|
Periphery posted:I'm not a lawyer so I'm not really concerned with legal definitions and considering the AFL's lack of ability to implement and understand even the most basic rules I don't think we need to make it any more complicated than it needs to be. Replace 'duty of care' with 'responsibility' and my point probably make more sense. Fail in the responsibility to protect the head to the degree that the opposition player is concussed and you can have a week on the sidelines unless you can prove at the tribunal that you weren't the one to initiate contact. I mean, the tribunal exists as a pseudo-legal body, which is why QCs present there. Duty of care being used is because it's a legal term, it's deliberate and necessary for it to fulfil its role and for the AFL to effectively moderate the controlled violence that is contact sport without being sued a million times. Its why tribunal decisions can be taken to the higher courts. I know what you are saying, that the result of an action has to be considered, but my terrible comparison is in saying that a Foreman should go to jail for a death on his site despite putting in every single OH&S requirement asked of him. Its unsustainable to punish result over intent, training, or negligence, not to mention daft, when a guy gets put in hospital a fortnight prior and a different standard is applied based on a completely different (legal) argument.
|
#
?
May 9, 2018 11:23
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 26, 2024 03:43 |
|
|
realbez posted:Look, if you choose to tackle when you could have bumped and the bloke gets injured as a result of that, then you have to wear the consequences. This isn’t a difficult concept. Why hello there Michael Christian
|
|
#
?
May 9, 2018 11:27
|
|
|
Quantum Shart posted:I mean, the tribunal exists as a pseudo-legal body, which is why QCs present there. Duty of care being used is because it's a legal term, it's deliberate and necessary for it to fulfil its role and for the AFL to effectively moderate the controlled violence that is contact sport without being sued a million times. Its why tribunal decisions can be taken to the higher courts. I know what you are saying, that the result of an action has to be considered, but my terrible comparison is in saying that a Foreman should go to jail for a death on his site despite putting in every single OH&S requirement asked of him. Its unsustainable to punish result over intent, training, or negligence, not to mention daft, when a guy gets put in hospital a fortnight prior and a different standard is applied based on a completely different (legal) argument. I see what you are saying in how it's problematic to judge things based on outcome and not intent/etc. But isn't that what most rules on the field are? You don't not pay a high free kick because the player didn't intend to make high contact - it's a simple (or should be) equation of yes/no for high contact. Suspensions are obviously a much harsher punishment than a free kick against or a 50m penalty, but they are still generally something that results from something that happened in a game. Overall, I just don't have any confidence in the AFL to administer anything bu the most basic poo poo (and even then I'd expect them to gently caress it up). I'm also not sure the pseudo-legal status of the Tribunal is any use when the AFL gets to decide, in it's completely ridiculous manner, what actually makes it there (eg the Burton bump).
|
|
#
?
May 9, 2018 11:34
|
|
|
The thing is, he's been tackling like this his entire career. It's always been a free kick if it's been seen as too 'harsh.' gently caress the AFL in it's entirety. This means we go in against GWS without NicNat, Shuey, Vardy and Sheed. Lycett is gonna have to ruck on his own. Here, have a massive contradiction in the same loving sentence: "The AFL's legal counsel, Jeff Gleeson, accepted there was no malice in Naitanui's tackle, but argued that the Eagle, at 110kg, hadn't exercise his duty of care to a player he outweighed by about 30kg." "Sorry Nic, if you were about a foot shorter and 40kg lighter, this never would have happened." Diet Crack fucked around with this message at 11:52 on May 9, 2018 |
|
#
?
May 9, 2018 11:42
|
|
|
I just want to be clear that I'm arguing for the ideal and not the reality. In my mind the umpires are empowered to report things that fall outside of that standard of reasonable care and need to have the designated powers assess them and the players agree to those standards so that they can't charge someone for assault when they get bumped to the head, they are aware of the physical boundaries and the expectation of their care within them etc etc. I agree completely that the AFL has an administrative clusterfuck at the pointy end of that system. Complaining that the umpires are making bad calls is one thing given the time, space and perception constraints that make that difficult, which also necessitates after match referrals. But being the league's representative to look at all these incidents and then come out and completely misrepresent one situation by saying he pinned his arms, then call that the easiest decisions he's had to make, has declared Christian as a smooth brained wiggling jowl and not much else. The flow of considerations he makes must be a jumbled bag of tarot cards cause how do you go "big man tackle, big man suspend" in the context of people being elbowed off play, people being stepped on, people being put in hospital. Instead of getting an ex-player from decades ago who's done not much but talk for a living, get proper legal counsel to look at other legal concepts, like precedent, intent, or something else that doesn't need crayons to play with and have more recent players do the role, rotate those players so they come to these situations with clear eyes (i dunno, like a loving jury?). It's just a complete meal of a situation and if Christian survives past this year, the tribunal will be confirmed as a farce and the AFL should be sued for how much they've hosed it up.
|
|
#
?
