Ha ha ha ha!!!

I see the joke! You're calling me a paedophile! That's really funny!.

You clearly don't get the idea of sledging, because that's just bad. That's where your team mates cringe and leave you alone.

Sorry pal, youre pretty much alone on this one. Maybe when you grow up & maybe, just maybe (but I seriously doubt it) have kids you'll understand, you peanut

What does Headland's history have to do with it? Why do you care who did it to who? We could call it player X and Y and nothing changes. Why the fixation or the player, his name/race/skill/mental capacity or whatever? Who cares?

Yes, people belt people all the time. I have a black eye because someone hit me on the footy field on the weekend. And no, I didn't hit him back or antagonise him. But in one on one contests I always tried a little harder to beat him. But it is illegal in football and Headland should be rightly suspended because of it.

What Selwood said wasn't illegal. He has a right to say it if he wants. What he spoke about was illegal, but there was nothing illegal in saying it.

I don't care if you've ever read my posts before. I don't write for other people and I don't even know who you are.

Quite right. Whilst we may not like what he said, it is something he is allowed to say on or off the footy field. It will not entitle the other player or person to hit him back. It may be provocation, but provocation merely diminishes the role of the person who used physical violence.

And to say you have to have a kid to comment, in fact it sounds like in Herb's case having a kid has made you totally inappropriate to comment because you cannot possibly be objective about the issue. don't have to die to know you don't want to.

Ok this is where im going to dive into the legal system. I believe that selwood has done the wrong thing. The australian court system (being common law) will be used in future i believe. When Headlands daughter grows older....and she is still humilated by the abuse, she can take it to the australian court. Once there, the court would look at if the case. In all likelyhood the court would see that there was defamation (making a statement about someone which you cannot prove to be true). If the papers had not written a collum then it would be libel (meaning no written record) and the case would be dismissed. But because their has been media articles on it(ie evidence + able to be viewed by public) then it is slander (meaning spoken). I hope headlands daughter takes this further when shes older or her parents do it on her bahaff because thoes comments are out of line.

Sorry pal, youre pretty much alone on this one. Maybe when you grow up & maybe, just maybe (but I seriously doubt it) have kids you'll understand, you peanut

I've got a young daughter (see avatar) and I'm completely with Bob. The "you've gotta be a parent to understand" thing is complete bull.

If anyone ever touched my daughter inappropriately I'd knock his head off. What father wouldn't? However, if some yobbo on the footy field made some wisecrack about f'ing her I'd just look at him with sympathy in my eyes for him being such a dimwit. I'd see it for what it is, a meaningless swing at me with no purpose other than to just piss me off. It wouldn't work.

Ok this is where im going to dive into the legal system. I believe that selwood has done the wrong thing. The australian court system (being common law) will be used in future i believe. When Headlands daughter grows older....and she is still humilated by the abuse, she can take it to the australian court. Once there, the court would look at if the case. In all likelyhood the court would see that there was defamation (making a statement about someone which you cannot prove to be true). If the papers had not written a collum then it would be libel (meaning no written record) and the case would be dismissed. But because their has been media articles on it(ie evidence + able to be viewed by public) then it is slander (meaning spoken). I hope headlands daughter takes this further when shes older or her parents do it on her bahaff because thoes comments are out of line.

You're a lawyer like I'm Jeff White

You're a lawyer like I'm Jeff White

Ur jeff white :0. Can i ask u then, who do u prefer...Jamar or Johnson?

+ ild like to say...ur an idiot

Ur jeff white :0. Can i ask u then, who do u prefer...Jamar or Johnson?

+ ild like to say...ur an idiot

Mate, no offence, but that isn't the law. Let's put it this way instead - I hope you're not a lawyer.

And Jamar

Mate, no offence, but that isn't the law. Let's put it this way instead - I hope you're not a lawyer.

And Jamar

Well obviously our lecturer is wrong and i doubt that. I dont know how u can question it unless u urself are a lawyer...dennis denito doesent cut it

Well obviously our lecturer is wrong and i doubt that. I dont know how u can question it unless u urself are a lawyer...dennis denito doesent cut it

I am.

And your lecturer didn't say that.

hahah is this all a big joke?

