Katie Brennan appeal - Wins battle with AFL

[Kwality]

Incredibly poor post. An AFL player would be able to sell or auction their premiership medallion for shitloads more than a pissy little $6000 ring. Yer, what do the male players have the league to thank for? Even average players get up to three times more money than most people get for slaving their guts out in a job. They get to live their dream, play in front of thousands of people each week, get the best possible care from support people that many others dont get, and get three months of the year off to travel the world and spend the shitloads of cash they earn. Gee, male AFL players have it tough. And then one female player stands up for herself and she is the worst person in the world for it. Get your hand off it.

You a victim? You are being used by the well heeled legal types with more interest in playing in the Courts than in womens footy, users ..

 

[Kwality]

Exactly. Couldn’t have put it better myself.

If it was about sexism it would have been about sexism from the beginning, but it only became about sexism when the WB realised they had another avenue to argue to try and get Brennan a reprieve. Sexism just happened to be the vehicle by which the WB could get there.

In fact this is a complete insult to all women involved in AFLW.

More abuse of the comp than insult to the women, they are just pawns to be used/abused in the Courts.

 

[gordo2016]

Even with a GF win you are still sulking , she won’t win the court case and the little self entitled princess will just have to get over it

Disagree. The QC's in Federal Court get paid just about as much in an hour as what female footballers earn for playing the whole season. As if the AFL would want it to go that far, they cant afford it to. As well as that, it will be a public relations disaster for the AFL, they cannot afford the risk of being labelled as discriminatory, it will kill the reputation of McLachlan and his cronies. Put your house on KB getting what she wants and rightly so.

 

[demondavey]

Yer, if Paddy missed a GF because of a pissweak tackle that caused no injury, I'm sure you would be saying that was justice. She wont get a ring but she will show the AFL up for their shithouse rules and they will change them.

You need to learn thr rules, and really fast because you’re eroding any sense of integrity you’ve got left in this forum.

You can’t sling tackle players. You can’t pin the arms and slam them down that way. Cordner was affected by that tackle. I suggest you look at it.

 

[Captivating]

Yer, if Paddy missed a GF because of a pissweak tackle that caused no injury, I'm sure you would be saying that was justice. She wont get a ring but she will show the AFL up for their shithouse rules and they will change them.

Rocca missed a GF for a hit on Lade that wouldn't pop a pimple. Caused no injury, but he missed a GF. Brennan has to man-up and accept the ruling.

 

[Over The Post]

Ummm... I may have missed something, but is it Brennan leading the circus here, or has she just been swept along by legal types at the Bulldogs showing incredibly poor judgement and their shenanigans are unfairly reflecting on her?

 

[DarkPhoenix]

Ummm... I may have missed something, but is it Brennan leading the circus here, or has she just been swept along by legal types at the Bulldogs showing incredibly poor judgement and their shenanigans are unfairly reflecting on her?

Has made statements regarding it so I'd hazard shes just as complicit as those behind her holding the law books

 

[Tandy]

Yer, if Paddy missed a GF because of a pissweak tackle that caused no injury, I'm sure you would be saying that was justice. She wont get a ring but she will show the AFL up for their shithouse rules and they will change them.

If he deserved to miss I'm not going to carry on like a pork chop. I'm sure you're aware it wasn't just the latest tackle that caused her to get the suspension...

 

[DJMac]

Incredibly poor post. An AFL player would be able to sell or auction their premiership medallion for shitloads more than a pissy little $6000 ring. Yer, what do the male players have the league to thank for? Even average players get up to three times more money than most people get for slaving their guts out in a job. They get to live their dream, play in front of thousands of people each week, get the best possible care from support people that many others dont get, and get three months of the year off to travel the world and spend the shitloads of cash they earn. Gee, male AFL players have it tough. And then one female player stands up for herself and she is the worst person in the world for it. Get your hand off it.

No the average players are playing for free in amateur competitions around the country. The elite players "AFL" get what they are worth.

 

[Jeld]

Surely the Western Bulldogs are not expecting the AFL community to be celebrating with them. They dragged the AFL and everyone who works there through the gutter yesterday. Accused them of being sexists and reported them to the Human Rights Commission. I hope there is a bitter taste to the celebration drinks.

 

[CatFan79]

If it was about sexism it would have been about sexism from the beginning, but it only became about sexism when the WB realised they had another avenue to argue to try and get Brennan a reprieve. Sexism just happened to be the vehicle by which the WB could get there.

