Elijah Taylor

[barry]

There is a "mess up" and then there is a "mess up".
Sneaking your girlfriend into the hub . Mess up. Forgivable.
Punching a woman. Not a mess up, and you "should" have it drilled into you from year dot that this is not on. Maybe his family situation didnt (pure unfounded speculation), but society does, and it does by throwing the book at anyone who does it, regardless of age.

- - - Updated - - -

No. Kinnear didn't get it wrong.
The kid has awesome football skills - we're a football club, remember.
Pity he has just pissed them up a wall.

No @@@@head policy ?

[AnnieH]

There is a "mess up" and then there is a "mess up".
Sneaking your girlfriend into the hub . Mess up. Forgivable.
Punching a woman. Not a mess up, and you "should" have it drilled into you from year dot that this is not on. Maybe his family situation didnt (pure unfounded speculation), but society does, and it does by throwing the book at anyone who does it, regardless of age.

- - - Updated - - -



No @@@@head policy ?

I doubt he was classed a dickhead at the recruitment level.
He was chosen on his football abilities - which he has in abundance.
Such a pity he chose the wrong path.

[Captain]

I dunno... I find it hard to be harsh about quite young people going wrong. A lot of people here will likely know some
similar aged kid who despite being given some opportunities has messed up in a big way. The thing about opportunities
is you have to know how to take them as well. Some of these kids get it together and some don't. We only know about
this young bloke because he plays football. Maybe in time for his own sake he can learn to get his head into the right
place. And that may involve following some other vocation and not football.

If someone is guilty of hitting a woman, I find it very easy to be harsh on that.

Maybe we move in different circles but I don't know one person who has 'messed up' by hitting a woman. Being a ratbag and punching a lady in the face are quite polar opposites in my opinion.

My 7 year old son even knows that you never hit girls. It's not a concept that should be accepted at any age.

[Nico]

I can only think it was a genuine display of faith in a 'risky' kid with huge potential to encourage him to aspire to greatness.....unfortunately they appear to have set the bar way too high. It's sad....

Illusions of grandeur.

[Meg]

Elijah Taylor

Interesting article re Swans stand down decision.

https://www.theage.com.au/sport/afl/why-swans-stood-down-taylor-but-pies-let-de-goey-play-20200916-p55wcl.html?btis

[AnnieH]

The collingwood player hasn't been presented with evidence; ET has.
That's the diff.

[barracuda]

The collingwood player hasn't been presented with evidence; ET has.
That's the diff.

I'm not sure about that. Both have been charged, so both will have the indictments. Regarding the actual brief of evidence it would appear neither have those yet. I think the thing for me is that standing down a player is being used as a tactical ploy. For example, the Swans stand down Elijah immediately. This will encourage Elijah and his lawyers to get on with the case and get it resolved as quickly as possible. This is a positive thing in my view for the player, the club and the code. Collingwood consider themselves in the premiership window and need De Goey for the next couple of years. Their strategy is to keep him playing, and slow the case as much as possible. Perhaps the person who allocates cases is a Collingwood fan? the case seems to be dragging on incredibly. My view is that De Goey should be stood down given the serious nature of the charges. That way they would have got on with it and sorted it out. I think the situation indicates a lack of moral fibre in the Collingwood club. It places their short terms desperation for a premiership above doing what is right.

[stevoswan]

The collingwood player hasn't been presented with evidence; ET has.
That's the diff.

Correct.....but why is it taking so long? The alleged De Goey 'incident' happened 5 years ago and was reported two years ago and they are saying that a court case may not go ahead until 2022!

Seriously, are the cops Magpie supporters? There seems to be a 'go slow' on this one....and as Niall says at the end of his article:

"That the police have not yet detailed the charges against De Goey has taken the decision on his immediate playing future out of Collingwood's, and the AFL's, hands.

Once the Magpies know what's been alleged against their star, they will have to make a call. It's easy to let him play when there's nothing specific to defend."

Very convenient....the Magpies may well get four seasons of footy from De Goey from the time of the official complaint while the police fart around at a snails pace.

I wonder how De Goey's victim feels about all of this? Are the police even talking to her? How is it so hard to work out what the 'nature of the allegation' is? Leikani Pearce had no trouble communicating the nature of ET's offence to police.....what's the hold up with De Goey's charges?

Collingwood are simply and conveniently hiding behind 'legal process' to continue to benefit from a star player......and if allowed to get away with it, who would blame them?

[AnnieH]

"Sydney have solid knowledge of the charges, laid out in the charge of aggravated assault occasioning bodily harm. The club had given Taylor a series of directives before the alleged incident in Western Australia that led the charge."

"When Sydney made the decision to stand down youngster Elijah Taylor after he was charged with aggravated assault, a contrast was immediately drawn with Collingwood, who had chosen not to take the same stance with Jordan De Goey when the star forward was charged with indecent assault."

Legally, there's a massive difference between aggravated assault and indecent assault.
It's alleged that De Goey "swore" at a woman, it's alleged Taylor physically assaulted a woman.
Right call.

[Nico]

I'm not sure about that. Both have been charged, so both will have the indictments. Regarding the actual brief of evidence it would appear neither have those yet. I think the thing for me is that standing down a player is being used as a tactical ploy. For example, the Swans stand down Elijah immediately. This will encourage Elijah and his lawyers to get on with the case and get it resolved as quickly as possible. This is a positive thing in my view for the player, the club and the code. Collingwood consider themselves in the premiership window and need De Goey for the next couple of years. Their strategy is to keep him playing, and slow the case as much as possible. Perhaps the person who allocates cases is a Collingwood fan? the case seems to be dragging on incredibly. My view is that De Goey should be stood down given the serious nature of the charges. That way they would have got on with it and sorted it out. I think the situation indicates a lack of moral fibre in the Collingwood club. It places their short terms desperation for a premiership above doing what is right.

Every one in the judiciary is a Collingwood supporter.

[stevoswan]

"Sydney have solid knowledge of the charges, laid out in the charge of aggravated assault occasioning bodily harm. The club had given Taylor a series of directives before the alleged incident in Western Australia that led the charge."

"When Sydney made the decision to stand down youngster Elijah Taylor after he was charged with aggravated assault, a contrast was immediately drawn with Collingwood, who had chosen not to take the same stance with Jordan De Goey when the star forward was charged with indecent assault."

Legally, there's a massive difference between aggravated assault and indecent assault.
It's alleged that De Goey "swore" at a woman, it's alleged Taylor physically assaulted a woman.
Right call.

Fair enough. I heard that De Goey had apologised to the women already for swearing at her and assumed there was more to the allegations. If not, yes.....massive difference.

[barracuda]

Fair enough. I heard that De Goey had apologised to the women already for swearing at her and assumed there was more to the allegations. If not, yes.....massive difference.

It seems odd that swearing at a woman amounts to a charge of indecent assault? Are you sure he didn't grope her, got told to f off and then gave her a gobful?

[stevoswan]

It seems odd that swearing at a woman amounts to a charge of indecent assault? Are you sure he didn't grope her, got told to f off and then gave her a gobful?

This is what confuses me.....if it was a simple case of just swearing at a women.....why is it going on so long? There may well be more to it.....and if so, Collingwood (and the cops) seem in no hurry to get to the bottom of it.

[707]

This is what confuses me.....if it was a simple case of just swearing at a women.....why is it going on so long? There may well be more to it.....and if so, Collingwood (and the cops) seem in no hurry to get to the bottom of it.

Fat chins has made some phone calls ......

[bloodspirit]

Swearing is not, as a rule, a crime. It certainly isn't indecent assault. Definitely more to those allegations.