coped a lot of [censored] about my skills and well attractive looks (or not so). At the end of the day, i ignored thoes players and just went about my footy. The player that had been very rude to me gave me inspiration to lay one of the biggest tackles on him which lead him off with concussion, massive corkie and a broken nose. I guess that was the way i adressed that play. It certainly gave me inspiration as my skills were always questionable but i got in the team due to the 1 %'s (smothering, tackelling, running my a** off).

At the end of the day, banter should be allowd in sport. I still play sport and although i dont sledge at all and never have, i and my teammates get some abuse. You just have to play to prove em wrong, win and wipe their cocky personality with their skidmarked underpants, or something like that.

Banter on the field should be only about the player...not involving their family or friends. It should be allowd to say "hey des, ur a pile of sh**" but to relate ur remark to a person not playing is wrong.

I don't believe the general tone of this.

I don't see how anybody could take the comments seriously.

Did Selwood boink Headland's daughter? No, of course he didn't. Nobody even contemplated if he had for a second. Did Des think he had? No, of course not.

So where's the big deal. How many times have you been told, when you're having a shot at goal, that your opponent is boinking your sister/mother/deceased great aunt/brother/self? All the time. Really the only thing that it could be classed as is humourous, because you know it didn't happen.

Selwood attacked a crack in the shallow surface of Des Headland's mentality. And let's face it, in a psychological war Des is clearly unarmed. It worked and West Coast won with Headland distracted.

Headland was reported twice for striking. While he claims he was provoked, which makes this case 'special', I don't recall too many striking charges where the player was not provoked in some way.

The only thing that I have gleaned from this incident is how little people know about what happens on the field, because I already knew that Headland is a headcase.

Not surprised at the many "...it stays on the field, don't take it seriously...' attitudes here on this.

I hope Selwood is called for what he said - IF proved true.

He's admitting to be a paedohpile. Oh sorry, apparently he didn't mean it.

He'll say he was joking etc - the old defence for all bullies.

Let all future sponsors take note. That's his real punishment.

TAll posters here - think about exactly what he said and what it means to any parent, let alone Headland.

It's a wonder he's not in hospital.

  Choko said:

I think the reason we spend so much time here talking about Headland's behaviour is because the fact of the matter is comments like that occur quite regularly in combat, over drinks, etc... and most people don't react that way, rightly or wrongly. I bet Josh Carr, who Des no doubt rates as a "good bloke" (because he's a team mate) has never said anything offensive to anyone!

You regularly have conversations with people that involve comments similiar to "I ****ed your six year old daughter"?

All through footy forums I've been hearing comments like this, am I on my own here to be revolted by behavoir?

Edited because for some reason the swear filter didn't work.

  Axis of Bob said:

I don't believe the general tone of this.

I don't see how anybody could take the comments seriously.

Did Selwood boink Headland's daughter? No, of course he didn't. Nobody even contemplated if he had for a second. Did Des think he had? No, of course not.

So where's the big deal. How many times have you been told, when you're having a shot at goal, that your opponent is boinking your sister/mother/deceased great aunt/brother/self? All the time. Really the only thing that it could be classed as is humourous, because you know it didn't happen.

Selwood attacked a crack in the shallow surface of Des Headland's mentality. And let's face it, in a psychological war Des is clearly unarmed. It worked and West Coast won with Headland distracted.

Headland was reported twice for striking. While he claims he was provoked, which makes this case 'special', I don't recall too many striking charges where the player was not provoked in some way.

The only thing that I have gleaned from this incident is how little people know about what happens on the field, because I already knew that Headland is a headcase.

i doubt that many players would say that sort of stuff about their family members. Otherwise fights would occur every match. Its not only embarrising for Des but his wife and daughter. I dont see how saying "slu*" is not overly offensive. I guess we will have to agree to disagree here

all but everyone would know Hedland is a nutter...not the question...nor point.

And entirely probable that Selwood and others were told to wind him up if the chance presented...thats almost a given.

