Julia Gillard played this card when the going got tough. The fish rots from the head.
Katie Brennan appeal - Wins battle with AFL
- Thread starter Quivorir
- Start date
- Tagged users None
Rance2Mewtwo
Cancelled
- Jul 31, 2016
- 1,554
- 4,909
- AFL Club
- Richmond
But the difference in rules is 100% due to salary, not gender.
Hate it when people cry "social justice!" to serve a personal agenda.
Hate it when people cry "social justice!" to serve a personal agenda.
- Oct 10, 2014
- 2,700
- 3,195
- AFL Club
- North Melbourne
but she should because bob missed the GF in 2016....
Problem is that a 2 game ban in an 8 game season is equivalent to the guys getting 5 weeks - over the top to what was a pretty nothing incident
- Oct 9, 2014
- 12,125
- 21,317
- AFL Club
- Western Bulldogs
Embarrassing. Hope it is out of her pocket and not the clubs
- Aug 15, 2014
- 10,414
- 21,490
- AFL Club
- Western Bulldogs
- Other Teams
- Chicago Bulls
Some of you clearly aren't reading the article.
She has accepted that she isn't playing in the grand final. This is a move to ensure this doesn't happen to anyone else in the future, which is shouldn't.
She has accepted that she isn't playing in the grand final. This is a move to ensure this doesn't happen to anyone else in the future, which is shouldn't.
I think the AFL would be very happy to amend the AFLW tribunal system. They love money so if the collective opinion of the players is they'll pay fines for reprimands they'll gladly do it. 20% of match or weekly fee for a first reprimand, 40% for a second and so on is probably fair. Avoiding 2 reprimands in a 7 match season isn't exactly that difficult and would save some women a lot of money but anyway, if change is wanted it can happen at the appropriate time.
The easier and smarter option would be to make reprimand suspensions reset for finals so Brennan serves her week ban in round 1 next year.
All of that said:
When you set rules for a men's competition and rules for a women's competition they don't have have to be the same! That means all rules - on field, off field, tribunal etc.
That's not discrimination. It's laying out particular rules for the particular competition.
AFLW announced certain rules changes - 16 a side, smaller ball, shorter quarters. The tribunal rules are no different to that.
Melbourne lost in the last 90 seconds against the Dogs. Can they now put 18 on the field and play for 5 more minutes because that's what the men do? Is it a human rights violation that they weren't afforded the same amount of players and time period to win the game? No one with a sane mind would argue that, so why is that an argument against the tribunal penalties?
The easier and smarter option would be to make reprimand suspensions reset for finals so Brennan serves her week ban in round 1 next year.
All of that said:
When you set rules for a men's competition and rules for a women's competition they don't have have to be the same! That means all rules - on field, off field, tribunal etc.
That's not discrimination. It's laying out particular rules for the particular competition.
AFLW announced certain rules changes - 16 a side, smaller ball, shorter quarters. The tribunal rules are no different to that.
Melbourne lost in the last 90 seconds against the Dogs. Can they now put 18 on the field and play for 5 more minutes because that's what the men do? Is it a human rights violation that they weren't afforded the same amount of players and time period to win the game? No one with a sane mind would argue that, so why is that an argument against the tribunal penalties?
- Nov 17, 2007
- 18,650
- 22,878
- AFL Club
- Richmond
I wrote that message first thing this morning before any article appeared.
The logic is this: the rules were in place before the beginning of the season, so that AFLW players were not unfairly penalised financially. The tradeoff was weeks vs cash. Going the "sexual discrimination" route made your entire club look like flogs. Sorry, but them's the breaks.
it's a bit of a tough one because they agreed to the rules at the start of the year with the AFLPA & AFL re: rough conduct charges and fines
noting that the women's salary isn't high enough to justify $5000 fines etc
Now that it's cost someone a GF, they want it changed...
---
on a side note, I don't think Brennan looked 100% fit last Saturday night... I know that has nothing to do with the outcome of this at all, but may be a blessing...
noting that the women's salary isn't high enough to justify $5000 fines etc
Now that it's cost someone a GF, they want it changed...