May 9, 2018 11:50
|
|
|
Quantum Shart posted:I just want to be clear that I'm arguing for the ideal and not the reality. In my mind the umpires are empowered to report things that fall outside of that standard of reasonable care and need to have the designated powers assess them and the players agree to those standards so that they can't charge someone for assault when they get bumped to the head, they are aware of the physical boundaries and the expectation of their care within them etc etc. I couldn't agree more. In the end, I'd be happy with either outcome for the Nic Nat situation as long as it's the result of a process that makes sense and is consistent.
|
|
#
?
May 9, 2018 12:25
|
|
|
Nic Naitanui is a loving class act and the afl has jumped the loving shark
|
|
#
?
May 9, 2018 12:47
|
|
|
And of course this happens after Mumford has retired; that prick would be suspended every couple of weeks if this was in effect during his caeer.
|
|
#
?
May 9, 2018 13:46
|
|
|
I'm just glad it's not a demons player involved in this sort of thing this go round, although we haven't played Adelaide yet so there's still time
|
|
#
?
May 9, 2018 13:53
|
|
|
https://instagram.com/p/BibMVtSD4l7/
|
|
#
?
May 9, 2018 13:58
|
|
|
I'm in the same boat. If it were a standard thing and wasn't a ruling just made up out of the blue with some level of consistency, I'd take it on the chin and accept the 1 week ban. However, because Nic Nat and other Ruckmen do this week in week out, and have done for many many years - all with bullshit lies coming from the very man who's supposed to adjudicate it... It really rubs me the wrong way because we all know we'll see exactly the same thing go scot-free in the next couple of weeks. It really hurts our chances of bagging another away win this week as well even if GWS say they have injuries, theirs aren't really as significant. Just gently caress the AFL honestly, I'm getting so sick of this rule change/rule bending bullshit year in year out.
|
|
#
?
May 9, 2018 14:07
|
|
|
imo max gawn is a strong chance to finish top 3 in the Brownlow
|
|
#
?
May 9, 2018 23:07
|
|
|
Solemn Sloth posted:imo max gawn is a strong chance to finish top 3 in the Brownlow Brownlows generally only go to players from teams who make finals but.
|
|
#
?
May 10, 2018 02:24
|
|
|
I remember one year telling a mad Essendon supporter that there was no way Jobe was going to win the Brownlow because it always goes to a top 8 side. It's nice knowing I was right in the long run.
|
|
#
?
May 10, 2018 02:40
|
|
|
Solemn Sloth posted:imo max gawn is a strong chance to finish top 3 in the Brownlow Umpires don't give ruckmen votes. In 2016 when he was on fire he got barely any 3 vote games from the umpires. In the hawthorn game where we beat them for the first time in however long he was best on ground by a mile and the 3 votes went to Viney
|
|
#
?
May 10, 2018 02:58
|
|
|
hiddenmovement posted:I remember one year telling a mad Essendon supporter that there was no way Jobe was going to win the Brownlow because it always goes to a top 8 side. Cotchin didn’t play finals either though
|
|
#
?
May 10, 2018 03:02
|
|
|
That's generally, though. I mean GAJ won his second with the Suns because of the tons of possessions which made him stand out in that team. Still pretty weird though.
|
|
#
?
May 10, 2018 03:40
|
|
|
I’d say a 7 foot bald guy with a big ole beard stands out alright imo
|
|
#
?
May 10, 2018 04:01
|
|
|
I got some footy gossip worthy of BigFooty for you thread: One of the owners of my local kebab shop is a Saints fan and we talk footy when I go in to get some delicious food. Today he told me that one of the AFL umpires came in to the shop and they got talking. The umpire apparently said that he did a Saints game and that there Saints players swearing at other Saints players when they missed a shot at goal. When asked if this was out of the ordinary he said it was very unusual. The Saints wont fix anything any time soon if that's what's actually happening.
|
|
#
?
May 10, 2018 04:26
|
|
|
Yeh but how good was the kebab/snack pack?
|
|
#
?
May 10, 2018 04:30
|
|
|
Periphery posted:I got some footy gossip worthy of BigFooty for you thread: RIP saints
|
|
#
?
May 10, 2018 04:34
|
|
|
I thought that problem might've gotten fixed when they let go of Goddard
|
|
#
?