But , if we are to take the reported comments as gospel, then after the initial comment and retort by Hedland.. Selwood ought to have stopped there... But he of his own volition chose to carry it forward into a, what can only be described as 'sick puppy' territory. No one for a moment would beleive he had committed the act.. but the nature of the offensiveness to a father of a young girl is beyond qualification.

btw..you dont 'boink young girls...you RAPE them !!

I can't believe all the moral crusaders out there. Dancing around in happy fairy land. You are what is wrong with society, where everything is someone else's fault.

Everyone is saying that it's bad because they are worried about what people will say about them if they don't. It's disgusting.

Think about this: If Selwood is punished for his comment, where do you draw the line? When does a comment become punishable and not punishable?

If I said that I boinked my opponent's dog, does that become punishable because I engaged in beastiality?

  Axis of Bob said:

I can't believe all the moral crusaders out there. Dancing around in happy fairy land. You are what is wrong with society, where everything is someone else's fault.

Everyone is saying that it's bad because they are worried about what people will say about them if they don't. It's disgusting.

Think about this: If Selwood is punished for his comment, where do you draw the line? When does a comment become punishable and not punishable?

If I said that I boinked my opponent's dog, does that become punishable because I engaged in beastiality?

Moral Crusading .... and its everyone elses fault.. !!

please feel free to make any sense of that...how are the two related or relevent ?

So its wrong to think innapropriate comments about the rape of 6 yo ( real or otherwise ) are quite ok??

No not every one is saying it because they are worried about how they are perceived, some simply think its vile and wrong.

where's the line...well.. the AFL have already made racial vilification punishable, maybe they will bring in other guidelines.

Dont know Bob...do you fancy your opponents dog ? :-)

do you have a young daughter Bob..

  belzebub59 said:

do you have a young daughter Bob..

Irrelevant. I have a young daughter and I agree with Axis of Bob's comments completely. If somebody said to me on a footy field something like what Selwood said , when it was quite obviously not true (and that's the biggest point here) I'd laugh it off. If anyone laid a finger on my daughter I'd probably rip their nuts off, but Selwood didn't do that. People here are making it out as if it did.

Of course child rape is no laughing matter and nobody is suggesting it is. But given that Selwood was quite obviously just trying to get at Des and his remarks held no truth whatsoever, I don't see why such a huge issue is being made.

  Axis of Bob said:

If I said that I boinked my opponent's dog, does that become punishable because I engaged in beastiality?

Did you use protection? Did you call your opponent's dog the next morning or send an sms saying "it's not you, it's me".

But seriously... Bob, that's not a fair comparison. In dog years a six year old is an adult...

Moral crusaders only do so because they want to be seen to be moral. However they do not want to be held accountable for what they crusade for because, generally, it is not practical. They may not even want it to be enforced because then they have no high ground to stand on and they are on the same level as everyone else.

The only people who are affected by this are the weak of mind. Nobody else would think twice. So now Des is blaming Selwood because Des is a headcase. It's testosterone talking. That's the sort of situation that results in signs on the wall of a building saying "Warning, stairs involved incremental increases in height" and having people sue because they fall down them because when you walk down them they decrease in height. It's not their fault, it's the sign.

Someone could say that they raped my girlfriend/sister/mother/whatever and it wouldn't matter because it's obviously false. Obviously. Who is stupid enough to get worked up about something that is just fancifully false?

Obviously someone who implies that I fancy dogs. (not directed at sideshowbob, because that was quite funny)

*there are so many lines following that last one that would see me banned for that exact reason*

  Nasher said:

But given that Selwood was quite obviously just trying to get at Des and his remarks held no truth whatsoever, I don't see why such a huge issue is being made.

So if he had used a racist jibe (even if he didn't really mean It) to get at him, then that is OK?

I am no moral crusader, they invariably have some other agenda , as you sugest.

I dont for one minute consider that Sillywood actually commited any act wrt to the young lass, thats not actually the point.

I believe a line was crossed, but we will simply have to disagree.

Who said that a racist jibe is obviously false?

If he called him a black ****, then how is that obviously untrue?

