Opinion Non-Crows AFL 10

[Samcro24]

That was a correct HTB decision but they haven't paid them most of the night lol

The whistles often come late on them too recently.

I think they get away with it then, pinged

 

[MarcusP2]

Nah, that was clear as day.

Yes, I agree it was HTB, that's what I said.

Feel like a few have been let go though.

 

[Rags_118]

I reckon I was calling people the F (or P) word in heated situations when I was late teens/early 20s. That was a different time, but it was still immaturity and I grew out of it and realised it was a dumb thing to say.

A bit surprised to hear people still using it in this day and age though. It's a pretty hefty punishment and I don't really agree with the logic the AFL has used. You could argue that as time goes on, it will carry a lighter punishment (i.e. It's a less severe act).

Adel Uni teams/players used to be collectively called Uni P……s back in the day. Not so much in heated situations but just to be mildly derogatory, sometimes while attempting to be humorous. It seemed ubiquitous.

 

[Scorpus]

The most shocking thing in that match was Cripps being caught holding the ball and it actually being paid

 

[BACCS]

Imagine ROB doing that.

No other ruck in the game that could kick that goal, Gawn is the best modern day ruckman we have seen

 

[Sanders]

Yes, I agree it was HTB, that's what I said.

Feel like a few have been let go though.

Not like that.

 

[TubbsFarquhar]

Bloody Melbourne, couldn't have managed even a point in the first quarter.

 

[BACCS]

Bloody Melbourne, couldn't have managed even a point in the first quarter.

Without Petracca, they honestly didn't look like scoring for 80% of the game. This won't hold up in finals, like we have seen the last two years.

 

[WetCrow1991]

Bloody Melbourne, couldn't have managed even a point in the first quarter.

Pretty telling how flaky Carlton are. Melbourne didn't rock up until half time and almost pinched it.

 

[WetCrow1991]

Without Petracca, they honestly didn't look like scoring for 80% of the game. This won't hold up in finals, like we have seen the last two years.

They don't have much up forward at all. Wish we were playing better when we played them.

 

[StonesThrow]

We are legit heading for no words to be said to opponents in 10 years time, if we continue this trend.

It's like when all the comedians in the last 5 years get up and say you can't say anything anymore and then go on to say the same thing they've been saying forever and get lots of laughs and then get paid lots of money for it.

 

[GreyCrow]

Adel Uni teams/players used to be collectively called Uni P……s back in the day. Not so much in heated situations but just to be mildly derogatory, sometimes while attempting to be humorous. It seemed ubiquitous.

To be fair we called all the private school old boys clubs that

 

[Slippery Pete]

why wouldn't there be an obligation to use the most offensive insults possible?

So the only real question is, do you think that homophobic slurs should be on the acceptable side of the line or not.\

Neither of you are able to draw the distinction between words you don’t like, and words that should be subject to a suspension from that paragon of ethics and morals, the AFL.

I personally wouldn’t use any of the aforementioned slurs on a football field — but I sure as s**t wouldn’t want anyone suspended for using them.

It is up to a player how low he wants to go to get inside someone’s head. Very rarely, a player will go as low as any human could possibly go.

And it tells you everything you need to know about those players.

It’s worth reminding you that the AFL just banned skin-fold tests because it might hurt someone’s feelings.

I am telling you that we are heading towards a competition where calling someone a fat campaigner will earn you a suspension and a hostage apology video.

And you blokes will be in here scratching your heads wondering how this insanity happened.

 

[FR0GGY]

It's like when all the comedians in the last 5 years get up and say you can't say anything anymore and then go on to say the same thing they've been saying forever and get lots of laughs and then get paid lots of money for it.

Is it, you used to be able to bump, accidental head knocks weren’t a think.
Times change not sure why people wouldn’t think it’s going to get sanitized even more.

 

[Scorpus]

Neither of you are able to draw the distinction between words you don’t like, and words that should be subject to a suspension from that paragon of ethics and morals, the AFL.

I personally wouldn’t use any of the aforementioned slurs on a football field — but I sure as s**t wouldn’t want anyone suspended for using them.

It is up to a player how low he wants to go to get inside someone’s head. Very rarely, a player will go as low as any human could possibly go.

And it tells you everything you need to know about those players.

It’s worth reminding you that the AFL just banned skin-fold tests because it might hurt someone’s feelings.

I am telling you that we are heading towards a competition where calling someone a fat campaigner will earn you a suspension and a hostage apology video.

