Hall Quits

[DST]

The McGuire hit was as much in play as the Staker hit. and condemned it when it wanted to offload him. A lot to be proud of in this.

Not according to the AFL rules at the time, they were changed after 2005 to better define what was in play and out of play.

You can't apply the same principle to rules a couple of years apart that have had their interpretation changed.

Connolly, I can't even believe that you are arguing that the McGuire and Staker incidents are even the same.

DST

[SwansFan1972]

Footy clubs are pragmatic (first and foremost, and mostly to the exclusion of all else). It suited them to defend him in 2005, and didn't in 2009. Right, wrong, honourable or disgraceful doesn't come into it really.

Find a club that would have acted differently, and I'll show you one which doesn't have its eye on the prize. Whoever you are, when you become a liability, more often than not you will be excised. I think everyone agrees there was still a lot to offer on-field from Hally, but off-field pressures eventually built up too much.

I've loved watching Hall over the years, but (as has been said before) eventually the chances run out. You just can't whack blokes time and again (regardless of force) and not expect repercussions.

In defence of the club, the Maguire incident was his first in a long while, which is the only mitigating factor to distinguish it from later events. The small matter of wanting to win a premiership was a much bigger consideration, and of course the club would move heaven and earth to get him off!

Pragmatism will always win out.

[connolly]

Not according to the AFL rules at the time, they were changed after 2005 to better define what was in play and out of play.

You can't apply the same principle to rules a couple of years apart that have had their interpretation changed.

Connolly, I can't even believe that you are arguing that the Maguire and Staker incidents are even the same.

DST

i wasn't talking about the rules which are a joke but the issue of Hall's uncontrolled aggression and violence and the club's response to Maguire, Staker and Rutten incidents. It is irrelevant whether the Maguire hit wa sin play. It was out of order. And the club took no action apart from using a smart silk to argue the letter of rule. Where was Forrest QC after the Rutten incident? Well there was no GF last week.

Just to refresh memories.

YouTube - St Kilda vs. Sydney Swans - Matt Maguire Incident

And when Hall got off and was cleared to play in the Grand Final the coach said:

Well, look, that's not a bad decision for us. But we can't get caught up in the excitement of it all. All it does is give us a chance to play with our strongest team on Saturday.
Really Roosey.

[CureTheSane]

He is out of contract, so we won't get anything for him anyway. Take your dribble and go elsewhere.

DST

He was out of contract at years end, there is no way a club would have traded with us for a 33 year old forward with anger management problems when they simply could have picked him up for free in the pre-season draft.

We wouldn't do it.

Are you for real?

DST

I don't understand.

Are you still sticking by your original statement that clubs get nothing when trading players who are out of contract, or are you changing it to the say that Hall would not be worth anything?

I presume that you are standing by your original post, considering you accused me of 'dribble' on the matter.

I would hate for you to have to admit that it was you who dribbled out the dribble.....

[bodgie]

Seems to be a lot of focus on the wayward punches here, and Hall and Roos etc all say as much. But I'm sure his imminent retirement, general on-field problems (umpires and his reactions, two or three on one marking contests, players intimidated into kicking to him regardless) and our need to develop a new forward structure had more significance if they did indeed pressure him to give it away.

[pinkemu]

In the end if the Rutten incident had happened near the end of the season and we were top 4 there would be a different attitude towards Barry from the team, club and supporters.

It's disappointing to see players thrown on the heap when success is unlikely in the near future.

As has been pointed out numerous times before, we were all happy to take Hall's style when we were on the up.

I hope I don't hear an Hall bashing tomorrow when he does his lap or I might get ejected from the ground for my aggressive style of defending a true legend of the game and our team.

[Big Al]

It's disappointing to see players thrown on the heap when success is unlikely in the near future.

As has been pointed out numerous times before, we were all happy to take Hall's style when we were on the up.

I hope I don't hear an Hall bashing tomorrow when he does his lap or I might get ejected from the ground for my aggressive style of defending a true legend of the game and our team.

Sorry, Did I miss Hall punching blokes in the head and costing us games with his behaviour before last year.

Hall threw himself on the scrap heap and only has himself to blame.

While I am disappointed that Hall wasn't able to control himself in the last couple of years, the fact is that I agree with Roos 100% when he said that we would not have won the flag without Hall so I will be giving him the appropriate send off. Dare I say that most Swans supporters will be doing the same.

[BigD]

Sad to see him go but not surprised

[pinkemu]

Sorry, Did I miss Hall punching blokes in the head and costing us games with his behaviour before last year.

