Jaded No More

Ok Slander, this is what you said... 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.

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!

Which comes back to Nasher's original point, that the sledge is not offensive, but rather stupid, because it's not true. I don't see it that way. It's offensive regardless, and is inappropriate. Let me put it another way. Say somebody accused you of being a 'so and so Jew', and you weren't Jewish, is that offensive?

The issue here is NOT whether Headland's reaction was stupid, of course it was! He is a headcase and it's easy to put him off his game, which is a problem for Freo. The issue here is whether or not Selwood stepped over the line when he used a sledge that involved sexually explicit remarks about a 6 year old. The action and the reaction are two separate issues. Nobody doubts that the reaction was stupid, the question is, was the action itself appropriate when you consider that 'anything goes on the footy field', or are there certain boundaries which players must not cross? How would you feel if an opposition player went up to one of our boys and said "your dead mate Broady is having a better game than you"... is that appropriate?

I couldn't believe it when I read it this morning. Thank god for that!

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.

Just so we're clear, I don't condone Headland's reaction. He should have known better than to attack Selwood and cost his team 6 weeks of his services. But as someone else said, this is not about Headland's reaction, which was silly to the extreme, it's about what caused it. I'm also not suggesting that it wasn't a throw-away line by Selwood, which is no doubt a common thing that happens when you're out there playing footy. But where do you draw the line? If it's not ok to attack people based on their religion or race, why is it ok to attack children and make sexual comments about them? It may be a storm in a tea-cup, or a way for Headland to try and justify his stupid reaction, but if Selwood really did make these comments, then I can't say I feel sorry for the abuse he's about to cop. I don't have kids, but if anyone came up to me and said things of a sexual nature about my younger cousins, or any of the kids I look after, I'd be tempted to thump them too. Why is it necessary to bring innocent kids into the equation I will never know. Surely there are plenty of sledges to go around.

I thought it might be a good idea to deflect, and take the heat off our footy club for a minute by turning our heads to the west. I'm sure it comes as no big surprise to read that there has been a big fall-out following the derby over in Perth. Who would have guessed it, two teams with zero discipline or accountability for their actions going head to head in the fishbowl that is Western Australian footy, and causing problems. The most disturbing story to come out of the game though, is surely the Selwood sledging. Now before we go any further, it has to be made clear that this is yet to be proven and we won't know for sure until tomorrow night whether or not this stuff was said, although all evidence suggest that this indeed took place. Surely though, it has got to be one of the lowest acts of sledging we've heard on a footy field. For those who haven't heard it, the story goes that Selwood apperantly made sexually explicit remarks about Des Headland's six year old daughter. That's right, she's six, and Selwood was claiming to have had intercourse with her, except he didn't word it so politely. I'm no prude, and of course every player will try and get stuck into his opponent with a bit of sledging, but what sort of human being resorts to abusing a child who is in no way involved in the game? It may be unfair to blame the club for this, but it's another one for the book of 'Eagles' players behaving like immature tools'. I hope that just as Headland is about to spend significant time on the sidelines (as he should btw), that if proven true, Selwood joins him. There has got to be a clear line which players should not cross. It's unacceptable when it's racial, and it's unacceptable if it involves attacking innocent children and making explicit remarks. And as a side note, West Coast may be a hugely successful club on the field, but their players and the way that team is managed is extremely poor. There is no accountability from players or from the board, and because they go unpunished they continue to act as if they untouchable and as if they can do as they please.

