No Oppo Supporters General AFL Discussion #11 - Carlton Posters ONLY!

[Navy_Blueblood]

Great point

By using the ‘like’ reaction, I’m saying thanks haha. Otherwise that may come across as quite arrogant

 

[The Coach]

People are told not to speed for valid reasons. Fines are apportioned.
Should speeding end up in manslaughter, the penalty will also be apportioned. The two situations are not mutually bound though.

So what was your point?

You placed gravity on how many times he would have been told not too
It would not have been as many times as drivers are warned about speeding
The number of warnings drivers receive about speeding is not mirrored in the penalties so why should it be here - he did not fix a game/commit manslaughter

A little off the point - he wasn't even caught but handed himself into the police station

 

[The Coach]

it's not about him - it's the game

One of the consequences of working for a big public company or in government?

 

[Gethelred]

A 19yro recently employed person in Aged Care whose Police Check shows they have a pending case for drug use while driving is immediately sacked.

Do we say, penalty too harsh, only a kid making a mistake?

Or do we say fair enough, they are working with vulnerable people and will have access to their medication and valuables and the temptation may be too great?

A very specific scenario. I'd argue it could cut both ways; if said drug case was a spurious one or involves marijuana rather than a harder substance, then I'd definitively say it is indeed too harsh, just as I recognise the validity of said rule because it makes sense. I'd also argue that, if the case is pending rather than a conviction, any sacking should probably be placed before the FWC, because it's abusing the notion of innocent until proven otherwise.

I don't know the answer here. I'm uncomfortable with the general notion that we possess enough information to accurately judge someone else, whilst simultaneously being conscious of the AFL's penchant for doing what's best for itself; they throw the book at him as befits someone who was in the position to fix a game, they lose a talented player who brings in the crowds, they offend a prominent media personality and they flush Collingwood's chances this season down the toilet; they also potentially condemn Stevenson to depression, to lose faith in himself, to negative self examination. He comes out of this wiser, all to the good, but not everyone reacts to this kind of thing in positive ways. Too many people lose themselves when they're young for me to want another one gone.

 

[Juddafideslenko]

$36?

Haha yeah sure!!


On iPad using BigFooty.com mobile app

 

[Robbo's my hero]

We should get the AFL to handle the recommendations arising from the Banking Royal Commission. I’d like to see bank employees and Management being punished appropriately.

 

[The Coach]

A 19yro recently employed person in Aged Care whose Police Check shows they have a pending case for drug use while driving is immediately sacked.

Do we say, penalty too harsh, only a kid making a mistake?

Or do we say fair enough, they are working with vulnerable people and will have access to their medication and valuables and the temptation may be too great?

I am not sure that is a fair comparison Jab
One is breaking the law but even he could be considered harshly done by in some cases
(I am not sure we can imply he is a potential thief)
Also to be comparable I am assuming he informed the aged care facility about the pending charge before the police check

 

[Jabba73]

A very specific scenario. I'd argue it could cut both ways; if said drug case was a spurious one or involves marijuana rather than a harder substance, then I'd definitively say it is indeed too harsh, just as I recognise the validity of said rule because it makes sense. I'd also argue that, if the case is pending rather than a conviction, any sacking should probably be placed before the FWC, because it's abusing the notion of innocent until proven otherwise.

I don't know the answer here. I'm uncomfortable with the general notion that we possess enough information to accurately judge someone else, whilst simultaneously being conscious of the AFL's penchant for doing what's best for itself; they throw the book at him as befits someone who was in the position to fix a game, they lose a talented player who brings in the crowds, they offend a prominent media personality and they flush Collingwood's chances this season down the toilet; they also potentially condemn Stevenson to depression, to lose faith in himself, to negative self examination. He comes out of this wiser, all to the good, but not everyone reacts to this kind of thing in positive ways. Too many people lose themselves when they're young for me to want another one gone.

Specific because it happened.

Have also sacked another young employee in a gaming venue for stealing from a customer who would never have worked out they had been robbed of $20.00. Ditto while in a bank for a similar amount.

My point being, unless the punishment is harsh enough, the lesson will not be learned and the temptation to escalate the behaviour is likely to be too great. Better to deal with it properly immediately. Don’t feel great for doing it, don’t lose sleep over it, knowing a likely reoccurrence has been prevented.

Stevenson will not even miss finals if the Pies get that far, where is the severe consequence for him? He may be a bit smarter and get someone to lay the bet for him, every chance he does this again.

And no, the amount is irrelevant, it is the behaviour.

 

[Gethelred]

Specific because it happened.

Have also sacked another young employee in a gaming venue for stealing from a customer who would never have worked out they had been robbed of $20.00. Ditto while in a bank for a similar amount.

My point being, unless the punishment is harsh enough, the lesson will not be learned and the temptation to escalate the behaviour is likely to be too great. Better to deal with it properly immediately. Don’t feel great for doing it, don’t lose sleep over it, knowing a likely reoccurrence has been prevented.

