Hit on Clarry

[bush demon 2,039]

14 hours ago, monoccular said:

Of course it is a dog act - but tolerated by the hypocritical afl and the incompetent MRO.

Clarrie cops these most weeks.

ANY strike should start at one week( if they are in any way serious about stamping out unnecessary and unsightly violence which clearly they re not) - yes, even for Collingwood and Carlton players in finals.

But of course even if Christian did look at it (though wasn't instructed to do so by Ch 7) he would grade low impact, in play (because it was at the ground) and maybe even accidental.

It's a tricky area, where players can dive after getting a love tap from someone giving them a "close tag". And we don't want players diving willy nilly. Having said that, 6 weeks would be fair.

[Undeeterred 3,123]

21 minutes ago, bush demon said:

It's a tricky area, where players can dive after getting a love tap from someone giving them a "close tag". And we don't want players diving willy nilly. Having said that, 6 weeks would be fair.

Nonsense. If you don’t punch someone, they can’t dive. I just don’t accept this 

[deanox 9,912]

23 minutes ago, Undeeterred said:

Nonsense. If you don’t punch someone, they can’t dive. I just don’t accept this 

Exactly. And what's the value of the dive? They get suspended for next week? It just doesn't happen.

[Travy14 1,917]

2 hours ago, Undeeterred said:

So if you were standing around in your workplace and someone just walked up behind you and punched you in the guts, that’s ok?

it’s completely unnecessary 

 

I'd be [censored] off if someone jumped on my shoulders or tackled me too.  It's not a work place

[Travy14 1,917]

2 hours ago, Dee Zephyr said:

This was his second offence.

he hasn't had another offence this year!

[Demonstone 22,486]

14 minutes ago, Travy14 said:

It's not a work place

Of course it's a work place.  It's where the players earn their living by being paid for what they do.

They could reasonably expect to have somebody jump on their shoulders or tackle them.

It is unreasonable to suggest that they cop a coward punch while doing their job.

[Travy14 1,917]

.

 

Edited April 26 by Travy14

[Travy14 1,917]

13 minutes ago, Demonstone said:

Of course it's a work place.  It's where the players earn their living by being paid for what they do.

They could reasonably expect to have somebody jump on their shoulders or tackle them.

It is unreasonable to suggest that they cop a coward punch while doing their job.

comparing apples and oranges,  contact is allowed in football.  is prohibited contact which resulted in a fine.  If this happened in the workplace you would be fired.  are you saying that Pickett should be removed from the AFL?

[Demonstone 22,486]

I'm saying that Pickett should have been suspended.

[samcantstandya 1,045]

13 hours ago, Jaded No More said:

The fact that the AFL lets this type of stuff go, and commentators laugh off this type of behaviour, is not lost on me as I watch yet another woman be killed at the hands of a man. 

We do not do enough to eradicate this type of [censored] “boys will be boys” behavior in footy, and it’s very much reflected in our society too. 
Punching someone in the guts off the ball should never be allowed. It does nothing for our game and it’s the easiest non football action to judge and punish players for. 
 

The Pendelbury defense of “I was provoked” is up there with the “she was asking for it” defense. Putrid. 

I worry about the example they show for the young kids playing the game on 2 points one money buys you out of trouble and secondly it's okay to hit someone. Dislike television commentators on 7 for saying it was with a open hand just so it's okay and how the hell can they tell that from their commentry position. To makes thing more obsurb Marlon Pickett gets a discount with an early plea.

[waynewussell 5,726]

Those that think Oliver dived have never been 'jabbed' in the rib cage!

[Redleg 40,895]

16 minutes ago, waynewussell said:

Those that think Oliver dived have never been 'jabbed' in the rib cage!

Especially when you already have sore ribs before the jab.

[sue 9,102]

39 minutes ago, Travy14 said:

comparing apples and oranges,  contact is allowed in football.  is prohibited contact which resulted in a fine.  If this happened in the workplace you would be fired.  are you saying that Pickett should be removed from the AFL?

That is a silly comparison.  OK, you are saying a workplace which allows some sorts of physical contact as part of the employment (playing the game according to its rules) should do little to discourage physical contact which has nothing to do with the game.  Bus a fine (of the size the AFL employs) means nothing to these players. 

I'd agree, a fine would be OK if the fine was say 10% of the players annual contract and there were measures taken to prevent others paying the fine for them.   But since the latter is impossible in practice, a suspension is the only way to send the message to players to stop giving the AFL a bad image and influencing kids to think gratuitous violence is OK.   (if anyone thinks it is a good image, then take up supporting boxing.)

Current precedents create a problem, but the AFL has to grasp the nettle and make it a rule that a 'love tap' means 1 week off or more depending on severity (and penalties for blatant staging).  And if you do it too severely and too often, then yes, you are sacked from the AFL.

 

 

Edited April 27 by sue

[Travy14 1,917]

5 minutes ago, sue said:

That is a silly comparison.  OK, you are saying a workplace which allows some sorts of physical contact as part of the employment (playing the game according to its rules) should do little to discourage physical contact which has nothing to do with the game.  Bus a fine (of the size the AFL employs) means nothing to these players. 

I'd agree, a fine would be OK if the fine was say 10% of the players annual contract and there were measures taken to prevent others paying the fine for them.   But since the latter is impossible in practice, a suspension is the only way to send the message to players to stop giving the AFL a bad image and influencing kids to think gratuitous violence is OK.   (if anyone thinks it is a good image, then take up supporting boxing.)

Current precedents create a problem, but the AFL has to grasp the nettle and make it a rule that a 'love tap' means 1 week off or more depending on severity (and penalties for blatant staging).  And if you do it too severely and too often, then yes, you are sacked from the AFL.

