Alleged incident at hotel on Sunday night

[UUaswan]

Wow that's a take! I have so many friends that I've gone to games with for 25 years that were debating yesterday on which club to switch to. I have others who have been to every game since the Swans moved north who were not planning on renewing their membership. Many, but not all of these, were female. The club needed to be decisive or the ground would have been empty this weekend - and for finals. I've decided that this will be the first game in decades where I won't wear red and white with pride - or at all. The club's action gives me some ground for believe that it realizes that the very future of the club is at stake here. Sure there will be some members of the manosphere who feel the club has gone too hard. The rest of the rational world is waiting to see if this is followed up by a sweep of everyone responsible for letting this happen. Not the night in question but the whole unravelling of the bloods culture.

Im one of them members thinking elsewhere.

Why are we waiting for a sweep of the others ? why not just do it now ? Surely we arent waiting for something as trivial as an investigation

[mcs]

And the other 4 are just collateral and tarred with the same brush, guilty by association

Only time will tell in that regard - but I don't think again the club had much choice but to give all the same initial punishment. Again it is important to note that the sanctions do not relate to the actual incident being criminally investigated.

[UUaswan]

Something as 'trivial as an investigation'.

Those words and callous UU at best. I'd suggest you rethink.

That was the point in the trivial

Why do club leaders get the benefit of letting things unfold before future ramifications are known but the players involved do not

[UUaswan]

What needs to be investigated by the Board to say the culture is @@@@@@ ?

Alleged 5 players under investigation for Sexual Assault, doesn't that prove the culture is @@@@@@ ?

Sack the Coach and the CEO now, what are we waiting for ?

Or do they get the future benefit of an inquiry ?

[Merdo5555]

3 to 5 matches for being out late, drinking and bringing a stripper to their room.

You seriously want to argue the potential charges haven't been considered.

If there wasnt a potentially criminal act or actions you're seriously arguing the above list would get you 5 matches.

I would suggest 1 or 2 at the most.

Everyone needs to stop pretending that the potential criminal charges haven't been baked into the punishment. If they haven't then the morality police are running wild.

Ultimately, without the suggestion of criminal acts or actions the players at worse were drunk, out late and brought a stripper to their room (all very very stupid things in the context of commencing finals in a week's time) but other than their partners its not my job to make moral judgments.

They miss 1 or 2 matches at most.

Stop the hand-wringing and admit you've baked in the potential criminal charges, to do anything less is hypocritical.

I think their behavior is stupid, deplorable and potentially criminal but fact is their punishment has baked into it an assumption of guilt into it.

No i dont condone drunken stupidity, staying up all night or calling up strippers to take to your hotel room but nor am I the judge of whats right or wrong, thats what the law is for. Nor do i drink, hire strippers or bring random girls to hotel rooms, I just dont believe i should be the moral arbiter of others actions. This is why we have a legal code not a moral one.

Stop punishing them on the basis of crimes that remain allegations only.

At most 2 matches would fit the level of stupidity engaged in and the letting down of their teammates. Thats a punishment that fully reflects a disregard of the potential criminal acts.

Otherwise please explain how you get to potentially 5 matches and including finals.

People truly dont understand the concept of innocent until proven guilty.

So far their guilty of poor judgment and gross stupidity, punish them on that basis.

If criminal charges are laid and convictions upheld then deal with them once its done

[mcs]

You have no idea Merdo whether that is the extent of what happened in the lead up or not - ie what the sanctions relate to. The club has a lot more access to genuine information than any of us do about that period, and have made their judgment, and they haven't chosen to release information at this time about their decision making process. And I expect probably never will.

Media outrage or whatever you want to call it, but there is no world in which the club as an entity would be seen in a positive light from a 1 or 2 week ban, in which the players would play football again this season. That was never going to be a viable option given the media storm - rightly or wrongly.

The club has made no judgment on the alleged incident - how is that hard to understand? They are leaving that to the appropriate body to do.

The rights of innocent until proven guilty have all been upheld for the matter that is potentially criminal.

The matter for which they were sanctioned is not criminal in nature, and the decision makers that hold the pen have made their call and found them guilty of breaching the standards expected. They've been punished on that basis, and that basis alone.

[mcs]

That was the point in the trivial

Why do club leaders get the benefit of letting things unfold before future ramifications are known but the players involved do not

Because there is no world in which letting players play, saying 'nothing to see here' and seeing what comes would be acceptable. Like it or not - that is the world we live in. You can't simply exclude the need for clear pragmatism within approach, unless you are happy to just burn the whole place down in the process.

Issues of culture should be thoroughly explored as part of the response, and if they are not I will be the loudest of critics. But you don't do that well if you do it rashly, as you would seemingly like to do.

Anyway, my mental energy is well and truly drained. Time to do other things to take my mind off the awful few days for our club.

