I used to teach primary school kids and even they (mostly) had the emotional maturity to back off somebody when it became clear they were seriously hurting them. They didn't need polls, stats, arguments about suppression of their right to tease... It's not complex, it's just simple decency.
If Ryder genuinely feels that Essendon breached their duty of care, and risked his and his family's health, the moral thing to do would be to let him go. Even through a disadvantageous trade. Forcing him to stay against his will in those circumstances would not be right.
I wouldn't like to be paying a million bucks to a player who stuffed up so badly he got a one year suspension. I certainly wouldn't be applauding that player.
My problem with Vics v Allies was that it was one side that people cared about against some made up entity nobody gave a shit about. It was totally unequal. At least this way there's no pretence that the game matters. It's function is pure exhibition. I like that. And having the captains pick...
This is longform, narrative journalism. It has a different purpose and focus than the kind of muck raking, news breaking stuff done by Caro etc. Doesn't make much sense to compare them imo.
This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.