---
on a side note, I don't think Brennan looked 100% fit last Saturday night... I know that has nothing to do with the outcome of this at all, but may be a blessing...
hawkman
Hall of Famer
Last year the men were playing under the same rules. Actually AFL rules were stricter because they were actually fined and a 3rd fine in the 22 week season led to a suspension.
I think it should just be a lesser fine then. If she was fined 1k, instead of the 5k a male would have been, it would have been entirely fair?
- Jul 14, 2013
- 3,792
- 4,730
- AFL Club
- North Melbourne
Whats it with bulldogs players been whinging little bitches?
Approaching the AFL on behalf of the players union and working on a sensible change to the tribunal process would achieve the same result.
This is a bunch of lawyers and the ego of either a player, a President or both seeking retrospective justice to feel better for themselves.
Not every male did get a fine for similar tackles, Danger and Brody Grundy both laid similar tackles and got suspensions. This need for people to always defer to sexism or racism or homophobia etc in this country is beyond ridiculous.
I was at the Collingwood v Adelaide AFLW game last Sunday, and ended up around with the Crows Pride Cheersquad - Started talking to a couple of women and one of the 'last possession' out of bounds free kicks was paid. The two started complaining that the rule was s**t and that because the blokes don't do it in AFL, then the women shouldn't. As someone who doesn't entirely hate the rule, I pointed out that the SANFL men's comp have had the same rule for about 3 or so seasons now. It's nothing to do with men v women, but different competitions.
She begrudgingly gave me that point, but then went on to say she didn't like the rule - fair enough if you don't like it, but it's not a men v women thing though
- Banned
- #218
The Bulldogs are such heroes, fighting for equality. Wonderful ethics and just so brave;
However:
1. When she got a reprimand earlier in the season they didn't cry about how they should pay a fine rather than a slap on the wrist or go to the human rights commission for justice for all women
2. When she got suspended from the grand final, they didn't seek justice for all women and go to the human rights commission, they decided to fight the suspension, didn't even mention that paying a fine should be the outcome for fairness
2. When the suspension was confirmed at the tribunal, they didn't seek justice for all women and go to the human rights commission, they again tried to have the suspension quashed on some other basis, again the fine wasn't brought up.
3. Then when this was upheld again on appeal they cry 'poor us' and its an injustice for all women. We wont play her but will do everything for all the women out there as we are the moral police.
Outstanding citizens
- Jun 22, 2008
- 24,580
- 21,276
- AFL Club
- Geelong
Now that it's turned into such an embarrassing circus for her and the club and the AFL in general, maybe now they could pull back, sit down with other clubs at the end of the season and if they're all in agreeance, then go to the AFL and change it.
The AFL would fall over themselves to have it changed if that's what the clubs want.
- Jul 14, 2013
- 3,792
- 4,730
- AFL Club
- North Melbourne
So brave
I actually hate that rule and think it doesn't achieve what it's set out to do, and also think it is an example of the AFL experimenting too much with the women's game. That said, it's another rule set out before the games started and you can't go to court and demand a throw in if you didn't like the result!
Clubs and players have every right to fight the AFL for rule changes in such a new and growing competition and I think there's a valid point to try and keep AFLW as similar to AFL as possible. It's not a good look for the league to be experimental or to create special rules to artificially enhance the produce (see the AFL memo earlier this year). That's a whole different issue to adhering to the rules as they are set out.
They are all focusing on the fact that one male player from the dogs escaped with a fine but overlook a heap of others who copped a suspension.
They all got suspended.
Last edited:
Teen Wolf
Norm Smith Medallist
- Jul 5, 2011
- 8,123
- 8,955
- AFL Club
- North Melbourne
- Other Teams
- Afghanistan women's cricket team
I think Carlton should've worn their clash jumper.
Surely all they have to do is change the mens rules.....if an obvious sling tackle, injury or not, it is an automatic 1 wk suspension......if an injury they get more.
Doesn't have to be complicated. The world has gone mad, fair dinkum.
Doesn't have to be complicated. The world has gone mad, fair dinkum.
