Alleged incident at hotel on Sunday night

[mcs]

Im hanging on a chance the system's move switfly and the club redeems itself before the year is lost

I wouldn't hold on too closely unless the case absolutely falls apart from a criminal perspective (which seems fairly unlikely - but who knows given we know so little about the actual case).

The club has nothing to redeem itself for however - it has made the only pragmatic call it could make, irrespective of whether people think it is 'fair' or otherwise. It is the modern world we live in - the ability to brush stuff under the carpet and prioritise footballing outcomes in 2026 is not what it might have been in 1986 or 1996.

To give an idea on timeframes - it was around 3 months between when Bruhn at Geelong was interviewed and then charged in his case. then almost 12 months before it fell apart in court and he was exonerated. That was however after there was a large lag between the incident occurring and police investigating (i.e. a lot of investigation would have occurred before he was interviewed). Given the high profile and complex nature of this case, I suspect it could easily be 3+ months before we get any indication of who may or may not be facing charges, and potentially longer before they are actually charged.

The likelihood anything of note happening before the season is over is between zero and about 0.000001 I'd suggest - and even if it was to fall favourably (i.e. criminal investigation doesn't happen), the club isn't going to walk bank on the original sanctions, which whether you believe it or not, have clearly been articulated to have been placed on the players for their behaviour prior to the alleged criminal incident.

[imuninformedtwo]

FWIW, I’ve now checked in and feel creeped out. I think I better go to the bar and drink my worries away. What could go wrong?

[mcs]

FWIW, I’ve now checked in and feel creeped out. I think I better go to the bar and drink my worries away. What could go wrong?

Whatever you do, please keep it to a quiet drink or two at the bar

[stevoswan]

Shouldn't sanction him for @@@@all, then wonder why he wants out of the joint

He has been involved with the club since he could walk, has a night without police charges and all the "supporters" drop him like a hot pie, Hell of a standard

Not too mention the 3 days he was public enemy number 1 rapist who knocked out a women's teeth.

Swans really backed their man and put those claims to bed by sanctioning him 6 weeks, could only imagine how he felt with his partner and family

"and all the "supporters" drop him like a hot pie"

Really? So you've surveyed 'all the supporters' have you? Now you're just making ***t up.

[stevoswan]

Im hanging on a chance the system's move switfly and the club redeems itself before the year is lost

I would safely bet that in the eyes of our fans and the public (maybe not the manosphere....you're not a member are you?) that the club has largely redeemed itself already. Long way to go of course but the sanctions were a good start.

Sorry everyone, I know that will just start him off again.

[stevoswan]

FWIW, I’ve now checked in and feel creeped out. I think I better go to the bar and drink my worries away. What could go wrong?

Wear your Swans scarf!

[UUaswan]

I would safely bet that in the eyes of our fans and the public (maybe not the manosphere....you're not a member are you?) that the club has largely redeemed itself already. Long way to go of course but the sanctions were a good start.

Sorry everyone, I know that will just start him off again.

15yr member

Happy to be in the minority here, if that is the case.

[SwanSand]

Good article by Rana Hussain in The Guardian.
I must say it covers a lot of the reactions to this controversy well.

[UUaswan]

Good article by Rana Hussain in The Guardian.
I must say it covers a lot of the reactions to this controversy well.

Please dont start me off with a well balanced common sense article of the whole situation.

Less common sense, more hysteria is the order of the day

[liz]

Good article by Rana Hussain in The Guardian.
I must say it covers a lot of the reactions to this controversy well.

It was a good antidote to the syrupy melodrama of the Jonathan Horn article.

[dejavoodoo44]

FWIW, I’ve now checked in and feel creeped out. I think I better go to the bar and drink my worries away. What could go wrong?

So, didn't ask for the Heeney room, then?

[crackedactor 01]

Day 10 and not even one police interview. As a member I need to know more and why the suspension is until the end of the season? Even 2 AFLW players were guitly of taking cocaine only got 2 weeks.

[crackedactor 01]

Now Nick Blakey has requested to be traded. He claimed he wasn't at the stripper function and is angry he has been dragged in. Well done our useless woke board, by bowing done to the media you have destroyed this club for the next 5 years at least.

[mcs]

For the umpteenth time - the club has made clear the sanctions on players only relate to the point up to the events in the room, not the events in the room itself. This from the letter that Pridham and Pavlich sent last week.

"Five players have been found by the Club to have breached the Club’s expected standards of behaviour. This determination, and the resultant decision not to consider selecting these players for the balance of season 2026, including finals, relates specifically to their actions post-match and in the early hours of Monday morning.

Importantly, our determination that the players have breached our expected standards has been undertaken in isolation of a separate investigation by Victoria Police in relation to an alleged sexual assault. We stress that no player has been charged."

So the fact there has been no police interviews about the SA charges with any of the 5 is absolutely irrelevant to those sanctions. And the simple procedural answer as to why that is likely to be the case is that police will nearly always interview the suspects in any major case last - i.e. they want to know what broad case they have before they get them in the room, informed by evidence collect, statements/interviews with others. Hence why they've got statements from the women involved in the case, why they've got statements/had interviews with people like Cox, but not yet with any of the 5.

The 2 weeks for the players in possession of cocaine was sanctioned by the AFL/AFLW. At the time, there was no illicit drug policy in place for the AFLW, so they were given a general charge under the AFL provisions, which I understand only allow for a maximum of 2 weeks.

What exactly is it that you need to know more about? The club has made an assessment of what happened before they were in that room, made a determination they breached expectations, and passed down a significant sanction as a result of what is likely to have been considered to be multiple breaches.

[mcs]

Now Nick Blakey has requested to be traded. He claimed he wasn't at the stripper function and is angry he has been dragged in. Well done our useless woke board, by bowing done to the media you have destroyed this club for the next 5 years at least.

Is there a new article today, or is this solely off the stuff in the media from a few days ago?

He can claim what he wants (noting he hasn't spoken publicly - so none of us know whether the leaks are coming from him, or coming from the media wanting to make 2 and 2 equal 466), but he has accepted the sanctions for his actions - if he was so strongly against them being unreasonable sanctions, why didn't he get the AFLPA or similar involved and argue for a lower set of sanctions with the club?

If he wasn't in the room, he will be exonerated from that element at an appropriate time by the Victorian police removing him from the investigation. There is nothing the club can do on that side of it - that relies on the police doing their job and getting their investigation done as soon as practicable.

If he is going to have a massive sook for doing the wrong thing prior to the alleged incident, getting caught, accepting his punishment for that, and then pushing through for a trade because the club hasn't done something it has no power to do (i.e. exonerate him from the criminal investigation), that is on him at the end of the day.