I'm allergic to Fox reporters, too.
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Weekly Prize - Join Any Time - Tip Round 11
The Golden Ticket - MCG and Marvel Medallion Club tickets and Corporate Box tickets at the Gabba, MCG and Marvel.
Ahh yes, Gil McLachlan's little-known and seldom used superpower of being able to block journalists reporting something with only the power of his mind.
Most are accredited by the AFL....which means the AFL OWN them.
It’d be a very brave journo to go against the AFL’s wishes.
AFL accredited journos aren't the only journos out there. If it was as known prolifically as is being suggested then it would have hit the press by now. There's plenty of outlets that aren't looking to be seated at coach's press conferences and would happily soak up the engagement by publishing this first.
AFL accredited journos aren't the only journos out there. If it was as known prolifically as is being suggested then it would have hit the press by now. There's plenty of outlets that aren't looking to be seated at coach's press conferences and would happily soak up the engagement by publishing this first.
Yes, that is a consideration...however even non-acc journos work for publications that need access to to AFL....I can’t see AAP, Reuters, Fox or Sky putting their access at risk.
You don't see the general journos reporting on the sport for a reason, imagine a business writer penning an article about a sports person for the back page - it's not their department, send it to sports.
There were multiple journos who didn't toe the AFL line during the supplements scandal and were more than happy to report on it thoroughly rather than just following the AFL's 'fu** let's just hope this goes away' approach. Simon Lethlean and Richard Simkiss' scandal didn't exactly make Gil or the AFL look good and journalists had no hesitation putting that out there. We aren't even 6 months on from JDG being accused of a fairly egregious assault charge (that later turned out to not be nearly as serious as initially reported) that was substantially reported by all and sundry. If Dusty smacked up an Uber driver we'd know about it.
A professional athlete assaulting someone or sleeping with someone is gossip fodder. If one of the highest profile AFL players in the country assaulted an Uber driver it would most certainly not remain in the sports section. If you don't think the Daily Mail (who wouldn't give the slightest s**t about AFL accreditation nor would their parent company) would be all over a story like this then you are being way too generous. They were all over the JDG story like a rash.
If a footballer was involved in a business, it's written by the business writer.You don't see the general journos reporting on the sport for a reason, imagine a business writer penning an article about a sports person for the back page - it's not their department, send it to sports.
They had his arrest confirmed for that didn't they?
You reckon if Dusty Martin beat the s**t out of an Uber driver, and the press know about it (according to the text message) that he wouldn't be under arrest right now or at least 'assisting the police with their enquiries'?
I don't think there is a binary on that. Getting confirmation would be the hurdle, especially after Laidley.
Those really aren't the same thing...
You're right, because when it comes to Richmond's best player, arguably the league's best player and that player's own personal wealth - you don't run a story that makes them look bad without being damn sure you're sure.
The AFL, Richmond, the AFLPA and Martin would destroy you - even if you were right.
You don't see the general journos reporting on the sport for a reason, imagine a business writer penning an article about a sports person for the back page - it's not their department, send it to sports.
Injunction.
That's never going to happen. Have you seen the litany of NRL/AFL players who have been arrested for dodgy s**t over the years and injunctions were never sought? You're really not arguing in good faith here.
I heard it was more of a walk-in robe myself.View attachment 1358912
This is a fun game. The above must be true because it’s a screenshot of a text message. Must definitely be undoubtedly true because journalists aren’t writing about it.
You reckon if Dusty Martin beat the s**t out of an Uber driver, and the press know about it (according to the text message) that he wouldn't be under arrest right now or at least be 'assisting the police with their enquiries'?
Yeah I’m hearing this all over the place