Old Man Hirdy Tags In
- Thread starter dmc333
- Start date
- Tagged users None
Garlic muncher
Cancelled
- Feb 3, 2016
- 4,480
- 3,258
- AFL Club
- Collingwood
What concern is it of yours to post, none of your business, BTW do you have any valid reasons why a stand named after James Hirds grandfather should be renamed, or was it just a flippant throw away line like many of your inane posts.
Love the childish changing of my name
, i guess to respond i will say, what you say is what you are - a childish retort is probably about the level of your understanding.
Doss
Ass
- Aug 1, 2011
- 75,214
- 112,306
- AFL Club
- Essendon
The Allan. T. Hird stand at Windy Hill will not be renamed and it's pointless discussing it. Allan Hird was an important administrative figure at Essendon in days long gone by (NB...A LONG TIME AGO) and a decent player too. He made the tough but correct call to ditch Dick Reynolds as coach- an action Essendon's later administration should have taken much earlier with James Hird, you might reflect- and the successor (one John Coleman) coached Essendon to two flags in the 1960s. Job well done and important place in the annals of club history secured.
All of that is not changed in the slightest is by what his grandson did or didn't do, so it's an utter waste of time discussing it. Frivolous trolling, in fact.
All of that is not changed in the slightest is by what his grandson did or didn't do, so it's an utter waste of time discussing it. Frivolous trolling, in fact.
jenny61_99
Premium Platinum
Is anyone actually discussing that in here?
Doss
Ass
- Aug 1, 2011
- 75,214
- 112,306
- AFL Club
- Essendon
Yes Jenny. Read page four of this thread.
It's not the first time I've seen it come up either.
It's not the first time I've seen it come up either.
boncer34
Formerly "Dos23"
jenny61_99
Premium Platinum
Sorry Doss, I can't see it. Maybe I have someone on ignore?
Ah, no, it's cool I've got it now. Apologies. Might have been nice if you'd actually quoted the post you were referring to though.
Ron The Bear so probably
Doss
Ass
- Aug 1, 2011
- 75,214
- 112,306
- AFL Club
- Essendon
Nah. I figure people can read back if they wish.
wouldn't it be more sensible for you to just assume that a reasonable poster like Doss hasn't just gone completely bonkers and has just made something like that up for some inexplicable reason?
Many a reasonable poster has gone completely bonkers over this s**t.
Doss
Ass
- Aug 1, 2011
- 75,214
- 112,306
- AFL Club
- Essendon
Hence people suggesting things like a grandstand named after a person who died nine years ago being renamed because of his grandson.
I mean it's just one example, but there you go.
I mean it's just one example, but there you go.
Grandstands have been renamed beforeHence people suggesting things like a grandstand named after a person who died nine years ago being renamed because of his grandson.
I mean it's just one example, but there you go.
http://www.couriermail.com.au/news/stephen-hagan-racism-row-over/story-e6freon6-1111118880997
And closer to home
The John elliot stand at princess park Carlton
Doss
Ass
- Aug 1, 2011
- 75,214
- 112,306
- AFL Club
- Essendon
Curious.
John Elliot Stand. That is, named after John Elliot himself. Not his grandfather.
If the stand at Windy Hill was called the James Hird Stand you might have a point, but it's not, so you don't.
jenny61_99
Premium Platinum
Yep, fair comment. I did read back through whole thread and couldn't find anything. Was on the iPad so thought it must have been from someone I had on ignore.
Gees you still think they ain't guilty?
There is no way in hell Jobe should keep that medal, I can't believe he hasn't handed it back,
- Jan 17, 2016
- 1,887
- 6,088
- AFL Club
- Essendon
Not even the entire CAS panel thought they were all guilty.
It wasn't a unanimous decision, which says a lot.
Not really
I'd like a break down of their actual belief, ie we know they are guilty I'm not convinced you found all the info to 100% prove it and I don't like this thing called reasonable doubt.
And I still reckon Hird has the proof hidden away somewhere reallllllly good
Muggs
Premiership Player
Say's they were guilty.
Just as all tax payers got $900 by Rudd after the high court found 4-3 he could
or that aboriginal rights to native title could not be extinguished, the mabo case was 4-3 and had long term implications
Want me go on?
- Jan 17, 2016
- 1,887
- 6,088
- AFL Club
- Essendon
And that's where our beliefs differ.
I want proof in a guilty verdict. Not speculation, assumption or "strands in a cable"
Beyond reasonable doubt is the standard used to prevent gross injustices.
Muggs
Premiership Player
"strands in the cable" is the common way circumstantial evidence is examined in Australia, its a method nothing more.
A number of people have been convicted of murder based on Strands in a cable - ex Olympian Keli Lane for instance. Her case had nothing other than circumstantial evidence (no body, murder weapon, cause of death or exact time of death of her baby). She tried to go all the way to the high court and was refused
Beyond reasonable doubt is not the standard used for preventing gross injustices, its the standard of proof used to decide if someone has committed a crime - nothing else.
When someone claims a injustice against them and sues the party it is decided on balance of probabilities, beyond reasonable doubt is not used because often cant be proven to this level, and to need to prove things to this level would be a injustice in itself. So using beyond reasonable doubt does not prevent injustice.
Just think if the players needed prove reputation loss or future health risk to beyond reasonably doubt - all the insurance company would need to do to knock back the claim is point to EFC supporters like yourself and say see they have not suffered reputation loss, let alone how the players would prove the health side of things thus get a zero payout.
- Jan 17, 2016
- 1,887
- 6,088
- AFL Club
- Essendon
That's easy. It's everywhere on this forum.
Muggs
Premiership Player
Nope there is doubt - the Essendon board, Bomber Blitz, Bombertalk4, anyone who is friends with Bruce Francis on facebook, the various EFC34 face book pages and twitter #...etc.
- Apr 15, 2008
- 7,857
- 9,504
- AFL Club
- Hawthorn
- Other Teams
- Roger Federer
Just to make sure this is clear - this expectation that the standard should be 'beyond reasonable doubt' that I often see from a certain section of posters is... not reasonable. Sports doping isn't a criminal matter, it's actually a contractual matter. The normal standard of proof in such cases is 'on the balance of probabilities'. So 'comfortable satisfaction' is actually a higher standard than you'd generally expect.
See, when you are proving someone guilty of a crime, it is the State trying to deprive a citizen of their liberty. That is a huge deal. You just can't do it without being certain and ensuring that the accused has had a fair chance to defend themselves. Because finding a guilty person innocent is a much smaller injustice than finding an innocent person guilty.
When it's a civil matter, there is no presumption of innocence, no one being potentially deprived of liberty; and crucially it's not clear in advance of seeing the case at hand which incorrect verdict would be the greater injustice. So you have to work on the balance of probabilities. In light of the evidence, what finding is least likely to be unjust/most likely to be just?
While it's tempting to look at sports doping more like a criminal matter in which you have people being accused and then punished, it actually isn't. These players aren't going to jail, they aren't even being prevented from earning their (very substantial) incomes. At the end of the day, doping in sport is breaching a contractual condition. If you do insist on viewing this as crime and punishment, keep in mind that the standard 'punishment' appears to be 1 year's paid holidays. I can think of grosser injustices.