I knew how this would play out the moment that cuck_ Gerard Whately cried sexism on 360 the night of the tribunal decision..

Just like when he said 'anyone who booos Adam Goodes is racist' ..It's the age of rampant political correctness and it helps NOBODY.

 

[demondavey]

I knew how this would play out the moment that cuck_ Gerard Whately cried sexism on 360 the night of the tribunal decision..

Just like when he said 'anyone who booos Adam Goodes is racist' ..It's the age of rampant political correctness and it helps NOBODY.

Whateley is a decent journalist, he should know a lot better. And I agree, the age of polical correctness has just seen people walk in egg shells, be criticised unnecessarily, misinterpret the true meaning of expression, and just go soft in general.

 

[FRUMPY]

Ummm... I may have missed something, but is it Brennan leading the circus here, or has she just been swept along by legal types at the Bulldogs showing incredibly poor judgement and their shenanigans are unfairly reflecting on her?

I think she has been poorly advised the whole way. What footy player would think going to this extreme to change a rule. Bulldogs from the start have ballsed this up and have just continued to embarrass themselves for some strange reason.

Why not just goto the afl to get heard like they would in the afl? Have stupidly played the discrimination card.

And at the same time have ruined the reputation of their captain. I feel sorry for her. Bulldogs no class and doing so much damage and no good at all

Sent from my SM-G930F using Tapatalk

 

[FRUMPY]

I knew how this would play out the moment that cuck_ Gerard Whately cried sexism on 360 the night of the tribunal decision..

Just like when he said 'anyone who booos Adam Goodes is racist' ..It's the age of rampant political correctness and it helps NOBODY.

So easy to say racists/sexist these days as you can't be wrong. No-one can argue against it as you will also be labelled sexist/racist.

But what It does do is cheapen the argument of those who are truly being victimised via racist/sexist conduct. All for sport, or in the media's case, relevance

Sent from my SM-G930F using Tapatalk

 

[Chubberson]

As we all know, hormones run riot and lead to behavioural irregularities in women during the 'menstrual cycle' as scientifically proven. Could this have affected the decision making ability of Katie during this stressful time?

 

[gordo2016]

I think she has been poorly advised the whole way. What footy player would think going to this extreme to change a rule. Bulldogs from the start have ballsed this up and have just continued to embarrass themselves for some strange reason.

Why not just goto the afl to get heard like they would in the afl? Have stupidly played the discrimination card.

And at the same time have ruined the reputation of their captain. I feel sorry for her. Bulldogs no class and doing so much damage and no good at all

Sent from my SM-G930F using Tapatalk

She will have her critics like anyone who challenges the system and she will have just as many people who support her. You can say she has been advised poorly, but she makes her own decisions and there can only be one winner by taking this to the Human Rights Commission and that is her. They will mediate with the AFL and the big boys of the AFL will hardly risk going to Federal Court and face the prospect of losing a discrimination case against an AFWL player. The only reputations who will be ruined will be those in the AFL, Brennan will be laughing all the way to the bank. Has played it to a tee and will end up getting exactly what she wants. Brennan has been a trailblazer for women's football and will be remembered as the woman who took on the boys club and won. Reputation and profile will grow and she will make shitloads out of it. Good luck to her.

 

[Slack Nang]

Katie Brennan is not only right in challenging the AFL over their sexism, she is righteous

The AFL is an extremely sexist org. and this has been proved on numerous occasions

I am disgusted with the contempt the AFL have treated the women's comp this year. From arbitrary rule changes to the unfair way in which the rules were applied. There is no way that tackle would be cited in the AFL

That is the case with K.B.

I am so proud of the Footscray Football Club and Katie for taking a stand

 

[MagpieJo]

You need to learn thr rules, and really fast because you’re eroding any sense of integrity you’ve got left in this forum.

You can’t sling tackle players. You can’t pin the arms and slam them down that way. Cordner was affected by that tackle. I suggest you look at it.

Exactly. She did the wrong thing, this is nothing to do with gender.

 

[MagpieJo]

She will have her critics like anyone who challenges the system and she will have just as many people who support her. You can say she has been advised poorly, but she makes her own decisions and there can only be one winner by taking this to the Human Rights Commission and that is her. They will mediate with the AFL and the big boys of the AFL will hardly risk going to Federal Court and face the prospect of losing a discrimination case against an AFWL player. The only reputations who will be ruined will be those in the AFL, Brennan will be laughing all the way to the bank. Has played it to a tee and will end up getting exactly what she wants. Brennan has been a trailblazer for women's football and will be remembered as the woman who took on the boys club and won. Reputation and profile will grow and she will make shitloads out of it. Good luck to her.