May 10, 2018 04:40
|
|
|
drunkill posted:Yeh but how good was the kebab/snack pack?
|
|
#
?
May 10, 2018 04:40
|
|
|
drunkill posted:Yeh but how good was the kebab/snack pack? Unlike the Saints, the kebabs are consistently good.
|
|
#
?
May 10, 2018 05:03
|
|
|
Periphery posted:The Saints wont fix anything any time soon if that's what's actually happening. AFL 360 last night did a bit of analysis about the culture at Essendon, discussing some of the same sorts of culture issues. Theirs was related to how they didnt celebrate a first time goal kicker, looked pretty damning compared to the equivalent celebration at the Eagles.
|
|
#
?
May 10, 2018 10:14
|
|
|
That reminds me... anyone else watching The Beep Test on Fox on Wednesday nights? I think it’s a pretty good mix of comedy, trivia and footy personalities. I’ve had several good chuckles at the laugh out loud moments.
|
|
#
?
May 10, 2018 10:19
|
|
|
no foxtel is a devils tool 
|
|
#
?
May 10, 2018 14:24
|
|
|
drunkill posted:no 
|
|
#
?
May 10, 2018 14:47
|
|
|
LOL that reply is from a mate of mine.
|
|
#
?
May 10, 2018 21:24
|
|
|
Sounds like there was a second, more recent incident involving Ross Lyon
|
|
#
?
May 10, 2018 22:01
|
|
|
Come on Gil, tell us more about how acceptable sexual harassment hush money is to those at Assistant Fuckers League HQ
|
|
#
?
May 10, 2018 22:09
|
|
|
I continue to be surprised that there hasn’t been a huge leak of embarrassing emails and internal documents from AFL HQ. There must be so much loving dirt in that place. Maybe the place is so cult like that the only ones who would have access have drunk so much koolaid they’ve lost all sense of what constitutes good conduct.
|
|
#
?
May 10, 2018 22:20
|
|
|
gay picnic defence posted:I continue to be surprised that there hasn’t been a huge leak of embarrassing emails and internal documents from AFL HQ. There must be so much loving dirt in that place. Maybe the place is so cult like that the only ones who would have access have drunk so much koolaid they’ve lost all sense of what constitutes good conduct. It'd be like any other large org, full of people wanting to climb to the top not wanting to spoil their chances, plus it's a relatively small industry and you don't want to be the whistleblower. https://twitter.com/1116sen/status/994683501768142849?s=21  I'll give you the tip, it ain't gonna be ol' mumbles Sumich
|
|
#
?
May 10, 2018 22:55
|
|
|
Spedman posted:It'd be like any other large org, full of people wanting to climb to the top not wanting to spoil their chances, plus it's a relatively small industry and you don't want to be the whistleblower. I'd bet this plays a huge part in it. Notice how much of an old boys club it is. If you get sacked from a position at one club, you just slide into a different position at another club. People move from AFL house to club back to AFL house in various administrative roles. Everybody knows everybody else, and you don't want to ruin your chances of promotion by pissing off those above you by revealing their secrets. I'd also argue there is a "what happens on footy trip stays on footy trip" mentality among the male ex-players, as well as a "you never played footy, you wouldn't understand" culture that thinks that the football industry has different rules to normal corporate and workplaces.
|
|
#
?
May 11, 2018 00:25
|
|
|
Yep, small industry, the AFL make a shitload of money so jobs are well paid with a bunch of functions staff get to attend (plus a corporate box for games) Nobody is going to be a whistleblower if they're on 100k+ a year.
|
|
#
?
May 11, 2018 05:08
|
|
|
Paddy's "whiplash" is actually - surprise - another concussion. His seventh. Probably time to have a serious think about retirement.
|
|
#
?
May 11, 2018 05:14
|
|
|
boy undead posted:Paddy's "whiplash" is actually - surprise - another concussion. His seventh. Didn’t the saints put him back on the field following the head knock?
|
|
#
?
May 11, 2018 05:29
|
|
|
Here we go boys, Freo having a presser with Lyon. And it ain't to announce the list.
|
|
#
?
May 11, 2018 05:38
|
|
|
Lyon has already denied that there's a second allegation.
|
|
#
?
May 11, 2018 05:41
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 26, 2024 03:43 |
|
|
I feel like the doctor who looked at a guy who has had 6 concussions in 4 years, who had symptoms matching concussion, and decided it was definitely not concussion but actually whiplash because he also had a sore neck, should be pretty embarrassed
|
|
#
?
May 11, 2018 05:43
|
|