We all know I'm the driver of the "play the kids" bandwagon, and this is how I see it: Inexperienced players will always be just that, inexperienced, until such time that they are given a significant run in the AFL. Some people are saying that we are risking damaging these young players by throwing them to the wolves too early. But speak to any kid coming through the ranks and they'll tell you that nothing can prepare you for AFL football. Whether you've been at a club for a day, a month or a year, you are never truely ready for what awaits you. Yes, young players can be damaged by having too much pressure put on them when they are not ready. Mentally it can shatter their confidence if unsuccessful (or elevate their confidence to unhealthy levels if successful), and physically it can damage their bodies if they are over-worked. I am certainly not in favour of either of those two things happening to any of our players, which is why I am advocating that we play players who have been in the system for a couple of years at least. Their form at VFL level may not be great, and their impact on game day may be insignificant, but it's not as if we are asking them to win us games of football, far from it. Furthermore, nobody is suggesting that these players replace senior players with a proven track record. But you tell me, what is the point of playing guys like Godfrey, Brown, Ferguson etc..., who while they try their absolute hardest, are just not good enough at this level? Not only are they going to do nothing for our long term success, they are not winning us games in the short term either. What good will come of protecting these kids for another month, or another year? At some point we're going to have to bite the bullet and throw them into the deep end. They may very well sink along with the rest of the side, or they might just keep their head above water long enough to give us a glimpse into their capabilities. One thing is certain, it serves no purpose keeping these kids back, when the alternative is to play players who are not going to be at the club next year or the following year. Because in two years from now, when Brown has hung up his boots and Godfrey is running around in some country league, we don't want their replacements to have had zero games experience and absolutely no idea of what it takes to be an AFL footballer. Well anyways, that's my two cents worth. I know a lot of people see it as a sign of resignation, but to me there is never a bad time to breed new talent, especially when you are 0-3, have an injury list the size of Sandilands, and your depth players are proving to be unsuccessful.

Jared Rivers - Has hamstring soreness after making his return from a hamstring injury that occurred during the pre-season. May be in doubt for round 4. Brent Moloney- Looks to either have suffered a strain or has had a recurrence of the soreness he experienced last season. Very unlikely to play this week. Colin Sylvia- Has groin soreness. James Frawley - foot stress fracture Rnd 6 David Neitz- Has a grade 2 MCL tear and will miss at least 4 weeks. Brock McLean- Fractured foot and will miss at least 6 weeks. Clint Bartram- Has had an arthroscope for a knee injury. Travis Johnstone- Looks to have fractured his hand and will likely miss at least 6 weeks. Russell Robertson- Hyperextended his knee and has extensive bone bruising. Injury was worse than first thought and he has had surgery and will not play before the mid season break. That is the most depressing injury list I ever read. They are all long term injuries too, which makes this even worse. *Sigh*

Well if he needs surgery, clearly he'll miss games. Wonderful, just wonderful. :(

Correct. Last year, we improved with each passing round. Our loss in Round 3 was very encouraging, and was very nearly a win against a top side. Sunday's loss was the worst of the three. The game plan, the skills and the attitude were vastly different to last year, as is the injury list. Nothing similar about this year and last, except where we are in terms of games won. We can still turn the season around and make the 8, but we'll only be making up numbers yet again. This year was meant to be a step forward, at best we'll remain stagnant.

I don't think you'll find a lot of posters who don't go to games as some sort of punishment to the club. I go every week, and I stay until the final siren even if we are getting our arses handed to us on a plate (like on Sunday). Let me ask you this, do you blindly support every player who pulls on a Melbourne gurnsey, or are you enough of a realist to recognise that some players (if not all) have their downfalls? How is that any different to Daniher? Yes, he's done a great job promoting our football club. He has battled on despite board upheavals, draft penalties, poor finances and facilities and so on, but his primary job (as he said himself) is to win games. As a 10 year coach, he needs to be judged on his performances, not in isolation, but over the whole 10 year period. 7 years ago he got us to a grand final. 4 years ago, we were bottom 4. For the past 3 seasons who scrapped into the top 8 and were extremely disappointing in September. All this while having a relatively good run with injuries. This year we will no doubt struggle because we have significant injuries. Nobody blames Daniher for that, but in the big scheme of things we will again be unsuccessful. Bottom line is, he hasn't got us what we all want, a premiership. Does that make him a bad person? Of course not. Does that make him a bad coach? Not even. Does that make him a candidate for criticism? Absolutely. A lot of supporters, myself included, don't want to get rid of Daniher for the sake of getting rid of him. We want him gone because we can't see a change happening any other way. BTW, I've always maintained that it's not who you criticise, but how you do it.

Lets wait for some sort of official confirmation before we all go slash our wrists. If proven to be correct, I'll be first in line.

The club comes before the individual, any individual, be it a player or a coach. Everyone who posts here has the best interests of the club at heart. Some believe that Daniher's coaching is no longer in our best interests. You can hardly blame Melbourne supporters for being frustrated, fed up and ready for a change. You've been reading these boards long enough to know that the calls for Daniher to be replaced are nothing new. In his 10th year as coach, and still no premiership, time seems to be well and truly ticking. It will be unfortunate if in the end, a long and miserable injury list, is what brings him down. Mind you, our issues run deeper than our injury list. Edit: I hate to shatter your dreams, but we are no chance to finish top 4, which means we are no chance to win a premiership, which makes all the points I made above valid.

