Goodesy - One Week

[WeHaveTheGoodes]

There's a bit of support for Goodes. Crawf says Goodes had no other choice.

http://www.afl.com.au/News/NEWSARTICLE/tabid/208/newsId/133420/Default.aspx

Time for an official 'clarifciation'.

Had this been 2008* and one of the golden melbourne based teams top player been rubbed out for the same there would be days and days worth of angst about the game going soft, vlad and his cronies ruining the game etc etc and SEN and 3AW would be going off.

As it is we get one article and golden silence.

God i hate the AFL with such an unhealthy passion. Love the code love the swans but really dislike the AFL. They are everything i really hate about living life under corporate rule.

*it's clear that at the start of 2011 the AFL gave the media a directive to not criticise the rules nor the umps nor the MRP. These days you don't hear a whimper. The AFL really are dictating the way the game should be written and discussed about in the media and thats means 100% spin and bull@@@@.

[Hartijon]

Craig O'Brien say's hi....

I tweeted FoxFooty and asked them to get David King's assessment of Goodes' act of sliding. Not surprisingly, they haven't asked him yet...

Gold!

[WeHaveTheGoodes]

After reading some opposition fans reply to this (most are from vic based clubs) i really wonder if my fellow Victorians actually understand the game more than my fellow swannies from Sydney.

Seriously i think a lot of people simply don't understand the game and they just go with the flow, you know shout holding the ball when everyone else in the crowd does it, boo a certain person because everyone does it and many more.

Sheesh some of the stupidity i have come across today on that BigForty site is just mind boggling.

[Dosser]

After reading some opposition fans reply to this (most are from vic based clubs) i really wonder if my fellow Victorians actually understand the game more than my fellow swannies from Sydney.

Seriously i think a lot of people simply don't understand the game and they just go with the flow, you know shout holding the ball when everyone else in the crowd does it, boo a certain person because everyone does it and many more.

Sheesh some of the stupidity i have come across today on that BigForty site is just mind boggling.

Booooooooo!

[chalbilto]

After reading some opposition fans reply to this (most are from vic based clubs) i really wonder if my fellow Victorians actually understand the game more than my fellow swannies from Sydney.

Seriously i think a lot of people simply don't understand the game and they just go with the flow, you know shout holding the ball when everyone else in the crowd does it, boo a certain person because everyone does it and many more.

Sheesh some of the stupidity i have come across today on that BigForty site is just mind boggling.

There are quite a few rational well informed posters on BigFooty site, however they are outweighed by the ones who come out with stupid ill informed statements as well as the vitriol that many display. At least on this forum, on the whole, there generally is decorum, passionate, intelligent contributions mixed with very different view points. Whilst not everyone agrees with everything that is posted one can still appreciate the contributions made. I personally do bother to contribute on the BigFooty site as my it is better to keep one's mouth shut, than to open up and remove all doubt.

[Big Al]

Twitter: Shane Crawford says attacking the footy has become a 'grey area' after Adam Goodes' suspension for rough conduct http://t.co/tv1xIhyn

Even that dill Crawford things the decision was a crook one.

[WeHaveTheGoodes]

There are quite a few rational well informed posters on BigFooty site, however they are outweighed by the ones who come out with stupid ill informed statements as well as the vitriol that many display. At least on this forum, on the whole, there generally is decorum, passionate, intelligent contributions mixed with very different view points. Whilst not everyone agrees with everything that is posted one can still appreciate the contributions made. I personally do bother to contribute on the BigFooty site as my it is better to keep one's mouth shut, than to open up and remove all doubt.

Yeah you are right. Most times i have to remind myself that i am reading dribble written by a 12 year old. There are a lot of teenagers on bigfooty.

[Meg]

If we want to carry on about this business of using the knees then lets take it out of marking contests. More players have been badly injured over the years in this way. IIRC Sam Newman lost a kidney in this way and in more recent times Tom Lonergan. On a weekly basis you see players holding their backs after a player "gets a ride" on their backs.

I have been thinking exactly the same thing. While admiring the brilliance of many a "mark of the day", it has often puzzled me how it can be deemed to be legitimate to ride on another player's back and shoulders with the knees when you see much milder acts (such as Goodes') penalised.

