The Great Beat-Up: The Drug Problem at West Coast *MB thread*

[hoogs]

Re: The Great Beat-Up: The Drug Problem at West Coast

Why?

You didn't make any points.

Yes I did. Go have another look.

 

[Freo Big Fella]

Re: The Great Beat-Up: The Drug Problem at West Coast

What a waste of a thread.

All Gunnar could have said is that, as a journo, he's happy to engage in media beat-up's when it suits him, but doesn't like it when his own club is smeared in print.

 

[Crosby87]

Re: The Great Beat-Up: The Drug Problem at West Coast

Who cares.

Just watch the football.

 

[QL 21]

Re: The Great Beat-Up: The Drug Problem at West Coast

was not impressed with Judd on Channel 7 last night..how rude was he?!?

The silly journo deserved it.

 

[tess]

Re: The Great Beat-Up: The Drug Problem at West Coast

Yawn......


The emperor has no Clothes .....

 

[FreoGirl]

Re: The Great Beat-Up: The Drug Problem at West Coast

The silly journo deserved it.

It was just another example of the lack of culture down there!

 

[Underdog]

Re: The Great Beat-Up: The Drug Problem at West Coast

was not impressed with Judd on Channel 7 last night..how rude was he?!?

He said he knew nothing about the issue and she continued to hound him. That isn't rude?

I thought is was humourous, not rude

 

[Biggie]

Re: The Great Beat-Up: The Drug Problem at West Coast

Well written GL.

Good thought out post.

Still hurts to be implicated with the use of drugs in our great club but hey POO happens in he real world.

Like I've said before cant wait for RND 1 to start, sick to death of this off-field crap thatg happens to us all the time.

GO EAGLES.

 

[Biggie]

Re: The Great Beat-Up: The Drug Problem at West Coast

All of you....get a life!

have any of you nerds ever had a ****** blinder! if not ask cous and the gang how ******* great fun it is! good on em and as long as they keep kickin *** all over the footy field i dont give a flying ****!

Go and get something else to worry about....like scraping up four points every once in a while!

If you cant beat em.........

Im about to join em myself

 

[Biggie]

Re: The Great Beat-Up: The Drug Problem at West Coast

was not impressed with Judd on Channel 7 last night..how rude was he?!?

It's difficult for the media not to have a field day with all of this. They are getting enough ammunition.

Like he cares what a journo thinks FG.

He stated earlier no contract talks and BANG what does she ask about?

Cant imagine what Kerr would of done!

 

[FreoGirl]

Re: The Great Beat-Up: The Drug Problem at West Coast

He said he knew nothing about the issue and she continued to hound him. That isn't rude?

I thought is was humourous, not rude

He asked her is she was a school child and if she had a university degree. How immature was that?!?

Gunnar, do YOU have a university degree?

 

[Bombers_Forever]

Re: The Great Beat-Up: The Drug Problem at West Coast

If nothing happened to Fletcher, he would have told the club.

 

[Biggie]

Re: The Great Beat-Up: The Drug Problem at West Coast

He asked her is she was a school child and if she had a university degree. How immature was that?!?

Now you've crossed the line.

Judd is not immature by any means.

Get houned by intense media and see if you can be MATURE every single time.

Pick on something worth while FG.

Judd is untouchable.

 

[Strapping Young Lad]

Re: The Great Beat-Up: The Drug Problem at West Coast

i.e. hearsay

Funnily enough, I also have another mate who used to smoke weed with your current player so you might call it 'hearsay' but I call it 'a known history'.

 

[imright]

Re: The Great Beat-Up: The Drug Problem at West Coast

If nothing happened to Fletcher, he would have told the club.

If you believe what you read in the paper then Fletcher's manager has said that medical reports from the hospital where he stayed, indicated that no illicit drugs were found in his system only alcohol.

 

[imright]

Re: The Great Beat-Up: The Drug Problem at West Coast

Funnily enough, I also have another mate who used to smoke weed with your current player so you might call it 'hearsay' but I call it 'a known history'.

I'm afraid having unnamed "mates" who know AFL players does not make your opinion anymore creditable. It sounds more like blowing smoke out of your backside.

 

[Bombers_Forever]

Re: The Great Beat-Up: The Drug Problem at West Coast

If you believe what you read in the paper then Fletcher's manager has said that medical reports from the hospital where he stayed, indicated that no illicit drugs were found in his system only alcohol.

Maybe so but why not tell that to the club to clear the allegations of an overdose? If there is evidence to prove he did not overdose, why not show the club so his name can be cleared?

 

[Milkman]

Re: The Great Beat-Up: The Drug Problem at West Coast

If nothing happened to Fletcher, he would have told the club.

When nothing happens to me I make sure everyone knows about it.

 

[imright]

Re: The Great Beat-Up: The Drug Problem at West Coast

Maybe so but why not tell that to the club to clear the allegations of an overdose? If there is evidence to prove he did not overdose, why not show the club so his name can be cleared?

It was written in the paper so whether it is actually true or not, who knows?

If that medical evidence is available maybe Fletcher is weighing up his legal options and any talk from the club in the public arena may adversely affect it. Of course I'm only speculating.

 

[Captain Random]

Re: The Great Beat-Up: The Drug Problem at West Coast

Funnily enough, I also have another mate who used to smoke weed with your current player so you might call it 'hearsay' but I call it 'a known history'.

I have a mate who says your mate is full of crap.

And another mate who agrees. Funnily enough.