If Headland is stupid enough to have a tattoo of his daughter on his arm, then it is fair game

What happens on the field, stays on the field. SOFT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Some of you people are a joke and goes to show how emotions overcome brain power to make some of the comments in relation to this, DO YOU KNOW ALL THE FACTS YET or are you judging Selwood by what is in the papers and TV, I myself will wait for the facts to come out before I judge him. If it is not proved I all hope you are ready to say sorry for jumping to conclusions, but if he is guilty then a penelty will be handed out, I myself will wait before I judge him!!!!

99.99% of people that play footy however dont talk about haviing sex with young children..

FFS people are still using this angle. Would you complain if the talk was about having sex with Headland's mother? Sister? Partner?

Selwood found Headland's weakness and went it, doesn't mean anything about his feelings towards young children.

I also agree with YM, if he is yobbish enough to have a tattoo of his kid on his arm he deserves everything he gets.

FFS people are still using this angle. Would you complain if the talk was about having sex with Headland's mother? Sister? Partner?

Selwood found Headland's weakness and went it, doesn't mean anything about his feelings towards young children

His mother, sister, partner are not minors.

FFS can you not work out that under any circumstances talking about this is a f#@king disgrace.

Major concern if people on this forum condone such an attitude

Oh my lord, this thread has gone way beyond its original intention.

Now people are sledging one another, and it's messier than a West Coast after-party. :D

The new issue now seems to be, that what offends some, many not offend others. That's human nature.

We can't make rules that please everyone, but surely there are certain social issues that are deemed unacceptable by the majority of people.

These issues usually include racism and child abuse (which encompasses pedophilia).

If everyone agrees that racism is not on when sledging on the footy field, why is this different?

If Selwood called Headland a 'dirty [censored] so and so', everyone would raise their eyebrow, even though some of the comments accompanying the racial slur may not be true.

So why then, is it not ok to racially vilify an opponent, but having a crack at his 6 year old daughter is fair-game?

Again, not justifying Headland's reaction, but just as we fine all players involved in a scuffle, the AFL should also punish both these parties as they were equally to blame for what went on.

BTW, Headland should be free to tattoo himself with whatever he likes. Blaming the tattoo is just stupid!

His mother, sister, partner are not minors.

FFS can you not work out that under any circumstances talking about this is a f#@king disgrace.

Major concern if people on this forum condone such an attitude

oh I give up.

You have clearly been brainwashed into becoming a political correctness nazi.

One dimwitted footballer says something unoriginal to another dimwitted footballer with probably no idea of who that tattoo really was or their age and you're acting as if its a premeditated disgusting comment involving pedophilia. Get off your high horse.

I am.

And your lecturer didn't say that.

Well he did actually but im not going to fight

If everyone agrees that racism is not on when sledging on the footy field, why is this different?

If Selwood called Headland a 'dirty [censored] so and so', everyone would raise their eyebrow, even though some of the comments accompanying the racial slur may not be true.So why then, is it not ok to racially vilify an opponent, but having a crack at his 6 year old daughter is fair-game?

If you read either Scoop or my earlier posts on this subject, you'll hopefully understand where the line is drawn.

Also as Nasher said the "you don't understand if you aren't a parent" line is complete bull. Those who truly don't understand are those who haven't stepped on to a footy field and copped crap before.

You either get sucked in by people talking unmitigated crap (which is generally the price of free speach) or you don't. That's all.

Ok Slander, this is what you said...

For starters racial vilification is against the law in many states. Anyway most players who have been racially vilified in my experience have done so with class. Winmar's gesture to the Vic Park ferals was classic and Michael Long made an official complaint. Even Chris Lewis who was always a bit of a loose cannon and would've put up with more than most didn't go as insane as Headland on the weekend IIRC.

It may seem an oxymoron but to me attacking someone on the basis of their race or culture is a lot more personal than silly little primary school cracks about "Your mum, your sister, your family" etc.

Firstly, child abuse is also against the law, as is pedophilia.

Secondly, again I'm not justifying Headland's reaction. I never have.

Thirdly, race or culture is more personal than your own child? Maybe in your eyes, but not in the eyes of a lot of people.

As I said, different people are offended by different things.

The comment made was distasteful, and inappropriate. I guess what it comes down to is, where do you draw the line? We say no to racism, and rightly so, but everything else is ok?

