I'd suggest Fahey got 4 weeks because he won't be contracted so good luck getting the cash out of him and they can be seen to be hard on it knowing it means nothing.
I have no problem with their being punishments, while I don't think they should have done it and some of the choices were distasteful an apology and a bit of charity work was probably where it should have sat.
The issue I have is with the AFL again deciding to come down hard on things that should barely involve them while allowing the grubs in the comp to go around giving cheapies racking up fines that are less than this. Soft on things that are in their wheelhouse and actually important, tough on things when they think their image is damaged and it might affect the bottom line.
Zelezny Chucks wrote:I'd suggest Fahey got 4 weeks because he won't be contracted so good luck getting the cash out of him and they can be seen to be hard on it knowing it means nothing.
I have no problem with their being punishments, while I don't think they should have done it and some of the choices were distasteful an apology and a bit of charity work was probably where it should have sat.
The issue I have is with the AFL again deciding to come down hard on things that should barely involve them while allowing the grubs in the comp to go around giving cheapies racking up fines that are less than this. Soft on things that are in their wheelhouse and actually important, tough on things when they think their image is damaged and it might affect the bottom line.
With you on all counts. I think the behavior was less than ordinary, the punishments don't fit the "crime" and the apology / charity work you suggest is appropriate.
When the AFL ignore the situation that saw Stengle sent to hospital in an ambulance at 3am only to suspend players for this shows up their inconsistency once again.
Yep spot on, as long as the commission set the CEO revenue targets to trigger bonuses everything is going to be around the image of the game and attracting the most eyes, nothing else matters.
I do wonder where the fine money goes? Back to general revenue which ends up getting split 18 ways anyway?
Charity or grassroots game development should be the answer.
tigerpie wrote:Booney it wasn't a Christmas show with men, women,teenagers and other in attendance. It was a private party with just dumbass footballers on the gas.
They even waited until people left who might not agree with what went on went home apparently.
No illegal activity, no fighting, nothing broken except some young players reputations.
Class action. Invasion of privacy!
Back up AFL.
Well if they waited for people with common sense to go home then they obviously knew it was going to be pretty stupid.
How can it be an invasion of privacy if someone else seen it? Just very dumb footballers.
Just go to one of their mansions to do pathetic boys club shows, costumes are one thing but the skits must have been pretty tasteless to have made the news like they have.
tigerpie wrote:Booney it wasn't a Christmas show with men, women,teenagers and other in attendance. It was a private party with just dumbass footballers on the gas.
They even waited until people left who might not agree with what went on went home apparently.
No illegal activity, no fighting, nothing broken except some young players reputations.
Class action. Invasion of privacy!
Back up AFL.
Well if they waited for people with common sense to go home then they obviously knew it was going to be pretty stupid.
How can it be an invasion of privacy if someone else seen it? Just very dumb footballers.
Just go to one of their mansions to do pathetic boys club shows, costumes are one thing but the skits must have been pretty tasteless to have made the news like they have.
Who dresses up? Don’t you just get drunk and nude up
There are no stupid questions, just stupid people.
tigerpie wrote:Booney it wasn't a Christmas show with men, women,teenagers and other in attendance. It was a private party with just dumbass footballers on the gas.
They even waited until people left who might not agree with what went on went home apparently.
No illegal activity, no fighting, nothing broken except some young players reputations.
Class action. Invasion of privacy!
Back up AFL.
Well if they waited for people with common sense to go home then they obviously knew it was going to be pretty stupid.
How can it be an invasion of privacy if someone else seen it? Just very dumb footballers.
Just go to one of their mansions to do pathetic boys club shows, costumes are one thing but the skits must have been pretty tasteless to have made the news like they have.
Who dresses up? Don’t you just get drunk and nude up
tigerpie wrote:Booney it wasn't a Christmas show with men, women,teenagers and other in attendance. It was a private party with just dumbass footballers on the gas.
They even waited until people left who might not agree with what went on went home apparently.
No illegal activity, no fighting, nothing broken except some young players reputations.
Class action. Invasion of privacy!
Back up AFL.
Well if they waited for people with common sense to go home then they obviously knew it was going to be pretty stupid.
How can it be an invasion of privacy if someone else seen it? Just very dumb footballers.
Just go to one of their mansions to do pathetic boys club shows, costumes are one thing but the skits must have been pretty tasteless to have made the news like they have.
Who dresses up? Don’t you just get drunk and nude up
Not since gravity came knocking.
Embrace the man titties
There are no stupid questions, just stupid people.
tigerpie wrote:Booney it wasn't a Christmas show with men, women,teenagers and other in attendance. It was a private party with just dumbass footballers on the gas.
They even waited until people left who might not agree with what went on went home apparently.
No illegal activity, no fighting, nothing broken except some young players reputations.
Class action. Invasion of privacy!
Back up AFL.
Well if they waited for people with common sense to go home then they obviously knew it was going to be pretty stupid.
How can it be an invasion of privacy if someone else seen it? Just very dumb footballers.
Just go to one of their mansions to do pathetic boys club shows, costumes are one thing but the skits must have been pretty tasteless to have made the news like they have.
The invasion of privacy comment was tongue in cheek. My point being it was a private show and I don't think the AFL have any jurisdiction here. And it opens up all sorts of doors. Now a player has a fancy dress party at his private home, his neighbour complains about someones costume then he gets busted. That's not right.
You know the deal. Family show you wait till the oldies go then the real party starts.
tigerpie wrote:Booney it wasn't a Christmas show with men, women,teenagers and other in attendance. It was a private party with just dumbass footballers on the gas.
They even waited until people left who might not agree with what went on went home apparently.
No illegal activity, no fighting, nothing broken except some young players reputations.
Class action. Invasion of privacy!
Back up AFL.
Well if they waited for people with common sense to go home then they obviously knew it was going to be pretty stupid.
How can it be an invasion of privacy if someone else seen it? Just very dumb footballers.
Just go to one of their mansions to do pathetic boys club shows, costumes are one thing but the skits must have been pretty tasteless to have made the news like they have.
This. It may have been a private show but it was at a public venue with members of the public waiting on them
The sanctions are debatable but regardless of the nature of the function it’s not a good look to be simulating rape and other derogatory behaviour towards women when the same players actively took a stance to show their support against domestic violence. The whole thing makes the players and league look hypocritical which is even worse given the AFLW alliance. It needed to be addressed as being unacceptable.