She won’t get that premiership medal though. And I doubt she would win a discrimination case, she broke a rule, simple as that.

 

[MagpieJo]

Yer, if Paddy missed a GF because of a pissweak tackle that caused no injury, I'm sure you would be saying that was justice. She wont get a ring but she will show the AFL up for their shithouse rules and they will change them.

I’d lay odds the rules won5 change, and nor should they. Sling tackles are dangerous

 

[demondavey]

Katie Brennan is not only right in challenging the AFL over their sexism, she is righteous

The AFL is an extremely sexist org. and this has been proved on numerous occasions

I am disgusted with the contempt the AFL have treated the women's comp this year. From arbitrary rule changes to the unfair way in which the rules were applied. There is no way that tackle would be cited in the AFL

That is the case with K.B.

I am so proud of the Footscray Football Club and Katie for taking a stand

So why not contest the rules when the laws of the game where handed down? Why wait until now to make an issue out of nothing? Have you actually seen the tackle? It was dangerous and negligent. I’ve seen male AFL players rubbed out for that.

What arbitrary rule changes occurred? You do reason there are variances in the rules at high level football leagues throughout the country right? The AFLW clubs signed off on these rules so that they could protect the financial position of the players when sanctioned.

Have you stopped to actually review all this? The WB have been places in a precarious situation with their captain suspended. They’ve tried to go down every avenue within the laws of the game, then someone has said ‘let’s call this sexual discrimination’. Why? Because the rules YOU SIGNED UP TO SEEM TO INCONVENIENCE YOU WHEN THE PROVERBIAL HITS THE FAN!

Maybe Katie Brennan should’ve read that contract a bit better? I am sure within it stated the rules of the competition. The WB have simply gone out of their depth here, they’ve introduced this issue when blind Freddy can see two things;

1. The rules are set and signed upon
2. Brennan has history for rough conduct.

More poignantly, Brennan has history for rough conduct! Yes! She’s already been sanctioned for this behaviour yet she did it again! And now it’s sexual discrimination!?!

Sorry, that’s just not right. Nor is it fair on anyone. It’s unnecessarily painted men to be sexist pigs, and painted women to be victims who’ll cry DISCRIMINATION when things don’t go their way. Both aren’t true!

I also suggest you learn about Peter Gordon. This perennial sook was on 774 last week STILL whingeing about Chris Grant missing out on his Brownlow in 1997. The reason he gave was comical.

‘Under the CURRENT laws of the game that wouldn’t have happened and he wouldn’t be suspended’.

Well Peter, the current year is 2018 and 1997 is not current! It’s 21 years ago! No wonder this idiot has allowed this issue to formulate and play out like a pantomime.

 

[demondavey]

Katie Brennan is not only right in challenging the AFL over their sexism, she is righteous

The AFL is an extremely sexist org. and this has been proved on numerous occasions

I am disgusted with the contempt the AFL have treated the women's comp this year. From arbitrary rule changes to the unfair way in which the rules were applied. There is no way that tackle would be cited in the AFL

That is the case with K.B.

I am so proud of the Footscray Football Club and Katie for taking a stand

So why not contest the rules when the laws of the game where handed down? Why wait until now to make an issue out of nothing? Have you actually seen the tackle? It was dangerous and negligent. I’ve seen male AFL players rubbed out for that.

What arbitrary rule changes occurred? You do reason there are variances in the rules at high level football leagues throughout the country right? The AFLW clubs signed off on these rules so that they could protect the financial position of the players when sanctioned.

Have you stopped to actually review all this? The WB have been places in a precarious situation with their captain suspended. They’ve tried to go down every avenue within the laws of the game, then someone has said ‘let’s call this sexual discrimination’. Why? Because the rules YOU SIGNED UP TO SEEM TO INCONVENIENCE YOU WHEN THE PROVERBIAL HITS THE FAN!

Maybe Katie Brennan should’ve read that contract a bit better? I am sure within it stated the rules of the competition. The WB have simply gone out of their depth here, they’ve introduced this issue when blind Freddy can see two things;

1. The rules are set and signed upon
2. Brennan has history for rough conduct.

More poignantly, Brennan has history for rough conduct! Yes! She’s already been sanctioned for this behaviour yet she did it again! And now it’s sexual discrimination!?!