Save your money and come to the Queens B'day match. Without a doubt, the most exciting H&A match we play each year. The atmosphere is amazing, and we're every chance to win.

I'm not letting myself entertain the thought of a win. I think that once again a lot will depend on team selection, and who is available. If we lose Moloney, and don't regain at least one of Pickett or Sylvia, we're in serious trouble. Rivers is also a must. I'll be there... I always am. Just hope we get a happy ending this week!

Yes, lets delist a bottom-age recruit in his third season. He is clearly the biggest issue we have. I think the only way to win a flag is if we keep holding onto Godfrey and Brown and Bizzell. Also, lets bring back Woewodin. If only we delisted Johnstone after three seasons...

Yep, or why it took so long to get Brad Green to FF. Or why, despite the fact that our only chance to score would come from a small, mobile, quick forward line, we still went into the side with a surplus of giants who can't run, mark or kick goals. Injuries do not excuse the terrible skills that were on display yesterday, and definitely don't excuse the shocking game plan (or lack thereof)

I agree, it was woeful. Reminded me of being at a funeral... which is indicative of not only the sounds of the trumpet, but also the mood of the crowd. I think they said he'll be there for every home game we play at the G' this year. Heaven help us!

There are some things that I'm not going to say in a public forum. You can take my word for it or not, that's up to you. I don't think I've ever come here and made allegations just for the sake of big-noting myself. As for Judd, I'm not saying we'll get him, hell I'm not saying he'll leave West Coast, but if he does want out I'd hope that like a lot of other clubs, we at least entertain the thought of getting him and make a serious push to gain his services. What would I be prepared to give? Anyone that is not wearing the #5 jumper (and I'd think twice about trading Rivers too). The rest are expendable, especially some of our more fancied senior players. Not saying we should give up an arm and a leg to get him, but he'd be more productive and useful than 3 or 4 of our senior players combined (which probably shows you how interested West Coast will be in our second-rate midfielders).

Can't make a team until we know what's happening with Rivers, Moloney, Sylvia, Dunn and Pickett. If they are all fit and able to play, they all need to come in and you can pick 5 players at random who can go back to Sandy. Choosing who needs to go is the easy part, replacing them with something better is the issue. One thing is certain, we cannot play with all of White, Jamar, PJ, Holland and Ferguson. That's too many one-dimensional (at best), slow talls. I'm sure we'll keep the first 3, and give PJ another go as a defender. Holland will no doubt be back to take on the remaining Rocca brother, or someone similar, very soon. Ferguson is just not up to it. I love his courage and his endavour, but he is too slight to play one-on-one defensive footy. We need to inject this team with some class and some football brains, or else I'm afraid we're competing on a primary school level. Freo may be 0-3, but they can still kick a football, a crucial aspect in today's game I believe Edit: Yes, Wheatley's kicking is ok, but I counted 3 separate incidents yesterday in which he refused to go at the man with the footy. That's always been his issue, looking a million bucks when he has space in front of him, but having absolutely no idea how to apply any sort of pressure going the other way. He'll stay, but gees at least Ward chases and tackles (albeit the fact that he's often chasing his own man, who he got 100m away from).

I think you'll find some people at board level have already started looking to the future. Say what you like about us at the moment, but at least our administration knows what the the hell they're doing. I agree with you RR, we need to start the process as early as we possibly can, especially given the amount of list manipulation a new coach will have to do, and the fact that this trade period may be very important given Judd is out of contract.

Because I rather we persist with young players who one day might actually win us a premiership, than keep promoting players who were not good a few years ago, and are still no good now. If Daniher really thought that CJ was woeful and needed to be dropped, despite not playing him in his rightful position over the last 2 weeks, the least he could have done is brought in a replacement runner. As it was, we were stuck with having too many tall, slow players on the bench, while Geelong ran like Forrest Gump down the middle.

I love you Belly, seriously... I do! It's great when your love- child from way back starts to come good and proves everyone wrong, especially given how much negative comments were made about him since his debut. Every small defender in our side can learn from him at the moment. Getting involved in the play does not mean you have to be unaccountable. Good defenders do both, and Belly is a good defender.