 

 

i think the silly comparison is that of an everyday work place. 

whats the difference between that "love tap" and Viney then wrestling with Pickett after? should he be suspended?  or because its retaliation its ok?

Like i said in other posts, i believe it should be a fine first and repeat offences go up!  So if he was to do it again he would incur a suspension.  I also agree staging should be penalised, although if he hit Clarry in the right spot it could of hurt, so it becomes hard to determine.

[No. 31 1,235]

It was a cheap shot that deserves a week or two.

[Undeeterred 3,123]

1 hour ago, Travy14 said:

I'd be [censored] off if someone jumped on my shoulders or tackled me too.  It's not a work place

Ah, it is. 

[daisycutter 29,613]

38 minutes ago, waynewussell said:

Those that think Oliver dived have never been 'jabbed' in the rib cage!

and more importantly when you are relaxed and totally unaware

his action was the very such sneaky action the afl should want to eliminate

should've been 1 week

[sue 9,102]

41 minutes ago, Travy14 said:

i think the silly comparison is that of an everyday work place. 

whats the difference between that "love tap" and Viney then wrestling with Pickett after? should he be suspended?  or because its retaliation its ok?

Like i said in other posts, i believe it should be a fine first and repeat offences go up!  So if he was to do it again he would incur a suspension.  I also agree staging should be penalised, although if he hit Clarry in the right spot it could of hurt, so it becomes hard to determine.

You're the one who raised the comparison with an everyday work place, so either I'm glad you now think it is silly or you have confused me completely.

I'm surprised you can't see the difference between a 'love tap' and wrestling. But yes, if the wrestling is over the top (eg causes significant pain), it should be penalised too.  But if it is not over the top, it would be worthy of a fine, not suspension IMO. Repeated minor acts and fines should lead to a suspension if there is a further infraction.  Just as too many suspensions for 'love taps' might be grounds for the sack.

[Travy14 1,917]

1 minute ago, sue said:

You're the one who raised the comparison with an everyday work place, so either I'm glad you now think it is silly or you have confused me completely.

I'm surprised you can't see the difference between a 'love tap' and wrestling. But yes, if the wrestling is over the top (eg causes significant pain), it should be penalised too.  But if it is not over the top, it would be worthy of a fine, not suspension IMO. Repeated minor acts and fines should lead to a suspension if there is a further infraction.  Just as too many suspensions for 'love taps' might be grounds for the sack.

i think if you followed the convo instead of just commenting on the first part that takes your eye, you would see i was responding to another that compared it to a workplace.

Would their be a different outcome in a "workplace" between a love tap and wrestling? this is my point, for people saying it is the same as an every day workplace.

[Dr. Gonzo 24,207]

17 hours ago, Undeeterred said:

The face that this thuggery is a fine only is an indictment on the AFL and the game 

I'm sure the AFL won't be surprised when all our players turn and do the same to their Geelong opponents at the first siren next Saturday? Only a little tickle.

[Dee Zephyr 19,267]

2 hours ago, Travy14 said:

he hasn't had another offence this year!

So you’re saying players should get a free whack in the guts to someone per year before they are suspended. Fines do FA, he got a $6250 fine for a second offence. 

[PaulRB 6,362]

I think the challenge with these incidents is that they probably are not happening in isolation… as in Pendlebury had probably been jabbed in a contest, pinched and scragged in pre-contest situation, had his feet stood on, etc… to the point he felt compelled to respond. 
should he then be suspended when all the prior incidents were missed…

I’ve no idea re the Clarry incident, only that it’s not alway so clear. 

[sue 9,102]

18 minutes ago, Travy14 said:

i think if you followed the convo instead of just commenting on the first part that takes your eye, you would see i was responding to another that compared it to a workplace.

Would their be a different outcome in a "workplace" between a love tap and wrestling? this is my point, for people saying it is the same as an every day workplace.

My apologies for not having read earlier posts.  IMO arguing by analogy often leads to irrelevant arguments as to how closely the 2 cases are related, rather than discussing the original point. Best not to carry on with the analogy.

You'd be far less likely to be suspended/sacked from many everyday jobs for a bit of wrestling than for a punch (though yes, in some you'd be sacked for either). 

Then there is the  'equivalent to AFL infringements' in the analogy with the everyday workplace - stealing staples compared to stealing a stapler? 

Curses, they've got me doing it now.

 

[Travy14 1,917]

21 minutes ago, Dee Zephyr said:

So you’re saying players should get a free whack in the guts to someone per year before they are suspended. Fines do FA, he got a $6250 fine for a second offence. 

maybe 1 year should carry over, but there should be some cut off time id say.

i mean we have to apply this to everything though.  Toby Greene may naver play footy again lol

AFL want to be able to pivot on these things so if a Gawn, Daicos, Hawkins ect can get off leading into a final.  It's sad but it's true

[Travy14 1,917]

1 minute ago, sue said:

1 minute ago, sue said:

My apologies for not having read earlier posts.  IMO arguing by analogy often leads to irrelevant arguments as to how closely the 2 cases are related, rather than discussing the original point. Best not to carry on with the analogy.

You'd be far less likely to be suspended/sacked from many everyday jobs for a bit of wrestling than for a punch (though yes, in some you'd be sacked for either). 

Then there is the  'equivalent to AFL infringements' in the analogy with the everyday workplace - stealing staples compared to stealing a stapler? 

Curses, they've got me doing it now.

 

Agree, although i like to see a workplace that allows wrestling in an aggressive manner like the AFL.

Which is why i don't bye the AFL is a workplace thing.  It's nothing like a "normal" workplace.  I'm in mining which has a completely different type of "normal" again

i think the best way to stamp these out is a fine, then repeat offence is a suspension.  But the is the argument of how long do they carry over.