by retired60 » Sun Jul 24, 2016 8:46 pm
by The Big Shrek » Sun Jul 24, 2016 8:49 pm
Eagles2014 wrote:
Think there has been more than two incidents, but either way, the decision to ban the Club for rest of season has been justified. If they just took points off them, taking them out of finals contention, you can imagine what some of their players would have done on the field, that was the major worry of the League. Think Ricky Pearce the coach would be disappointed in himself allowing it to happen and being front and centre in that photo, even though he did not have his finger raised.
by jo172 » Sun Jul 24, 2016 8:55 pm
The Big Shrek wrote:Eagles2014 wrote:
Think there has been more than two incidents, but either way, the decision to ban the Club for rest of season has been justified. If they just took points off them, taking them out of finals contention, you can imagine what some of their players would have done on the field, that was the major worry of the League. Think Ricky Pearce the coach would be disappointed in himself allowing it to happen and being front and centre in that photo, even though he did not have his finger raised.
You're kidding me aren't you? I can imagine what the rest of the players would have done, played footy.
What absolute nonsense to suggest otherwise.
The two incidents were ones to do with umpires. So if there is another incident with abusive umpires is there an endemic problem there?
by piglet1 » Sun Jul 24, 2016 9:05 pm
by MW » Sun Jul 24, 2016 9:09 pm
by heater31 » Sun Jul 24, 2016 9:10 pm
piglet1 wrote:All this over a single photo when boys are on the piss when they've just been booted out of the league. The amount of media coverage this has got has been ridiculous. You'd think rosewater are associated with isis how some of you people are carrying on.
by jo172 » Sun Jul 24, 2016 9:12 pm
heater31 wrote:piglet1 wrote:All this over a single photo when boys are on the piss when they've just been booted out of the league. The amount of media coverage this has got has been ridiculous. You'd think rosewater are associated with isis how some of you people are carrying on.
If they had any brains they wouldn't post such inflammatory images on social media when the initial incident was cooling down still.
by whufc » Sun Jul 24, 2016 9:15 pm
piglet1 wrote:All this over a single photo when boys are on the piss when they've just been booted out of the league. The amount of media coverage this has got has been ridiculous. You'd think rosewater are associated with isis how some of you people are carrying on.
by daysofourlives » Sun Jul 24, 2016 9:23 pm
piglet1 wrote:All this over a single photo when boys are on the piss when they've just been booted out of the league. The amount of media coverage this has got has been ridiculous. You'd think rosewater are associated with the Premier of the State how some of you people and Ch7 and Mike Smithson are carrying on.
by The Big Shrek » Sun Jul 24, 2016 9:23 pm
whufc wrote:piglet1 wrote:All this over a single photo when boys are on the piss when they've just been booted out of the league. The amount of media coverage this has got has been ridiculous. You'd think rosewater are associated with isis how some of you people are carrying on.
The media coverage is ridiculous but after all it was Rosewater players who put this on social media
Even if the coverage is excessive it doesn't mean they shouldn't be punished as u simply can't have people posting stuff like that all over Facebook regardless of whether it was a drunk post or not
by carey » Sun Jul 24, 2016 9:25 pm
by jo172 » Sun Jul 24, 2016 9:28 pm
The Big Shrek wrote:whufc wrote:piglet1 wrote:All this over a single photo when boys are on the piss when they've just been booted out of the league. The amount of media coverage this has got has been ridiculous. You'd think rosewater are associated with isis how some of you people are carrying on.
The media coverage is ridiculous but after all it was Rosewater players who put this on social media
Even if the coverage is excessive it doesn't mean they shouldn't be punished as u simply can't have people posting stuff like that all over Facebook regardless of whether it was a drunk post or not
I've never understood the need so many people feel to punish people for everything. They were upset, let it go.
by whufc » Sun Jul 24, 2016 9:36 pm
The Big Shrek wrote:whufc wrote:piglet1 wrote:All this over a single photo when boys are on the piss when they've just been booted out of the league. The amount of media coverage this has got has been ridiculous. You'd think rosewater are associated with isis how some of you people are carrying on.
The media coverage is ridiculous but after all it was Rosewater players who put this on social media
Even if the coverage is excessive it doesn't mean they shouldn't be punished as u simply can't have people posting stuff like that all over Facebook regardless of whether it was a drunk post or not
I've never understood the need so many people feel to punish people for everything. They were upset, let it go.
by The Big Shrek » Sun Jul 24, 2016 9:51 pm
by Eagles2014 » Sun Jul 24, 2016 9:53 pm
piglet1 wrote:All this over a single photo when boys are on the piss when they've just been booted out of the league. The amount of media coverage this has got has been ridiculous. You'd think rosewater are associated with isis how some of you people are carrying on.
by jo172 » Sun Jul 24, 2016 9:59 pm
The Big Shrek wrote:Specific deterrence refers to deterring an individual. I've never seen a prosecutor ask for an innocent person to be punished for what someone else did either.
The reason a club may have many different responses is because it is made up of many individuals, with different opinions. The situation is far more complicated than a post on here can do justice to, but this holier than thou and tar everyone with the same brush crap bugs me.
by piglet1 » Sun Jul 24, 2016 10:15 pm
Eagles2014 wrote:piglet1 wrote:All this over a single photo when boys are on the piss when they've just been booted out of the league. The amount of media coverage this has got has been ridiculous. You'd think rosewater are associated with isis how some of you people are carrying on.
How ridiculous, you and The Big Shrek just don't get it. Absolute waste of time discussing it anymore, if people at Rosewater are thinking the same as you two then no wonder they have a problem. The Club will never get better and are odds on favourites to be docked points or banned again in 2017. Then you guys can continue to whinge about it!
by The Big Shrek » Sun Jul 24, 2016 10:23 pm
jo172 wrote:The Big Shrek wrote:Specific deterrence refers to deterring an individual. I've never seen a prosecutor ask for an innocent person to be punished for what someone else did either.
The reason a club may have many different responses is because it is made up of many individuals, with different opinions. The situation is far more complicated than a post on here can do justice to, but this holier than thou and tar everyone with the same brush crap bugs me.
Moving aside from the current situation, in your view is collective responsibility and liability ever justified in Community Football?
by Footy Chick » Sun Jul 24, 2016 10:25 pm
Gatt_Weasel wrote:if they (Walkerville) dont win the flag ill run around the block of my street naked :) you can grab a chair and enjoy the view
by The Big Shrek » Sun Jul 24, 2016 10:38 pm
Footy Chick wrote:Sorry to use Smiffies as a example here but when this happened to that club no one batted an eye, what's the difference now?
Competitions SANFL Official Site | Country Footy SA | Southern Football League | VFL Footy
Club Forums Snouts Louts | The Roost | Redlegs Forum |