I don't have kids, and I'm no footy player... who knows, maybe I'm just too sensitive, but a lot of people do seem to agree that Selwood's alleged comments stepped over the 'what happens on the footy field, stays on the footy field' line.

like i said im a parent and played plenty of footy, and yep there s alot said on the footy field but this is so different.

alot of coaches have come out today saying this goes way beyond sledging. but you probably no more about footy than them. yeah right

Firstly, child abuse is also against the law, as is pedophilia.

*Sigh*

I am aware of this and this has nothing to do with what I said.

If I had said genocide is against the law then you may have a point. Racial vilification IS against the law, "You're *insert family member here*" jokes aren't

Thirdly, race or culture is more personal than your own child? Maybe in your eyes, but not in the eyes of a lot of people.

A systematic attack on someone's race or culture is surely a more personal attack on someone than a throw away line about their tattoo or *insert family member of player B here, that player A claims to have had sexual relations with in some way, despite player A never having even concievably met player B's family member* IMO. It was more or less an extension of a "Your mum is.." crack.

To racially vilify someone is to claim someone is inferior because of something they had no part in, which is their own background. It is judging someone based on a cultural stereotype. What Peter Everitt did to Scott Chisholm makes Selwood look like a choirboy.

I guess what it comes down to is, where do you draw the line? We say no to racism, and rightly so, but everything else is ok?

It's a hard one and near on impossible to control. Ultimately the push has to come from the players and through the right medium. I know you don't condone Headland's reaction, to me it is his reaction that has done more harm than good. Selwood's intentions were to get under Headland's skin and he did so successfully.

This debate often rages about the Australian Cricket Team and their sledging - to me if teams or players have problems with what is being said on the field in sport they need to complain to the governing bodies and push those bodies to make regulations against personal and derogatory remarks.

But again where do you draw the line?

"You're ugly" could be construed as a derogatory remark.

Until that time comes sledging is part and parcel of the game and players just have to cop it sweet. It is a test of mental strength.

I don't have kids, and I'm no footy player... who knows, maybe I'm just too sensitive, but a lot of people do seem to agree that Selwood's alleged comments stepped over the 'what happens on the footy field, stays on the footy field' line.

It's rather funny that. I hope these aren't the same people who are calling for a win at all costs approach and ruthlessness at the MFC. Where do you draw the line indeed?

If you read either Scoop or my earlier posts on this subject, you'll hopefully understand where the line is drawn.

Also as Nasher said the "you don't understand if you aren't a parent" line is complete bull. Those who truly don't understand are those who haven't stepped on to a footy field and copped crap before.

You either get sucked in by people talking unmitigated crap (which is generally the price of free speach) or you don't. That's all.

Free speech hey Slander? So where the hell do you draw the line? Sledging of this magnitude is just not on.

Lucky for Neale, we have some sense of decency on this site or he would really be copping it in the nackers, if you know what I mean. BTW, you were one of the 1st on this site to sook how perverse it was that we were baying for his blood and poor Neale would be jobless.

Seekers, we are all trying to argue our point of view, but do NOT cross the line by taking personal shots at other posters.

I knew I'd cop it. Why? Perhaps it might have [censored] him off?

Free speech hey Slander? So where the hell do you draw the line? Sledging of this magnitude is just not on.

Like I said in an earlier post, unfortunately ATM it is, until there is a concerted effort from the AFLPA for the AFL to do something about it. Again drawing the line is a problem.

Lucky for Neale, we have some sense of decency on this site or he would really be copping it in the nackers, if you know what I mean. BTW, you were one of the 1st on this site to sook how perverse it was that we were baying for his blood and poor Neale would be jobless.

Although it has hardly any relevance to this topic - I was trying to put across the point that I felt there was a way to put a view across construcitvely without engaging in personal abuse and just downright disrespect, a concept you have clearly failed to have grasped.

I would hardly call it sooking.

Seekers, we are all trying to argue our point of view, but do NOT cross the line by taking personal shots at other posters.

Indeed.

I applaud Selwood for putting Headland off his game

Whatever he said got into his head

And the Eagles won. They are reigning premiers. Maybe some of our players should toughen up and start to unleash some real sledging to put the oppositon off their game

I knew I'd cop it. Why? Perhaps it might have [censored] him off?

So you are ramming home your arguments by delibrately partaking in the things you are speaking out against?

How clever.