 

[Dagless]

Re: The Great Beat-Up: The Drug Problem at West Coast

Yes, in my experience nearly all journalists are dishonest scum. They make more news than they report, and can't tell the truth to save their skins. See Chewy's experience in this thread:

http://www.bigfooty.com/forum/showthread.php?t=304228&page=6



He did this:



I think he admitted there were drug problems, and they were bringing in drug counsellors. I don't think they did that before. I think this isn't a new problem, its just the beat up is getting too loud to ignore.



I think previously he has said "no comment". Its good to hear him spell it out, and it contrasts with the previous silence on the issue. I am interested to see what "not tolerating more stuff ups" means. The Pies treated their last public miscreants (albeit implied drunken ones, not implied druggies) very lightly: after a mild fine, one was kept on in a leadership role and the other traded profitably at season's end. What will happen to the next Eagle duffer to do something that can be whisperingly attributed to a drug problem?

In the end West Coast have reacted positively to a problem. The problem has probably been worse in the past, and been dealt with in the past (eg Gardiner's sacking). Now there's a public beat-up, and they have reacted with a public statement.

However the President is on record admitting there is a problem, which is a new development.

Wouldnt any president rather admit to an issue like this rather than have the media constantly hounding them. Just asking an opinion, but the media have constantly bagged the Eagles without proof and it didnt look like it was going to stop no matter what they said. Not saying they do/dont have an issue, but its a lot easier to get the media on your side by admitting a thing like that rather than continually denying it

 

[Contra Mundum]

Re: The Great Beat-Up: The Drug Problem at West Coast

This whole issue of drugs in AFL, and of West Coast supposedly being the worst offenders, is a total beat-up.

Rumour and innuendo are no substitute for real evidence, but that hasn't stopped commentators from inflating this issue at every opportunity.

The Footy Show interview with West Coast chairman Dalton Gooding was presented as some kind of massive expose - maybe I missed it, but was anything actually revealed?

Gooding basically admitted their had been some discipline problems at the club, before saying the club wouldn't tolerate any more stuff-ups and that illicit drugs were unacceptable. What was the big revelation here? What else was he going to say? You'd get the same line on drugs and discipline from every chairman in the league.

This whole saga is marked as a beat-up by the complete lack of real information. I'm yet to see a shred of evidence that there is a "drug problem" in the AFL, or at West Coast or any other club.

Notice the way Hutchison kept referring to "a perception back East" that West Coast had a drug problem. That perception was emphasised because Hutchison had no actual evidence to use as a starting point for his questions. A perception - that's what's driving this beat-up.

I love the way commentators use "anecdotal evidence" to build their case. What does that phrase mean in this context? Rumour? Hearsay? In most reporting, that would not be sufficient to drive a story - but in this issue, that's considered a smoking gun.

Craig Hutchison spuriously linked Cousins getting locked up and Kerr assaulting a taxi driver with a supposed drug problem at West Coast. How does that work? Were drugs a factor in either incident?

Then there's the Fletcher incident. If anyone knows what happened in Las Vegas, then let's hear it. It's unsound to just assume it was a drug overdose in the absence of any real information?

Like I said - show me the evidence. Don't just recite unsubstantiated rumours or point to incidents that had nothing to do with drugs.

Quite frankly, I couldn't care less what Ben Cousins or any other player does or doesn't ingest in a nightclub. I have no interested whatsoever in this half-baked soap opera that surrounds players' off-field activities. The public appetite for this stuff mystifies me.

I thought most people follow football because they like the spectacle and the contest. Players will be judged on what they do on-field - and rightly so. Why is there such interest in everything else?

That said, the way this story about the "drug problem" has been manufactured needs to be pointed out.

People should demand some facts instead of just lapping up innuendo that feeds their dislike of the Eagles.

Hey apparently their casting for a remake of Hogan's heroes - you would be a monty for the role of Sergeant Schultz. You can walk around screaming; "I know Nothing, Nothing!"

 

[imright]

Re: The Great Beat-Up: The Drug Problem at West Coast

Wouldnt any president rather admit to an issue like this rather than have the media constantly hounding them. Just asking an opinion, but the media have constantly bagged the Eagles without proof and it didnt look like it was going to stop no matter what they said. Not saying they do/dont have an issue, but its a lot easier to get the media on your side by admitting a thing like that rather than continually denying it

Yes, I think your right. It would be easier to admit to something and say that there dealing with it rather than keep on saying they can't act because they have no proof. In a strange sort of way it takes a bit of the pressure off the club.

I don't necessarily agree with it but maybe it's more practical.

 

[Corpuscles]

Re: The Great Beat-Up: The Drug Problem at West Coast

Hey apparently their casting for a remake of Hogan's heroes - you would be a monty for the role of Sergeant Schultz. You can walk around screaming; "I know Nothing, Nothing!"

Nah ... Schultz could shut up... Gunnar more of a Col Klink.... opens mouth blurts out ****

Only the most blind fanatical West Coast Ill-E-gal fan would deny there is serious and obvious problems.... and it would be better if all acknowleged it including the Pres & AFL

 

[Milkman]

Re: The Great Beat-Up: The Drug Problem at West Coast

Nah ... Schultz could shut up... Gunnar more of a Col Klink.... opens mouth blurts out ****

Only the most blind fanatical West Coast Ill-E-gal fan would deny there is serious and obvious problems.... and it would be better if all acknowleged it including the Pres & AFL

I reckon Kerr's puffy shirt was the dead giveaway. What clinched it for you?

Cousins temporarily moving in with his parents?

Embley's dancing?