[Wardy]

I have been thinking exactly the same thing. While admiring the brilliance of many a "mark of the day", it has often puzzled me how it can be deemed to be legitimate to ride on another player's back and shoulders with the knees when you see much milder acts (such as Goodes') penalised.

don't say it too loud Adrian Anderson might take that out of the game too. The inconsistency is staggering but the current nut bags at control headquarters are determined to leave a legacy, more likely to the detriment of the game if truth be told but a legacy nonetheless.

[Beerman]

'm with Crawford confused! There wasn't any charge against the player who broke Barlow's leg a couple of years ago. I can't remember the incident clearly, and I can't bring myself to watch it again, but I seem to remember he dived at the ball when it was at Barlow's feet (they were both approaching the ball hard). When you compare the chance of injury in that case vs. Goodes it seems a world apart.

From the live blog, I thought the Swan's QC didn't make the best defence. Should have argued that with both players approaching low and sliding, the chance of injury was negligible and that therefore Goodes had met his duty of care. Also, the contact was below the level required for the offence to be reportable.

Still, with a clean record he would have got off with a reprimand, which seems fair enough. It was only the priors that pushed him over to one week, so I can't complain too much. [Oops! Too late!]

[jono2707]

Um the bloke that broke Barlow's leg was Rhys Palmer - a teammate..... As far as I'm aware they can't throw the book at you for snapping one of your teammate's legs......

[liz]

I am curious about the whole concept of 'duty of care' in the context of a contact sport like AFL. Would be interested in the comments of any lurking lawyers, given it is a concept taken from law, and also anyone actually familiar with the written rules of the game and/or tribunal guidelines. Is it actually defined / documented anywhere precisely what duty of care players owe each other, and to the extent that a duty exists, what defences they can rely on to demonstrate that they have met it? Is it defined by the various (and changing) pronouncements of the Rules Committee? The DVD that the AFL distributes to clubs at the start of each year (or has for some years) providing examples of what players will and will not be sanctioned for?

There are a few specific instances where the AFL has made it clear the extent to which players owe each other a duty of care. In recent years this has centred around head high contact, especially in the context of bumps and tackles. And most of us would intuitively accept that players have a duty of care not to deliberately set out to injure another player. But more broadly, given the nature of the collisions and contact that occur every minute of a game and the frequent injuries that happen that we accept are just (an unfortunate) part of the game, where does players duty of care to others start and stop?

[CureTheSane]

Um the bloke that broke Barlow's leg was Rhys Palmer - a teammate..... As far as I'm aware they can't throw the book at you for snapping one of your teammate's legs......

Raises an interesting point.
What's the difference between a team mate injuring a player with no intent and an opposition player doing the same.
They are both accidents in a game of physical contact.
There are a lot of fine lines....

[Dirtyburt]

There are a lot of fine lines....

Jessica Alba and Monica Bellucci 2 fine examples

[Mr Magoo]

I am curious about the whole concept of 'duty of care' in the context of a contact sport like AFL. Would be interested in the comments of any lurking lawyers, given it is a concept taken from law, and also anyone actually familiar with the written rules of the game and/or tribunal guidelines. Is it actually defined / documented anywhere precisely what duty of care players owe each other, and to the extent that a duty exists, what defences they can rely on to demonstrate that they have met it? Is it defined by the various (and changing) pronouncements of the Rules Committee? The DVD that the AFL distributes to clubs at the start of each year (or has for some years) providing examples of what players will and will not be sanctioned for?

There are a few specific instances where the AFL has made it clear the extent to which players owe each other a duty of care. In recent years this has centred around head high contact, especially in the context of bumps and tackles. And most of us would intuitively accept that players have a duty of care not to deliberately set out to injure another player. But more broadly, given the nature of the collisions and contact that occur every minute of a game and the frequent injuries that happen that we accept are just (an unfortunate) part of the game, where does players duty of care to others start and stop?

If you were to take a legal viewpoint nearly every incident of contact on a football field could be a lack of duty of care in that a reasonable person in that position would have forseen that in carrying out their actions , it would cause the person harm or damage.