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

[Bostonian]

I think you will find you are very much incorrect

I think you'll find I've worked far more of these types of events than you have.

If we had staff spreading shit to outside of the event they are gone.

Private means private.

 

[Mudman85]

I think you will find you are very much incorrect

So if some young girls having a 21st get a bit loose you think it's fine for the venue staff to review and share, maybe post the cctv online ? What if there is nudity involved either deliberately or accidental wardrobe malfunction

 

[kickazz]

I don't think you know what that means.

It's the opposite of wanting people to be able to poke fun of whoever they like

I know what it means, I was just surprised at your censorious stance given your libertarian leanings, I couldn't help but poke you with the commie stick.

 

[Carringbush2010]

If it was private you wouldn’t know about it.

It was, by definition, not private.

The intention was that this function was to be private, no public 'knowledge' of the event.

So yeah for all intents and purposes, it was absolutely a private event.

The only thing that made it public was that someone(s) has found offence and informed the AFL, not a member of the public, likely a hotel employee(s).

If that didn't happen we wouldn't have 70 odd pages of virtue signalers vs virtue signalers, losing their shit about the hypocrisy of the AFL and the bleeding hearts oh so at the ready to condemn the players and anyone with a skerrick of sympathy for the players.

 

[Bostonian]

"Private" just means exclusive and not open to the general public, it doesn't mean "our lips are sealed and we keep your secrets".

When we refer to the "private sector" or "private ownership", we pretty clearly don't mean "everything is a secret".

Yes it can.

There's so much shit going on out there that players do that never gets reported because venue and their staff are often worded up to keep it in house.

I've worked security, I know this for a fact.

 

[Carringbush2010]

Dill thanking the informer.

I'd bet my house and life savings he's not thankful, couldn't have a safer bet.

Nothing surer if this didn't go public, it wouldn't be discussed.

 

[iameviljez]

I remember sending around emails organising the pub on the last day of work - you'd always have the old "this is not an official work sanctioned event" tacked on.

Then we got training saying you could still be in violation of workplace rules if you did bad shit.

Yeah, it's a bit of a bit each way but I kind of get it to be honest.

Legally speaking, if for example somebody had their drink spiked or got sexually assaulted, the company (rightly) doesn't want to be liable for providing an unsafe environment for their employees.

But on the other hand, if a bunch of your employees - known to be your employees - behaved like absolute douchebags a la private schoolboys on the train singing misogynistic songs, then HR wants to have that kind of thing in their back pocket.

Then we got training saying it can be considered bullying (or something) if you don't invite everyone. (Like it can be mean to exclude people but sometimes you just have separate groups at work you know)

If you invited literally everyone except one single person as a real High School move, then yeah, I get it. It's probably also written around the old trope of senior exec teams having boozy client lunches at girly clubs full well knowing that the one female exec wouldn't go.

 

[Muddiemoose]

So if some young girls having a 21st get a bit loose you think it's fine for the venue staff to review and share, maybe post the cctv online ? What if there is nudity involved either deliberately or accidental wardrobe malfunction

Of course not, and that isn’t what has happened so let’s not try and act like it’s the same thing

A staff member complained and passed the footage onto the afl who were conducting a investigation on the complaint

 

[Bostonian]

I know what it means, I was just surprised at your censorious stance given your libertarian leanings, I couldn't help but poke you with the commie stick.

I'm not censoring anything.

I'm railing against the losers who prop up the pathetic industry that love to report on people's private lives constantly.

 

[Carringbush2010]

Doesn't sound like the person who put in the complaint was even working the event.

So there's that.

Then this person shouldn't have been there.

 

[iameviljez]

Yes it can.

There's so much shit going on out there that players do that never gets reported because venue and their staff are often worded up to keep it in house.

I've worked security, I know this for a fact.

Yeah, if they are worded up beforehand and given the genuine option to back out (and I do mean a genuine option, not just "you've got the choice to do this or quit your job), that's completely different.

 

[Muddiemoose]

Yes it can.