Stevenson will not even miss finals if the Pies get that far, where is the severe consequence for him? He may be a bit smarter and get someone to lay the bet for him, every chance he does this again.

And no, the amount is irrelevant, it is the behaviour.

I agree with you that the amount is irrelevant. It's the principle of having a) stolen something knowingly, deliberately, when they had the opportunity to do so, b) risking the likelihood of said fellow stealing the medication, and c) avoiding the appearance and the actuality of match fixing. I agreed with the ban on Mohammed Amir - as well as his jail term - but it didn't stop me from feeling rather uncomfortable about it; you're potentially ruining a life by sending them to prison.

My perspective is very simple; I'd prefer young people had a second opportunity, instead of having their lives taken away after a single mistake. I have quite a bit to do with young people, even some who are relatively shitty people. I agree that there need to be rules surrounding behaviour, and in order to prove trustworthiness.

Could be that I'm wrong (I'm hardly new at that) or that I cannot adequately express what I think. It just bothers me how easy it is for some to cavalierly condemn other people.

 

[gandaal]

It was a dumb thing to do but he is only 20 and I do worry about all the media attention on players these days. Am I too soft? Maybe.

They were very keen to point out he's 20 years old, weren't they? As if a legal adult, who no doubt attended meetings where the rules were made very clear, isn't responsible for his actions.

Just another example of the infantization of football players.

 

[Gethelred]

They were very keen to point out he's 20 years old, weren't they? As if a legal adult, who no doubt attended meeting where the rules were made very clear, isn't responsible for his actions.

Just another example of the infantization of football players.

Infantization of everyone, really. Doesn't just apply to footballers.

But then, I'm looking at it from the other side. Some are adults at 16, others don't get there by 30.

 

[Jabba73]

I agree with you that the amount is irrelevant. It's the principle of having a) stolen something knowingly, deliberately, when they had the opportunity to do so, b) risking the likelihood of said fellow stealing the medication, and c) avoiding the appearance and the actuality of match fixing. I agreed with the ban on Mohammed Amir - as well as his jail term - but it didn't stop me from feeling rather uncomfortable about it; you're potentially ruining a life by sending them to prison.

My perspective is very simple; I'd prefer young people had a second opportunity, instead of having their lives taken away after a single mistake. I have quite a bit to do with young people, even some who are relatively ****ty people. I agree that there need to be rules surrounding behaviour, and in order to prove trustworthiness.

Could be that I'm wrong (I'm hardly new at that) or that I cannot adequately express what I think. It just bothers me how easy it is for some to cavalierly condemn other people.

Nothing cavalier about the decisions I have made, they have been guided by history and human behaviour that says even a want to change may not be enough to effect change. Had to consider the greater good so to speak and look at the potential damage that an escalation would cause.

Part of the reason I left the finance industry was the understanding of where it was heading, which is now the subject of horrified reporting from the Royal Commission. It started with seemingly innocent incentives to reward results, often without regard to how they were achieved, and ended with greed being a way of life.

If the AFL gives a nod and a wink with the punishment for gambling, as they have done here, it is a small but very significant step towards match fixing and corruption. Starts with small bets, moves to inside information on team selection, then becomes outright cheating to win money.

Please note I left the finance industry over 15 years ago because I wasn’t comfortable with playing their silly games, it has taken until now for outsiders to see the ugly picture. Can see the same happening under Gil’s ineptness.

 

[Gethelred]

Nothing cavalier about the decisions I have made, they have been guided by history and human behaviour that says even a want to change may not be enough to effect change. Had to consider the greater good so to speak and look at the potential damage that an escalation would cause.

Part of the reason I left the finance industry was the understanding of where it was heading, which is now the subject of horrified reporting from the Royal Commission. It started with seemingly innocent incentives to reward results, often without regard to how they were achieved, and ended with greed being a way of life.

If the AFL gives a nod and a wink with the punishment for gambling, as they have done here, it is a small but very significant step towards match fixing and corruption. Starts with small bets, moves to inside information on team selection, then becomes outright cheating to win money.

Please note I left the finance industry over 15 years ago because I wasn’t comfortable with playing their silly games, it has taken until now for outsiders to see the ugly picture. Can see the same happening under Gil’s ineptness.

Lots to think about in there.

I don't know. Could be life/experience thing that I lack. I'll contemplate this a bit.

 

[Lace_Out]

Three separate offences.

Would only be a week if he played for the Cats ...

With that suspended for a week allowing him to play.

Sent from my SM-G965F using Tapatalk

 

[Metalcrusher]

Let Darwinism take its course …. if he can't get his big boy panties on and wrap his head around the fact that he is paid massive $$$ to do a sporting recreation … then …. join the rest of the regular workforce and see how that pans out for him.

