Vic bias against sydney teams

[barry]

Rumours of GWS being stripped of first and 2nd round picks and whitfield being banned for 18 months.
This is on par with what essendon coped re draft picks and worse ban for player. Essendon was systemic drug program. Whitfield missed a drug test.

What a joke the AFL jas become that it tries to fix things with BS or over the top penalties. Reminds me of the swans trade ban. Nothing has changed.

[R-1]

Nah. Club officials knowingly engaged in the rulebreaking.

[Rob]

The rumour I heard was two draft picks (pick 2 not being one of them and leaving them enough draft points for their two academy picks) and six months for Whitfield, which would have him able to return in Rd 8. Only sticking point was whether or not he was going to allowed to train with the side while banned. 12 month ban for the two officials. Sounds like they're getting off fairly easily to me.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[barry]

Has a team other than essendon ever been baned from the draft for a drug issue?.
The draft ban is the same as essendon. Essendon willfully cheated with 34 players. Its orders of magnitude worse than GWS.

[Bloods05]

Sorry Barry, you're not going to get very far with allegations of AFL bias against GWS. I know you sort of barrack for them, but seriously.

[barry]

Sorry Barry, you're not going to get very far with allegations of AFL bias against GWS. I know you sort of barrack for them, but seriously.

It being GWS clouds the issue. The real issue is the the AFL going after a non-vic team again. May not be the swans this time but could certainly be next time.

I hate the state of this comp.

[barry]

Surprised we havent lost a draft pick for talia actually positive drug saga.

Something like 8 clubs withheld the wearabouts of players for drug tests.

Im not against banning the player and the officials, but trade bans equivalent to essendon is way way to excessive.

[Bloods05]

Actually, for once, it seems like a proportionate response. If anything it's a bit on the lenient side. They should lose their first pick. Let's also not forget the penalties handed out to Lambert and especially Allan. It's worth remembering that he's a Collingwood person.

[ernie koala]

To the contrary Barry.

Given that GWS have admitted that Whitfield was deliberately kept away from drug testing, for fear his illicit drug use may have meant he tested positive to a banned performance enhancing drug....

It's very much on the lenient side....

A 4 year ban, for and player willfully avoiding a drug test, is supposedly mandatory.

Whitfield, and the GWS staff involved, have got off extremely lightly.

[yorlik]

What do you expect?

Like humanity always being a racist POS species (hence trump being elected and the sudden rise of the Alt Right) the code will always be VFL first.

Do what I do these days, just give this code a passing glance. If they, the VFL, want to act this way then why should i invest so much time in following it? I might as well watch WWE as its exactly the same thing..and i hate wrestling.

[chalbilto]

What do you expect?

Like humanity always being a racist POS species (hence trump being elected and the sudden rise of the Alt Right) the code will always be VFL first.

Do what I do these days, just give this code a passing glance. If they, the VFL, want to act this way then why should i invest so much time in following it? I might as well watch WWE as its exactly the same thing..and i hate wrestling.

Is this a political or footy forum?

[Bloods05]

Is this a political or footy forum?

Doesn't matter. This siege mentality is still ridiculous. The AFL is very clearly committed to making GWS a power club. There is no organised bias against non-Victorian clubs. It is much more selective than that, and it shifts from time to time.

For a time the Swans and the Lions were given a reasonable amount of support, but once they became successful the AFL, under the pernicious influence of people like McGuire and Fitzpatrick, turned against them.

What the AFL really hates is the idea that a non-Victorian club could enjoy a period of dominance like Hawthorn's - EXCEPT for GWS. The difference is that western Sydney represents a huge untapped market for them, and they think they can make a killing over the long term by building them into a force.

Of course there are countervailing forces in the AFL. At the strategic level, they are absolutely committed to expanding the game into non-traditional parts of Australia. But at the club level, there is always a struggle between those who regard equalisation as an unacceptable form of football socialism and those who take the idea seriously. In the latter group, too, there will always be disagreements, some more self-interested than others, over the application of the principle of equalisation.

But the paranoid notion that the AFL is out to get non-Victorian clubs is cheap and undiscriminating.

[WauchopeAnalyst]

The VFL has still protected their adopted son and will allow them to keep their top pick (2) to ensure a total 'Gun' goes to GWS.

On the flip side the Academy boys might be more available or the Giants go into a big deficit for next year.

Or might also have to sell a 'Gun' next year to recoup the points.

Fun and games....

Sent from my SM-G900I using Tapatalk

[crackedactor]

Gilgil

Doesn't matter. This siege mentality is still ridiculous. The AFL is very clearly committed to making GWS a power club. There is no organised bias against non-Victorian clubs. It is much more selective than that, and it shifts from time to time.

For a time the Swans and the Lions were given a reasonable amount of support, but once they became successful the AFL, under the pernicious influence of people like McGuire and Fitzpatrick, turned against them.

What the AFL really hates is the idea that a non-Victorian club could enjoy a period of dominance like Hawthorn's - EXCEPT for GWS. The difference is that western Sydney represents a huge untapped market for them, and they think they can make a killing over the long term by building them into a force.

Of course there are countervailing forces in the AFL. At the strategic level, they are absolutely committed to expanding the game into non-traditional parts of Australia. But at the club level, there is always a struggle between those who regard equalisation as an unacceptable form of football socialism and those who take the idea seriously. In the latter group, too, there will always be disagreements, some more self-interested than others, over the application of the principle of equalisation.

But the paranoid notion that the AFL is out to get non-Victorian clubs is cheap and undiscriminating.

.

I think you are kidding yourself is you honestly believe the AFL does not have a set against Non-Victorian teams. Yes GWS is becoming successful, thanks to Andrew Demt. ever since Gil Mclaclan has entered the arena it is all changing.

[Bloods05]

.

I think you are kidding yourself is you honestly believe the AFL does not have a set against Non-Victorian teams. Yes GWS is becoming successful, thanks to Andrew Demt. ever since Gil Mclaclan has entered the arena it is all changing.

As I said, cheap and undiscriminating. A bit of nuanced and considered analysis never hurt anyone. All you need to do to convince yourself that the AFL is right behind GWS is to listen to the ABC interview with Mike Fitzpatrick from a couple of months ago. I'll let you do the legwork.