Rumour Multiple GWS players are set to be suspended to start the 2025 season after distasteful costumes and skits from their post-season function

[Foxman98]

I assume blokes that do little to no drinking most of the year have a pretty low tolerance too

Either way they're heavily intoxicated being served more drinks

 

[Corn Cobbers]

The AFL didn’t take it public
The media did

Oh come on

 

[Underarm]

So the AFL could have had a quiet word to them and that would have ended it.

Nobody would even know anything about the evening.

Which is what they have done in the past. It's a good thing the afl is finally taking something like this seriously and punishing the act, and not deciding punishments based on media reaction.

 

[FlowersByIrene]

& you are within your right to complain to the event organisers and if the governing bodies see fit they can impose penalty’s

It’s exactly what has happened in this situation

Difference is, and going back to my original point, I would think (and hope) that grooming and paedophilia is a stance that we as a society can agree on as being part of our baseline standard of morality. Making dark jokes is NOT part of that baseline.

 

[Muddiemoose]

Difference is, and going back to my original point, I would think (and hope) that grooming and paedophilia is a stance that we as a society can agree on as being part of our baseline standard of morality. Making dark jokes is NOT part of that baseline.

What about a joke or skit making light / trivialising grooming and pedophilla?

 

[Bostonian]

Why is it so important that nobody know?

Because it's a nothing story that you or I don't need to be told.

 

[Bostonian]

What about a joke making light of grooming and pedophilla?

Plenty of those types of jokes out there.

I mean have you never heard the countless Michael Jackson jokes?

 

[Muddiemoose]

Because it's a nothing story that you or I don't need to be told.

So it’s a free for all as long as no one finds out?

 

[Bostonian]

So it’s a free for all as long as no one finds out?

So long as it's not a criminal activity.

You all good with reporting on all the players drug strikes when they go down?

 

[FlowersByIrene]

What about a joke or skit making light / trivialising grooming and pedophilla?

Obviously permitted in context. You want to criminalize jokes do you?

 

[Muddiemoose]

Plenty of those types of jokes out there.

I mean have you never heard the countless Michael Jackson jokes?

But there is a time and a place for such jokes if you are so inclined

Work related function in a public facing role for a big company that gains most of its money from advertising wouldn’t be the best platform I would say

 

[Muddiemoose]

So long as it's not a criminal activity.

You all good with reporting on all the players drug strikes when they go down?

It’s not my decision to make
It’s the AFL’s so it doesn’t matter what I think

 

[iameviljez]

Plenty of those types of jokes out there.

I mean have you never heard the countless Michael Jackson jokes?

Yeah, as much as I think the players have no right to make Shocked Pikachu Face when a member of staff reported it, let's not pretend that these jokes don't do the rounds on the regular, or that they aren't acceptable at least in some contexts.

 

[Bostonian]

But there is a time and a place for such jokes if you are so inclined

Work related function in a public facing role for a big company that gains most of its money from advertising wouldn’t be the best platform I would say

If the players paid for the venue hire and not the club then it's not a work related function.

Did the club pay for the venue hire?

 

[Muddiemoose]

Obviously permitted in context. You want to criminalize jokes do you?

But there is a time and a place for such jokes if you are so inclined

Work related function in a public facing role for a big company that gains most of its money from advertising wouldn’t be the best platform I would say

 

[Mudman85]

Have you been to an end of year footy function?

Can guarantee they over did it

Absolutely guaranteed that RSA was breached.

 

[Bostonian]

It’s not my decision to make
It’s the AFL’s so it doesn’t matter what I think

But you're hear telling us all what you think about this incident.

So you can't have an opinion then?

 

[Muddiemoose]

If the players paid for the venue hire and not the club then it's not a work related function.

Did the club pay for the venue hire?

It doesn’t matter in these matters

 

[Bostonian]

Absolutely guaranteed that RSA was breached.

It absolutely always is.

Brownlow night a perfect example of it.

 

[Mudman85]

The AFL didn’t take it public
The media did

Because it got leaked from ?

 

[Bostonian]

It doesn’t matter in these matters

Well it does.

If it's not club organised it's private.

 

[Jarman3]

That's fair. Hard to put a number on it, not a lot of precedent for penalties involving rape re enactment to fall back on.

What about Django Unchained re-enactment?

 

[kickazz]

Because it's a nothing story that you or I don't need to be told.

Your opinion.

Maybe let people decide for themselves which stories they view / read.

 

[Muddiemoose]

But you're hear telling us all what you think about this incident.

So you can't have an opinion then?

I’m not telling anyone what to think, it literally doesn’t matter what you or I or anybody else thinks

My point is that it’s completely between the players and the AFL if they have breached behaviour clauses in the contracts

As it would be with any employer and employee in a similar situation

 

[Muddiemoose]

Well it does.

If it's not club organised it's private.

It’s not private if it’s at a venue because of the staff members of the venue present

Only way it’s private if it’s held at a house without any 3rd party catering, security, ect