Anyone spruiking that gambling raises the same endorphine markers as drugs is ****ing delusional.

 

[Gethelred]

I'm appreciating the forum change.

I can't put what I want to say into words at the moment, so the difference between the sad emojie and the angry one will have to do.

 

[SkyhorseTamer]

You placed gravity on how many times he would have been told not too
It would not have been as many times as drivers are warned about speeding
The number of warnings drivers receive about speeding is not mirrored in the penalties so why should it be here - he did not fix a game/commit manslaughter

A little off the point - he wasn't even caught but handed himself into the police station

He was caught... Howe caught him.

 

[mrjones]

Really? Let's not tell anyone not to kill then.

You enter a system that has the rules being drummed into you day and night.
You're told what to say and what not to say. Told what to think and what not to think. Told what you can do and told what you can't do....See this point.

You can do whatever you want to do, but pretending you didn't understand in this situation doesn't count and it has nothing to do with age as it has for the respect of those advising you of the repercussions for bucking the trend.

Stephenson 'chose' to ignore his teachings. At the ned of the day, this is what we have. He made a considered choice and it was a poor one. Game over.

A game that is saturated in Pro Gambling advertising. OK to have an opinion but **** me, regardless of how often you try and teach a young adult something they also need to see you uphold the same standards/teachings.
Gillon McLachlan cannot lead the game forward because his is shit scared of pissing off the sponsors.
Who are they again?

 

[gandaal]

A game that is saturated in Pro Gambling advertising. OK to have an opinion but **** me, regardless of how often you try and teach a young adult something they also need to see you uphold the same standards/teachings.
Gillon McLachlan cannot lead the game forward because his is **** scared of pissing off the sponsors.
Who are they again?

I read that twice. It still doesn't make sense. Are you suggesting that Gil gambles on AFL games? Or that keeping sponsors happy somehow makes him morally bankrupt?

And you also don't have to be against gambling to also understand the idea that players gambling on their own games is a very bad thing indeed.

 

[mrjones]

I read that twice. It still doesn't make sense. Are you suggesting that Gil gambles on AFL games? Or that keeping sponsors happy somehow makes him morally bankrupt?

And you also don't have to be against gambling to also understand the idea that players gambling on their own games is a very bad thing indeed.

I rarely make sense and do not condone players gambling on their own games. Stephenson deserves his whack, just curious what agent he used and the Sport they sponsored.

 

[mediumsizered]

Just my two bobs worth. The penalty handed to Stephenson, of which he should be serving the full 22 weeks, goes to show that the penalty given to the Essendope players for being injected with prohibited substances was manifestly inadequate.

 

[1shay]

Really stupid thing he did, he self reported though. For those lamenting the softness of his punishment, I read he's still received the biggest suspension in AFL history for a single player betting on games. Baby steps for the AFL. I would've thought their betting partners would be furious and putting pressure on to make the punishment worse, bookies hate manipulation of their odds etc.

Or 13 months if you were a recruiter and had no way of being able to influence a game...

Category: | Herald Sun

www.google.com.au

 

[Curnowhan]

I'm surprised some people think this isn't a soft punishment. Other sports (baseball, cricket) have dealt out far harsher penalties for gambling-related offences. The coincidental timing of the suspension and the length of time between the offence being reported and the suspension being handed down are further blows to the integrity of the AFL. If I wasn't such a rusted-on Blues fan, I would stop watching. And the AFL trade on that being the case for people. But as the integrity of the competition continues to sag, so too does my love for the game. #rantover

 

[Blue Pulse]

It's just one step away from full-on match fixing, that's what needs to highlighted.
As soon as you're placing bets on yourself and your own team - on games you are actually playing in - the next step is when it occurs to you "Hmmm, I can actually influence the outcome here..."

As with PEDs, part of being a professional athlete is a full understanding of the seriousness of it.

So much this, he bet on the outcome and point margins of games he was in. They have said that he didn't influence the outcome of results, if he had, it wouldn't be the AFL handing out the punishment, he would be in court.

The amount he bet is not relevant.

 

[HARKER]

A game that is saturated in Pro Gambling advertising. OK to have an opinion but **** me, regardless of how often you try and teach a young adult something they also need to see you uphold the same standards/teachings.
Gillon McLachlan cannot lead the game forward because his is **** scared of pissing off the sponsors.
Who are they again?

There's a point in there, but let's reduce it all to this simple fact - Betting on games you participate in, makes for a huge problem.

No one told Stephenson he shouldn't be bet on the horses, basketball games, NFL etc. but he would have been told many times over that he CANNOT bet in the industry he's involved in.
One can put a bit of themselves into Stephenson and feel sorry for him because one may have done the same thing when they were his age.....but that doesn't make it right. It just doesn't.

I do like your post though, but then again I despise betting and all it brings with it. (even though I've done it on 5 occasions in the past 5 years)