Swans leaders to consider Hall punishment

[JF_Bay22_SCG]

That's not the issue. We know how powerful the leadership group is, having input on team selections, list management, punishment (e.g. Nick Davis). By that very nature, you need leaders who are responsible and have the respect of all their teammates, including the youngesters. Surely Hall's position in the leadership group for the time being is untenable.

I agree & find Wardy's stance rather finnicky to be honest. The Swans have an established player-driven code of ethics and standards that may sound rather cold & clandistyne, but the proof is in the pudding. It obviously works, as the moral around the country appears to be generally pretty sound & the player come across as extremely motivated and full of energy at the moment.

There is no better leveller than being told you have lost your mates, especially in this country. I have no problem with the players coming out & saying this, even if it does come across as rather cold & unsupportive. The facts are as Craig Bolton stated; the platyers will either have to change their roles and/or have to have to play that much harder to compensate for Barry's loss (even if he generally gets towelled up by Scarlet). This loss was unnecessary & I can understand players being fed up with all the unnecessary publicity all this hoohah has brought onto them as a team & the Swans as a club.

At least we don't have a culture like the Eagles where people mucking up are allowed to get away with things & appear to have never had to be pulled into line when they have done so.

You people can choose the club culture you like. I'm happy with ours, thank you very much.

JF

[Wardy]

Unfortunately a player can't be dealt with by the Tribunal who bludges on his team mates and then squeals when he is dropped. Pity

agree to disagree connolly - now lets all move on!

[connolly]

The difference in circumstances is huge.

Hall has been dealt with by the tribunal, he doesn't need double dose of punishment from teammates. Davis was not dealt with by the tribunal, his were off field indiscretions which the club found a need to deal with, somehow.

Unfortunately a player can't be dealt with by the Tribunal who bludges on his team mates and then squeals when he is dropped. Pity

[CureTheSane]

That's right Stella, no doubt, but he has been dealt with and punished by the tribunal, therefore no further sanctions are needed by the leadership group.

Davis was not punished by the tribunal and action needed to be taken.

Spot on, except it should be the CLUB as a whole whop punish Davis type circumstances, not a 'leadership group'

[Triple B]

Is being turfed out of the leadership group such a bad thing??

Less pressure - more chance to do it again.

Go Barry !!!

He appeared to accept/happy to relinquish the captaincy so he could concentrate on regaining fitness and form.

This is even a bigger issue to overcome, so a breakaway from the leadership group may be a good thing also.

[AnnieH]

Is being turfed out of the leadership group such a bad thing??

Less pressure - more chance to do it again.

Go Barry !!!

[RED RAG]

With all the mental pressure that BBB is going through at the moment, and what he is going to cop on his return from opposition players knowing that he can't retaliate in any way and that he will not be awarded a deserved free kick ever, I would not be too surprised to see him give it all away and take up a boxing career. We would be more gobsmacked with that than Staker was last Sat. night.

[Triple B]

The additional punishment surely means being turfed out of the leadership group, which is an internal structure set up by the players. I doubt they will impose an additional suspension.

I agree that would seem the logical punishment.

[hammo]

That's right Stella, no doubt, but he has been dealt with and punished by the tribunal, therefore no further sanctions are needed by the leadership group.

Davis was not punished by the tribunal and action needed to be taken.

The additional punishment surely means being turfed out of the leadership group, which is an internal structure set up by the players. I doubt they will impose an additional suspension.

Put it this way - if for various reasons a few years ago Goodes was deemed 'not ready' for a leadership role, then you'd have to think Hall would, as it currently stands, fail to meet the same criteria.

[Triple B]

I'm not so sure that Barry will get such a bad go from the scumps when he returns.

I reckon they will be more aware than ever in relation to Barry getting scragged and held. A well timed media conference may be handy where Roos comes out and says he hopes the scumps protect Barry from opponents who realise that they now have an open cheque to do whatever they want to Barry without fear of retribution.

This whole incident may bring to a head the scragging issue.

[stellation]

My understanding is that the on field and off field thing is irrelevant as far as the Bloods code is concerned.

Hall has been part of the leadership group that has had far too great a sway in the past, has spoken out when they should have kept their mouth shut at times (Hall himself has been one of them) so I think he needs to cop this on the chin. The isolating and seemingly over the top comments about Hall are pretty much identical to comments Hall has made in the past.

[Plugger46]

Perhaps there is no loss of respect, but I would be surprised if someone like Kirk would still want Baz in the inner sanctum.

Perhaps not, but I think that's pretty unfair. Does everything he's done for this club (which is a lot) go out the window, because of one (yes I know it was a big one) misdemeanour?

These guys should be behind Hall, not publicly canning him. All it does is give the media something else to right about.

[Jewels]

you can imagine the coverage during the round where he returns - every thing he does will be monitored and commented on - that would get to anyone eventually - if it was me I'd tell them to all go to hell and the I would get on with life on my terms.

There will inevitably be another media circus on the weekend of his re-appearance. We will all have to endure the same crap we have had to put up with this week "He should be gone for the season", " He's a thug and should have been charged with assault" etc, etc... The poor bastard won't be able to fart on the field without getting a free kick paid against him!

[Triple B]

I'm sure Hall broke team rules.

That's right Stella, no doubt, but he has been dealt with and punished by the tribunal, therefore no further sanctions are needed by the leadership group.

Davis was not punished by the tribunal and action needed to be taken.

[Wardy]

The difference in circumstances is huge.

Hall had a split second brain snap on the field.

Davis broke team/club rules by speaking to the media unendorsed, hung out at KFC for months on end or whatever the @@@@ he did, he didn't do it on the spur of the moment.

Whilst I agree with all here who believe the leadership group should not be involved in further punishing Hall, let's not delude ourselves into thinking the Hall case is the same as the Davis case.

Hall has been dealt with by the tribunal, he doesn't need double dose of punishment from teammates. Davis was not dealt with by the tribunal, his were off field indiscretions which the club found a need to deal, somehow.

exactly - the tribunal is all that matters - not the other "politically correct" rubbish - let him serve his time, decide what he's going to do - dont be surprised if he gives the game away (I so hope I'm wrong!) because you can imagine the coverage during the round where he returns - every thing he does will be monitored and commented on - that would get to anyone eventually - if it was me I'd tell them to all go to hell and the I would get on with life on my terms.