Sorry, that’s just not right. Nor is it fair on anyone. It’s unnecessarily painted men to be sexist pigs, and painted women to be victims who’ll cry DISCRIMINATION when things don’t go their way. Both aren’t true!

I also suggest you learn about Peter Gordon. This perennial sook was on 774 last week STILL whingeing about Chris Grant missing out on his Brownlow in 1997. The reason he gave was comical.

‘Under the CURRENT laws of the game that wouldn’t have happened and he wouldn’t be suspended’.

Well Peter, the current year is 2018 and 1997 is not current! It’s 21 years ago! No wonder this idiot has allowed this issue to formulate and play out like a pantomime.

 

[demondavey]

Disagree. The QC's in Federal Court get paid just about as much in an hour as what female footballers earn for playing the whole season. As if the AFL would want it to go that far, they cant afford it to. As well as that, it will be a public relations disaster for the AFL, they cannot afford the risk of being labelled as discriminatory, it will kill the reputation of McLachlan and his cronies. Put your house on KB getting what she wants and rightly so.

No it won’t, because it’s obvious it isn’t

 

[Catters 070911]

Firstly, I don't think there was much in the incident, as the other girl was able to play on, and her head hardly hit the ground. It is a gross overreaction by dickhead jury-of-one Michael Christian.

The last time I looked, tackling was allowed in the game. It wasn't malicious. I think that this is a way that the AFL are secretly trying to get the tackle out of the game.

I thought this rule was brought in to stop concussion. There was no concussion, so there should be no suspension.

Also, she has a point. The women have less games before they get suspended than the men.

For a man to get a two-game suspension, it means that he misses 2 games out of 20 (or 23 with finals). That means he misses most likely only 1/10th of the season.

For a woman, a two game penalty means that they only play six of a possible eight games, meaning she can miss 1/3rd or 1/4th of the games during the season.

So a two-game suspension has a bigger impact in AFLW than the AFL men's competition.

The sooner Michael Christian is taken off making tribunal decisions, and they find something that works more efficiently, the better.

 

[Catters 070911]

So why not contest the rules when the laws of the game where handed down? Why wait until now to make an issue out of nothing? Have you actually seen the tackle? It was dangerous and negligent. I’ve seen male AFL players rubbed out for that.

What arbitrary rule changes occurred? You do reason there are variances in the rules at high level football leagues throughout the country right? The AFLW clubs signed off on these rules so that they could protect the financial position of the players when sanctioned.

Have you stopped to actually review all this? The WB have been places in a precarious situation with their captain suspended. They’ve tried to go down every avenue within the laws of the game, then someone has said ‘let’s call this sexual discrimination’. Why? Because the rules YOU SIGNED UP TO SEEM TO INCONVENIENCE YOU WHEN THE PROVERBIAL HITS THE FAN!

Maybe Katie Brennan should’ve read that contract a bit better? I am sure within it stated the rules of the competition. The WB have simply gone out of their depth here, they’ve introduced this issue when blind Freddy can see two things;

1. The rules are set and signed upon
2. Brennan has history for rough conduct.

More poignantly, Brennan has history for rough conduct! Yes! She’s already been sanctioned for this behaviour yet she did it again! And now it’s sexual discrimination!?!

Sorry, that’s just not right. Nor is it fair on anyone. It’s unnecessarily painted men to be sexist pigs, and painted women to be victims who’ll cry DISCRIMINATION when things don’t go their way. Both aren’t true!

I also suggest you learn about Peter Gordon. This perennial sook was on 774 last week STILL whingeing about Chris Grant missing out on his Brownlow in 1997. The reason he gave was comical.

‘Under the CURRENT laws of the game that wouldn’t have happened and he wouldn’t be suspended’.

Well Peter, the current year is 2018 and 1997 is not current! It’s 21 years ago! No wonder this idiot has allowed this issue to formulate and play out like a pantomime.

"The rules are set upon"

Yeah, but the rule is stupid.

If you think the tackle was dangerous, why not just ban the tackle for AFL altogether. Hey, someone might accidentally force someone's head into the ground and cause them a "concussion".

You know what else people sign up to? The chance of copping a concussion when they play a contact sport, where the chances of getting a head hit is more likely than the man in the street. Once they cross the white line, they are physically agreeing to cop whatever happens out there, within reason (and the last time I looked, tacking is within the rules). Concussion is an occupational hazard of playing football. Sure, do some things to minimise it, but stopping tackles being laid isn't the solution.

Next thing, boxers will want to sue for concussion and head-hits.