There's so much shit going on out there that players do that never gets reported because venue and their staff are often worded up to keep it in house.

I've worked security, I know this for a fact.

Just because people don’t doesn't mean people can’t

 

[Bostonian]

Then this person shouldn't have been there.

Maybe they'll get doxxed now.

People will want to know who the snitch was.

 

[Bostonian]

Yeah, if they are worded up beforehand and given the genuine option to back out (and I do mean a genuine option, not just "you've got the choice to do this or quit your job), that's completely different.

And given this person wasn't even working the event if information is correct then we're dealing an utter ****wit.

 

[Carringbush2010]

jeez thats unlucky. Probably should have held it at a private venue next time.

Nah, still not private, you walk in, in a costume, by chance a member of the public sees your Django costume gets offended, or sees an opportunity to grift (more likely the latter) and informs the AFL or a journalist.

 

[Mudman85]

Of course not, and that isn’t what has happened so let’s not try and act like it’s the same thing

A staff member complained and passed the footage onto the afl who were conducting a investigation on the complaint

You're right, it's not the same. But who decides where that line is. I don't think CCTV reviewed by staff for a laugh is responsible use. Given the daily goings on in bars around Australia I think it's a bit rich for some one who works in a pub to be the moral police

 

[Carringbush2010]

Maybe they'll get doxxed now.

People will want to know who the snitch was.

Whoever it was, whether an employee (likely unpopular with the employer) or a by chance member of the public would probably wanna keep a low profile for some time.

 

[Mudman85]

Whoever it was, whether an employee (likely unpopular with the employer) or a by chance member of the public would probably wanna keep a low profile for some time.

Go in and look for one with facial piercings and a rainbow tattoo would be a good start I reckon.

 

[kickazz]

Yes it can.

There's so much shit going on out there that players do that never gets reported because venue and their staff are often worded up to keep it in house.

I've worked security, I know this for a fact.

And generally speaking, this is the right thing.

It might sound silly, but at this party, I dunno - a player might start crying about something, expose themselves as a terrible singer or suffer a bout of diarrhoea. All little things they'd rather kept private, none of our business.

Illegal stuff - that's different. If they assault staff or something, of course it gets reported.

Then there is the stuff in between - a player cheating on someone (though this again probably not public interest), someone doing a series of racist jokes - all under the protection of 'privacy'. Not illegal but pretty shit. If say that happened at a Collingwood private function a few years ago (even now really) - you'd probably have an argument that it should be leaked.

 

[tiger_tough]

So I don't have to search through 75 pages, can someone please direct me to a post that outlines exactly what they did?

Seems excessive.

 

[Carringbush2010]

They can tell anyone they like. I agree that the bolded is usually the best first approach, but it's not for us to say they cannot tell the AFL or go public with it.

Of course, and anyone can rightly criticize them for it.

 

[kickazz]

Maybe they'll get doxxed now.

People will want to know who the snitch was.

Well that would be shit.

They didn't make it public, they raised a concern with the pub / AFL.

 

[Underarm]

So I don't have to search through 75 pages, can someone please direct me to a post that outlines exactly what they did?

Seems excessive.

If you don't know what they did how can you have an opinion on how excessive the penalty is?

 

[Gone Critical]

Once again, you’re assuming that’s what he was fined for

Clearly stated on AFL website that Whitfield and Idon were fined for leadership and the skit they performed. Its pretty cut and dried for me. The AFL are not in a place where they can judge Idon on a skit he does from a film portrayng slavery.

 

[Bunk Moreland]

The intention was that this function was to be private, no public 'knowledge' of the event.

So yeah for all intents and purposes, it was absolutely a private event.

The only thing that made it public was that someone(s) has found offence and informed the AFL, not a member of the public, likely a hotel employee(s).

If that didn't happen we wouldn't have 70 odd pages of virtue signalers vs virtue signalers, losing their shit about the hypocrisy of the AFL and the bleeding hearts oh so at the ready to condemn the players and anyone with a skerrick of sympathy for the players.

I’m not sure what your point is.