[Merdo5555]

You have no idea Merdo whether that is the extent of what happened in the lead up or not - ie what the sanctions relate to. The club has a lot more access to genuine information than any of us do about that period, and have made their judgment, and they haven't chosen to release information at this time about their decision making process. And I expect probably never will.

Media outrage or whatever you want to call it, but there is no world in which the club as an entity would be seen in a positive light from a 1 or 2 week ban, in which the players would play football again this season. That was never going to be a viable option given the media storm - rightly or wrongly.

The club has made no judgment on the alleged incident - how is that hard to understand? They are leaving that to the appropriate body to do.

The rights of innocent until proven guilty have all been upheld for the matter that is potentially criminal.

The matter for which they were sanctioned is not criminal in nature, and the decision makers that hold the pen have made their call and found them guilty of breaching the standards expected. They've been punished on that basis, and that basis alone.

Your comment confirms it you; are more concerned with the look of it, the club may have more information but have explicitly said they havent considered the potential criminal conduct.

You have done exactly what I said you have baked in the alleged criminal conduct into the punishment. Just admit it.

[UUaswan]

Because there is no world in which letting players play, saying 'nothing to see here' and seeing what comes would be acceptable. Like it or not - that is the world we live in. You can't simply exclude the need for clear pragmatism within approach, unless you are happy to just burn the whole place down in the process.

Issues of culture should be thoroughly explored as part of the response, and if they are not I will be the loudest of critics. But you don't do that well if you do it rashly, as you would seemingly like to do.

Anyway, my mental energy is well and truly drained. Time to do other things to take my mind off the awful few days for our club.

Rules for thee but not for me

Players can't play but Pav and Cox can continue in their most Senior roles overseeing AFLW, meeting Sponsors addressing members

[Merdo5555]

Wow they said they didnt consider it,in a statement, wow that makes it true.

Is their any PR release you wont believe?

[Merdo5555]

They may not have even consciously considered, thats my whole point its been baked into considerations before they even started.

You think if nothing potentially criminal happened their teammates would support a potential 5 match ban?

[Ludwig]

I wouldn't be underestimating the fallout from this incident. I suggest listening to the Swans fans who called into the SEN Whately show, as well as his interview with Phil Davis.

For those who have been on here or Big Footy for 10 years or so, remember the epithets used referring to Essendon. Injectors and similar slurs.

Season suspensions for 5 players is only the beginning.

Grab on to this thought: WE are the new Essendon.

[Merdo5555]

Because there is no world in which letting players play, saying 'nothing to see here' and seeing what comes would be acceptable. Like it or not - that is the world we live in. You can't simply exclude the need for clear pragmatism within approach, unless you are happy to just burn the whole place down in the process.

Issues of culture should be thoroughly explored as part of the response, and if they are not I will be the loudest of critics. But you don't do that well if you do it rashly, as you would seemingly like to do.

Anyway, my mental energy is well and truly drained. Time to do other things to take my mind off the awful few days for our club.

Yep who cares about presumption of innocence when the hungry mob needs to be fed. Lets gets some torches and pitchforks and barricade the players houses.

[Merdo5555]

I wouldn't be underestimating the fallout from this incident. I suggest listening to the Swans fans who called into the SEN Whately show, as well as his interview with Phil Davis.

For those who have been on here or Big Footy for 10 years or so, remember the epithets used referring to Essendon. Injectors and similar slurs.

Season suspensions for 5 players is only the beginning.

Grab on to this thought: WE are the new Essendon.

If fans are judging a whole club, entity because of the actions of a few they are fair weather at the very least. In the end the club is above and beyond the actions of 1 or 5 individuals.

By that logic one corrupt copper means they are all corrupt. Such short sighted and ignorant commentary

[imuninformedtwo]

Look, as someone who’s had some wonderful times over the years with the combination of women, alcohol, other substances and early morning action in my time, I’m not judging the players morally. Hell, it’s all fond memories for me.

But my actions a) weren’t in the context of a workplace, b) didn’t affect others and their workplace, or workplace outcomes, and c) never led to a criminal complaint. I should add d) never compromised my chance of winning a flag, but that’s pretty obvious.

And the club clearly has sufficient information to make that call.

As for the why five when only one player faces charges question? Well, we don’t know that to be true. It may be. But there’s been a lot of bad reporting in two days alone. Some of what we read today may well be wrong. And it might be the club knows, for example, player A organised the kick on, player B organised some substances (if that’s the case), player C organised the lap dancers and player D is the one facing an investigation. But it seems clear five players were in that room at some stage.

I’d also suggest there’s another part of this, beyond the issues internal to the two playing groups. The bottom line. Can you imagine we let players play for now. Every major commercial partner is already being asked by the media for their response. The easiest thing for them to do would be to walk away and for example, Telstra has pulled brand ambassadorships with some Swans players. At least we’ve given them the capacity to say they’re in dialogue with the club and expect them to take it seriously,which their actions so far suggest they do.

You might say that sucks as a motivation, but it’s real and unavoidable. It’s not the main reason for acting, but it’s not nothing.