And you blokes will be in here scratching your heads wondering how this insanity happened.

If you or I (or a player) can apply judgement to a player for using certain words, and that causes consequences for them, why can't the AFL and by extension the people that run the AFL?

 

[Slippery Pete]

If you or I (or a player) can apply judgement to a player for using certain words, and that causes consequences for them, why can't the AFL and by extension the people that run the AFL?

I’m not applying judgement to any words, that’s the point.

I’m saying that any spoken words on the field stay on the field and are sorted out on the field.

That was the approach for about the first 110 years the game was played, funnily enough.

 

[Geoffa32]

Didn't watch tonight's game. Just saw the "dangerous" tackle.

Perfect tackle, untill the Carlton player head butted the ground to milk the free kick...

On SM-A325F using BigFooty.com mobile app

 

[Pea Nut]

Is it, you used to be able to bump, accidental head knocks weren’t a think.
Times change not sure why people wouldn’t think it’s going to get sanitized even more.

I listened to the Jordan Lewis chat that he had with Schofield and this moment was brought up. I had forgotten how brutal this actually was. If this happened this weekend, what's the outcome ?? Player still competes for the ball.

 

[Scorpus]

I’m not applying judgement to any words, that’s the point.

I’m saying that any spoken words on the field stay on the field and are sorted out on the field.

That was the approach for about the first 110 years the game was played, funnily enough.

Of course you are applying judgement.

Earlier you described words that someone said on the field as "the worst" - you judged those words to be bad. You said if a player uses the lowest of low insults, that "tells you everything you need to know" - in other words, you are judging that player for what they said. The very act of classifying words into different severities is judging them - "I personally wouldn’t use any of the aforementioned slurs on a football field" - yeah because you judged them to be below your standards.

You said a player upon being insulted on the field could apply "summary justice" in return

So a player can judge another player's actions on the field and hand out consequences in the moment, but the people who set the rules and standards at the AFL cannot. Why? What's the difference?

 

[StonesThrow]

Is it, you used to be able to bump, accidental head knocks weren’t a think.
Times change not sure why people wouldn’t think it’s going to get sanitized even more.

We weren't referring to physical stuff.

My point is that yes things have changed and things feel like they're changing quickly, but how much are people truly being oppressed by these new rules? You can still say almost all of the stuff you used to. It's pretty easy to be cheeky and not get reported to HR/AFL headquarters.

 

[FR0GGY]

We weren't referring to physical stuff.

My point is that yes things have changed and things feel like they're changing quickly, but how much are people truly being oppressed by these new rules? You can still say almost all of the stuff you used to. It's pretty easy to be cheeky and not get reported to HR/AFL headquarters.

People get offended a lot easier these days, I can’t see why that wouldn’t continue, if you extrapolate that out, you end up with my original statement.

 

[BigBoSS_Riot]

I listened to the Jordan Lewis chat that he had with Schofield and this moment was brought up. I had forgotten how brutal this actually was. If this happened this weekend, what's the outcome ?? Player still competes for the ball.

That's actually a pretty interesting one. Looking at it on slow-mo, Harbrow doesn't brace, but doesn't actually appear to make contact with the ball (and if he does, it's pretty minimal).

Shocking hospital pass either way.

 

[Slippery Pete]

So a player can judge another player's actions on the field and hand out consequences in the moment, but the people who set the rules and standards at the AFL cannot. Why? What's the difference?

The difference is that one approach allows grown adults to regulate words in the social and/or sporting environment in which they exist.

The other approach is a corrupt governing body ruling over speech and issuing completely arbitrary punishments for this week’s latest thoughtcrime.

 

[Samcro24]

And you blokes will be in here scratching your heads wondering how this insanity happened.

Bet they won’t

 

[Scorpus]

The difference is that one approach allows grown adults to regulate words in the social and/or sporting environment in which they exist.

The other approach is a corrupt governing body ruling over speech and issuing completely arbitrary punishments for this week’s latest thoughtcrime.

It's interesting how you describe only the players as grown adults operating in a sporting environment, when that also applies to the AFL. And you also say the AFL is the only group issuing "completely arbitrary punishments", when the players would be doing that as well if they retaliated on the field through summary justice.

And that's basically what it boils down to. You've arbitrarily decided that one group of people (the players) is allowed to enact consequences and take action over speech, but another group of people (the AFL) is not.