Hall threw himself on the scrap heap and only has himself to blame.

While I am disappointed that Hall wasn't able to control himself in the last couple of years, the fact is that I agree with Roos 100% when he said that we would not have won the flag without Hall so I will be giving him the appropriate send off. Dare I say that most Swans supporters will be doing the same.

I'm sure they will BA, while mumbling under thier breath about how much of a @@@@w@t he is.

Seriously, some of the comments made by supporters about Hall and his actions warrant a major psychology session for aggressive response issues

[Big Al]

Seriously, some of the comments made by supporters about Hall and his actions warrant a major psychology session for aggressive response issues

Huh?? The only over the top comments I have read (until the wonderful Ignore list was utilised) were the conspiracy theorists who seem to have an agenda against the club.

Most of the responses are putting the blame on where it belongs and that is Hall himself. The other important person who is blaming Hall is Hall himself. Anyone who thinks otherwise should watch the press conference and the Footy Show interview.

[pinkemu]

Huh?? The only over the top comments I have read (until the wonderful Ignore list was utilised) were the conspiracy theorists who seem to have an agenda against the club.

Most of the responses are putting the blame on where it belongs and that is Hall himself. The other important person who is blaming Hall is Hall himself. Anyone who thinks otherwise should watch the press conference and the Footy Show interview.

I have watched.

That's the amazing thing about people, they see and hear different things, it's called "interpretation", and what you clearly saw is not so clear to me.

[Big Al]

I have watched.

That's the amazing thing about people, they see and hear different things, it's called "interpretation", and what you clearly saw is not so clear to me.

True... However I can only go on what Hall said and how he said it. Reading more into it seems to indicate that people want to see more than there is. Hall gave every indication both orally and with his body language that there was relief with the decision made.

Also it still does not negate the fact that Hall was the architect of his own demise. Unfortunately we have become a society of blame where we don't take responsibility for our own actions anymore. We seem to always try to blame others. To Halls credit he hasn't done that and for that he should be commended.

[Young Blood]

The McGuire hit was as much in play as the Staker hit. As an afficionado of the sweet sport of blokes belting other blokes i fail to see the difference in principle (not degree) between the two punches. One was to the jaw, the other to the guts. Both kind of punches disable. One turns the lights off and the other turns the gas off. Both were violent and both were infringements of the rule. I realise the club argued differently in regard to both punches. That is the point. The two punches were the result of lack of control. But the club chose to defend the McGuire punch not just because it did less damage but because a Grand Final was at stake (pun intended). If the club is against uncontrolled aggression only one of two conclusions are possible:

Halls hit on McGuire was a "controlled" premeditated act of aggression which the club, despite its rhetoric at the time, condoned and that is a disgrace. Was there any psych ops in regtard to Hall after the McGuire hit and before the GF? If there was it was behind closed doors where the Rutten hit should have remained. Were there any calls for "retirement"by coaches and captains? What was Kirk's views on the McGuire hit and why didn't he make them known at the time. Obviously there was a GF to be won and we needed a big strong forward that terrified the bejeezus out of the opposition.

Or the hit on McGuire was an uncontrolled unpremeditated aggression which if the club is being consistent it should have argued before the Tribunal warranted a suspension. Where was the call for duty of care with Terry Forrest QC address to the regulator? Why didn't the club suspend Hall itself as reinforcement of its high player standards? Was Hall any less of a risk of an uncontrolled act of agression in September 2005 than July 2009? He coat hangered Wirrapinda in the very next game. The fact is Hall has had outburst of punching aggression all through his career. The club knew this when he was recruited, used it when it suited us and condemned it when it wanted to offload him. A lot to be proud of in this.

The Maguire punch was Hall's first transgression in 3.5 seasons. The Rutten punch was his third in 23 games. That's the difference.

[Hartijon]

Hall is an anomoly in today's sanitised game.Love to have seen him back in the 70's 80's! I am convinced his physical prescence on the field drew attention away from other forwards who should have capitalised more but didnt.Great player,hard to defend today but I would rather have him on our side than against us. I fear we will never see another player like him! Sad to see him go,the accusations against the club are paper thin in substance..It was time to go and Barry knows it.Will miss the big fella,our "enforcer".

[Robbo]

Newman's interview technique is so @@@@ing woeful I'm not sure I'll be able to watch.
But yes, if the opportunity presents itself Baz please give Sammy a little jumper punch.

Newman is one of the best interviewers out there. Asks the tough questions without holding back.