The Des Headland Outburst!

[ScottH]

To clear his name of what? Are Wardy and I the only ones who think that even what Selwood admits to saying is vile and reflects a very poor attitude towards women?

I wasn't commenting one way or the other. I was merely reporting what I heard on the news.

[nat]

Selwood was very lucky to have gotten off, I believe he did make such comments not because I'm a sydney supporter & i hate the weagles, just because something nasty was said to Headland that made him lose it. Now Selwood believed all he said was " I was with a girl like that the other night" firstly I find that hard to believe as why would Headland get so upset over a comment like that & the fact that Umpire Wenn had said he heard Headland call Selwood a pedo.

So it seems to me that Umpire Wenn only heard what Headland said after the nasty comments Selwood made. FFS Headland was crying when the verdict was set out, now you can't tell Headland is putting on a show for everyone to see.

Selwood has gulity all over him...

I don't think he was 'lucky' to have gotten on. They had no proof that he said that stuff, if they would have suspended him then he could have gone as far as to sue.

[hammo]

Selwood has gulity all over him...

I don't disagree, but in any court of law and even the AFL tribunal you are innocent until proven guilty. Even if you pay-off your alleged victim... doesn't that look guilty also??

The hypocrisy of some on RWO has been on show for all to see these past 2 weeks.

I think there is a fair possibility that Headland misheard what Selwood said, and interpreted it as a sledge on his daughter whereas if Selwood is to be believed he was just making a smart arse comment.

The point I've been making is that if Selwood had half a brain he would realise that if Headland had a tattoo of a young girl with her name printed underneath, there is a fair chance the girl is a family member. In that case it should have been off limits.

[Chow-Chicker]

The point I've been making is that if Selwood had half a brain he would realise that if Headland had a tattoo of a young girl with her name printed underneath, there is a fair chance the girl is a family member. In that case it should have been off limits.

Precisely what Headland thought...and even after telling him who it was (as confirmed by umpire Wenn) it didn't stop him from continuing down that path. I don't condone Headland's actions, but I understand them.

[cruiser]

I wasn't commenting one way or the other. I was merely reporting what I heard on the news.

Sorry Scott, I didnt mean it to sound like I was having a go at you. Rather, I am very critical at the way in which Selwood has been exonerated by the AFL and that so few people seem to be troubled by what he does admit to having said. It's as if women are fair game for sledging on the field.

[goswannie14]

Sorry Scott, I didnt mean it to sound like I was having a go at you. Rather, I am very critical at the way in which Selwood has been exonerated by the AFL and that so few people seem to be troubled by what he does admit to having said. It's as if women are fair game for sledging on the field.

I would have thought, if the AFL was willing, which evidently they aren't with the Illegals, that they coiuld have changed the charges once he admitted to what he had said.

Instead, the morons at AFL HQ are quibbling about hands in the back and fast kick in's from points, while letting one club, do what it wants with no consequence. Come on Andy the Fat Controller, do something constructive for the league, you get paid enough, so it's time to perform.

[Doctor]

To clear his name of what? Are Wardy and I the only ones who think that even what Selwood admits to saying is vile and reflects a very poor attitude towards women?

I don't think you are. What you're raising though is a far, far bigger issue than just Selwood. The fact that it apparently goes on all the time and is considered "OK" unless it's about someone's children shows how widespread it is. We all know about the number of incidents involving professional footballers from all codes and women. I think most are choosing not to open that debate up here as part of this specific issue.

In terms of the finding, it seems like the tribunal couldn't find Selwood guilty, because they only had his word against Headland's, which is fair enough. On the other hand, it seems as though they think it's more probable than not that he either said it, or that Headland was convinced that he said it, otherwise Headland wouldn't have gotten off.

[NMWBloods]

The voices in his head.

I thought they called Gloria not Madisan [sic]...?

[NMWBloods]

now who was it that was screaming hypocrisy?

It was highlighting the hypocrisy!

[NMWBloods]

Well wouldnt the fact that they let Headland off mean that Selwood was in some way guilty? Selwood admitted saying what was said, he pleaded that he didnt know that the tattoo was Headlands daughter (am I right in saying this?) but still he said it about a woman regardless of whether she was 6 or 26 so that is deemed Ok as far as the Tribunal is concerned? And surely Selwood would have known that the tattoo would have some sentimental meaning to Headland, because why else would the tattoo be there in the first place? I'm confused.

But that sort of thing goes on all the time on the footy field (and cricket and others). Is there a plan to outlaw any sledging about personal issues?

[NMWBloods]

i'm in no way a lawyer, but, if hedland was excused as he was "provoked", shouldn't that make selwood guilty of provocation ... doesn't really matter what he said?

No.

[NMWBloods]

I would have thought, if the AFL was willing, which evidently they aren't with the Illegals, that they coiuld have changed the charges once he admitted to what he had said.

What would they have charged him with?

[goswannie14]

What would they have charged him with?

I Ifit is against the rules of the AFL to make racist remarks then wouldn't making sexist remarks also be against the rules?

You would have seen by looking at my post that I was highlighting the point that cruiser was making, and that if the AFL wanted to, they could have charged him with making derogatory sexist remarks. But apparently it is OK to make derogatory sexist remarks on the field of play.

I guess it's a little like Chick could have been charged or suspended for making a false accusation, but the AFL chose not to. WHY?

[NMWBloods]

I Ifit is against the rules of the AFL to make racist remarks then wouldn't making sexist remarks also be against the rules?

You would have seen by looking at my post that I was highlighting the point that cruiser was making, and that if the AFL wanted to, they could have charged him with making derogatory sexist remarks. But apparently it is OK to make derogatory sexist remarks on the field of play.

As I commented above already, that sort of thing goes on all the time - are they planning to eliminate all of that?

[573v30]

I Ifit is against the rules of the AFL to make racist remarks then wouldn't making sexist remarks also be against the rules?

It should be. The AFL players are counselled about respecting women, surely they've learnt something about now...