ManDee

Where are you going DC? Do they allow visitors?

It is funny how we read what we want to read. "I admire someone who can disagree with a point of view, but do so intelligently." I took that as a compliment but it could also have been an offhand statement of fact. Could that apply to hear what we want to hear? I wonder. Thanks for the mental stimulation.

I agree. It is possible to believe that you have not said something and for someone to think that you have. This has happened with my wife often. (Would you like a cup of tea?- Yes I put the bin out last night.) We laugh about it, but often cannot believe what the other says they have said. A misunderstanding is possible, as is a whitewash. If I have said something that has offended you I apologise for the offence taken, regardless of any lack of intent to offend on my behalf.

I posed several questions to ascertain peoples views. This was in order to make people think about the impact of what they say, and if it could be considered vilification. It can be a grey area. You and I probably agree mostly in this area. In the Burns example I think it is possible he was misheard or misunderstood. If he made a public racist comment he deserves to be pilloried.

Comparisons? The heading of the post was "Hypotheticals" Was that lost on you? I made no reference to degrees of bigotry. Hence I think your argument spurious.

I follow the invisible pink unicorn faith.

You must have some knowledge of the conversation, or how can you assume that the analogies are spurious? Or are you fabricating facts to suit your argument? Who is being spurious? The private conversation was with Steve Price. On The Project tonight Price said: “I was there and sitting with John Burns. I didn’t hear that comment at all. So I’m not doubting that the Richmond person says he heard it but I didn’t hear it.” So are you the Richmond staff member? No one else heard it. It is possible something was misheard. Simple this is not.

I ask several questions and make a comment. You obviously have some knowledge as to what was said that is not stated here. Care to share? Or is it more long bows on your behalf?

A hypothetical. Barry the Biddelonian bombs it in to the forward line. Vilification? Barry the Biddelonian has been terrorising our midfielders. Vilification? Barry the Biddelonian has trouble at the airport, he looks like a terrorist. Vilification? Barry is a blond anglo saxon with a beard or Barry is of Lebanese decent and has a beard. Vilification both or only one? We don't know what was said, we don't know what was heard or misheard. It was a private conversation, I think the apology was appropriate if Burns thought he may have offended someone, even though he does not know what it was that offended them. I would have preferred it to have been discussed in private. If no one hears it is it vilification? If the vilified person does not hear it are they vilified? I once told a supporter that a comment they were making about an aboriginal player was inappropriate, many people heard what was said, when they repeated it I said that I would report them for anti social behavior, they stopped. The player did not hear the comments. If it stops is that enough? I think it is.

FD, you are a genius, you obviously know more than Roos and the entire footy department. Why are we wasting our money on them? We should put you in charge. hahahahahhahahha. You crack me up.

So this is an acceptable clash jumper to play the Bulldogs! What colour is the Bulldogs jumper? or Oh I see totally different.

On the basis that an assumption was made that as he is from a Lebanese family and looks like a terrorist it is racist. If this can be defended it was a private conversation overheard by someone. Many, if not most of us have said some shocking things in private and in jest. This is not an excuse but perhaps an explanation. I do not think for a moment that it is his belief or that he would ever say that sort of thing in public. Best we let it go.

Stay safe dude.

I think this constitutes a well written apology. Not a denial. From http://www.afl.com.au/news/2015-04-27/richmonds-bachar-houli-allegedly-villified-as-terrorist "It has been suggested to me that during a conversation with my friend, I was overheard saying something which that person found offensive," Burns said in a statement. "I have no recollection of making an offensive remark. "However, I acknowledge that a complaint has been made and the idea that something I've said has offended someone is mortifying to me. "If I have said anything that has offended anybody, I unreservedly apologise. In particular, to the people at the match and the Richmond Football Club."

Unfortunately DC that is the way society is heading, we can ignore it and face the consequences or take steps to avoid bad outcomes. I do not blame the victims but recognise that care needs to be taken. Idiots are out there. Edit: - If Damian Monkhorst was there he could have provided some breathing space for Clarko by placing his ample frame between Clarko and the drunks.

GWS cannot afford to pay overs for Howe and still hope to keep all their players. That list is going to cost a fortune to keep. Swap Shiel for Howe sure.

Who is Shirley?

Adelaide!

You're not short are you Soidee? Small dogs are more aggressive than big dogs. Not much point discussing Napolean, Hitler, Pol Pot, Mussolini, Tom Cruise(Joke) http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/earth/earthnews/3336044/Short-man-syndrome-is-not-just-a-tall-story.html Why are senior football personnel walking around the streets around midnight without security?

Where are you?

Other than taking a look at the top 15 tacklers this season to date and guess what, they are all good players. Jack Steven Luke Dahlhaus Matt Priddis Marcus Bontempelli Bryce Gibbs Stephen Coniglio Ben Howlett Joel Selwood Todd Goldstein Angus Brayshaw Nathan Van Berlo Josh P. Kennedy Jake Melksham Maverick Weller Patrick Dangerfield

One day the Watts haters will get their wish. Until then they need to acknowledge one thing, the coach does not agree with them. For all the vitreol and angst stop and ask yourself, do you know more about football than Paul Roos? Probably not would be my guess. If Roos wants Watts in the side that is good enough for me. Edit-fix typo

Yarran Watts 3 Games 3 12.3 Kicks Per Game 8.0 2.0 Handballs Per Game 6.7 14.3 Disposals Per Game 14.7 4.3 Marks Per Game 5.3 0 Goals Per Game 1.0 0.3 Behinds Per Game 0.3 2.0 Tackles Per Game 2.0 0 Hitouts Per Game 0 1.7 Inside 50s Per Game 1.7 1. 0 Goal Assists Per Game 1.0 0.7 Frees For Per Game 1.0 2.0 Frees Against Per Game 1.0 3.7 Contested Possessions Per Game 6.3 You just hate Watts.

I will see you all there. I will be wearing a MFC scarf, come up and say hello.

We won all of our premierships under the banner of the MCC Since the MFC left the MCC we have failed. Other than that you are still wrong, in the last 50 years the MFC have won nothing and Victoria cricket have won 10 shields. I personally would be happy with another 10 flags. 22 premierships sounds great to me.