You don't have to like what he said, the arguement is about whether what he said was punishable.

The answer is that I don't like what he said, but there is nothing wrong with it.

  Scoop Junior said:

Absolute storm in a teacup.

Jaded I don't blame you for feeling that way, but having never played footy you probably don't know what's said out there each week. Stupid comments are said all the time. They are just an immature way to test a player and put him off. The good, mentally strong players wouldn't react and wouldn't care about such a stupid comment by Selwood.

There are comments that cross the line. Racial abuse, for example, cannot be tolerated.

But this is a stock-standard occurrence in footy. Headland shouldn't have taken the comments personally, because Selwood was just talking rubbish to try to distract him. IMO it wasn't malicious and Headland shouldn't have been sucked in.

Im with you scoop. Quite normal. Local cricket can be worse.....good ol mums get bought into it

  Nasher said:

Irrelevant. I have a young daughter and I agree with Axis of Bob's comments completely. If somebody said to me on a footy field something like what Selwood said , when it was quite obviously not true (and that's the biggest point here) I'd laugh it off. If anyone laid a finger on my daughter I'd probably rip their nuts off, but Selwood didn't do that. People here are making it out as if it did.

Of course child rape is no laughing matter and nobody is suggesting it is. But given that Selwood was quite obviously just trying to get at Des and his remarks held no truth whatsoever, I don't see why such a huge issue is being made.

I don't think it's that simple ...

I have no evidence or knowledge of this being the case ... but what if Des Headland has personal experience of this kind of thing?

If not him, then others do. An extreme reaction in this case is not surprising at all. They're not just words and Selwood has to take responsibility.

  GM 666 said:

So if he had used a racist jibe (even if he didn't really mean It) to get at him, then that is OK?

How can you not mean a racist jibe? If he'd called Headland a black whatever, of course he'd be offended, because he is aboriginal. That goes against my point of being "obviously not true".

  old55 said:

I have no evidence or knowledge of this being the case ... but what if Des Headland has personal experience of this kind of thing?

That's a good point, but again if that were the case then it blurs the borders of "obviously not true" and so my point is not covered by that scenario.

I'm assuming he hasn't though as I've not heard any evidence to the contrary.

  Nasher said:

How can you not mean a racist jibe? If he'd called Headland a black whatever, of course he'd be offended, because he is aboriginal. That goes against my point of being "obviously not true".

That's a good point, but again if that were the case then it blurs the borders of "obviously not true" and so my point is not covered by that scenario.

I'm assuming he hasn't though as I've not heard any evidence to the contrary.

So was Selwood "assuming he hasn't" too?

That's not a safe assumption because some people, many people have.

What Selwood did is wrong.

  old55 said:

So was Selwood "assuming he hasn't" too?

That's not a safe assumption because some people, many people have.

What Selwood did is wrong.

Yes, Headland was assuming it was not true that Selwood had done that with his kid. And incidentally, there is some suggestion he may have said she looks like a girl I ****ed. Is that also as bad? What if she was 18 and he said it?

People get on forums and say all sorts of truthful things which are defamatory and more hurtful to league footballers and unpires. They certainly call them out in the crowd. People really need to get off their high horses.

  Choko said:

Yes, Headland was assuming it was not true that Selwood had done that with his kid. And incidentally, there is some suggestion he may have said she looks like a girl I ****ed. Is that also as bad? What if she was 18 and he said it?

People get on forums and say all sorts of truthful things which are defamatory and more hurtful to league footballers and unpires. They certainly call them out in the crowd. People really need to get off their high horses.

That's not what I said - read what I said.

If Headland (or anyone else) has direct experience of paedophilia it's not surprising that they would have an extreme reaction to that taunt.

It's not safe for Selwood to assume that Headland (or anyone else he is taunting) has no direct experience of paedophilia.

Selwood has to take responsibility for what he said.

Well, if nothing else, my deflection tactics worked. :D

For what it's worth, I agree with Old.

Selwood has to be accountable for his words, but then again unaccountability is nothing new when it comes to players of the West Coast Eagles.