Retired 14. Liam Jones

[mickelboy182]

The new policy forced him retire. That’s what happens when you change the status quo. If the policy was that only players over 200cm could play, you’d concede he would have been forced to retire. You’re confused here by the illusion of choice.

Let’s say you went with your family to the park for a nice picnic in the sunshine. Halfway through, it starts raining and some drunk skinheads turn up and start playing loud death metal and swearing. You could say if the family ended their picnic at that point that it was their choice, but it would be equally as truthful to say that choice was made for them by changing circumstance.

if you don’t want to see the other side of the coin fine, but it sure does exist.

Both of those examples are utterly inane. Your first example WOULD be a forced retirement as there is no solution.
The second example sure (ignoring the fact that it is drawing an incredibly long bow), it 100% is their choice as they don't like the changed circumstances. Facts are they have changed and that family had the choice to stay or leave.

 

[KaiserJovan]

Drunk skinheads at the park playing loud death metal and swearing? I reckon you have to be a few stubbies short of a six-pack to come up with such a specific scenario to illustrate such a banal point.

I know the reaction to Mick Martyn's recruitment to Princes Park was a bit mixed but do you have to attack the poor baldies?!?!?

 

[katmanblue]

The new policy forced him retire.

Did it?

Jones hasn't officially said this. Which is the argument the AFL are going with. All they 'know' is that Jones retired. The reasons are between the club and Jones. The club is doing the right thing be Liam by not disclosing the negotiations to the AFL.

The AFL can't be seen (according to them) to be making these sorts of decisions without an official statements and only rumours.

Jones' retirement hurts Carlton. His continued silence hurts us again.

 

[swuzzlebubble]

Jones hasn't officially said this. Which is the argument the AFL are going with. All they 'know' is that Jones retired. The reasons are between the club and Jones.

Do the AFL want Jones to release the findings of his independent research or just a generic statement "My retirement was due to the Covid vax policy".

 

[Cripps 'n' Blue Bloods]

The new policy forced him retire. That’s what happens when you change the status quo. If the policy was that only players over 200cm could play, you’d concede he would have been forced to retire. You’re confused here by the illusion of choice.

Let’s say you went with your family to the park for a nice picnic in the sunshine. Halfway through, it starts raining and some drunk skinheads turn up and start playing loud death metal and swearing. You could say if the family ended their picnic at that point that it was their choice, but it would be equally as truthful to say that choice was made for them by changing circumstance.

if you don’t want to see the other side of the coin fine, but it sure does exist.

I think the problem here is your use of the word 'forced'. He wasn't forced to do anything.
In your first analogy, he absolutely would be forced to retire. He wouldn't have a choice, because he can't choose to grow to meet the new requirements.
In the real life scenario, he does have a choice, meaning he is not forced. The rule change might be a 100% deciding factor in his retirement, but it's still not forced, as the second option of getting vaxxed and playing on is available to him, but he's choosing not to take it.

There's an argument that the club has been forced into a position where they have lost a healthy best 22 player, who otherwise likely would have played on, through no fault of their own and should be compensated as such by the AFL, but if we apply a free agent style compensation to him, like Waite, chances are we get nothing anyway.

 

[FRUMPY]

Liam is exactly the same player he was 12 months ago. Nothing has changed with him.

The AFL policy is not the same as it was 12 months ago. Something has changed with it.

You are wrong.

He can still be on the list - he CHOSE to retire.....

 

[agro]

Did it?

Jones hasn't officially said this. Which is the argument the AFL are going with. All they 'know' is that Jones retired. The reasons are between the club and Jones. The club is doing the right thing be Liam by not disclosing the negotiations to the AFL.

The AFL can't be seen (according to them) to be making these sorts of decisions without an official statements and only rumours.

Can’t be anymore ludicrous and hypocritical than the Essendon “we don’t know what we took but we know it wasn’t illegal” defence and the AFL came in with number 1 draft pick and as many top up players as you want assistance

 

[swuzzlebubble]

He can still be on the list - he CHOSE to retire.....

If the AFL are interested in his reasons it's not about whether he was forced to retire or not.

 

[FRUMPY]

If the AFL are interested in his reasons it's not about whether he was forced to retire or not.

Its no different to anyone else retiring out of the blue at this point of the season.

 

[swuzzlebubble]

Its no different to anyone else retiring out of the blue at this point of the season.

The AFL wouldn't be giving it consideration if it was that straight forward

 

[CJMB]

AFL vax policy kinda means jack s*** here. By choosing to be unvaccinated he'd chosen to not enter the club/any sports stadiums/etc in Victoria, and likely other states too. That's on Liam.

The AFL policies regarding inactive list and contract termination period (form mid-May) mean that we're not stuck paying a full contract to someone who due to a personal decision is unable to enter his place of work to train or a stadium to play, likely across the country. Now that would suck.


You don't get some kind of priority pick anytime anyone retires earlier than expected, and we shouldn't get one. Having the option to fill his list spot through the ND would be nice, but it's not the end of the world if we have to wait until SSP.

 

[Monkey King]

The AFL wouldn't be giving it consideration if it was that straight forward

The AFL would be desperate to avoid taking any responsibility for compensating anyone over this policy.

If you compensate a club, you might have to compensate a player.

That doesn't make it right though.

 

[bmaurizio]

one respects an individual’s freedom of choice but let’s put this way, Liam certainly didn’t us any favours by refusing to adhere to government & AFL policies , retiring without comment.

 

[Monkey King]

He can still be on the list - he CHOSE to retire.....

I think the problem here is your use of the word 'forced'. He wasn't forced to do anything.

I think the problem with the posts replying to mine is the illusion of choice. If I put a gun to your head and said eat a s**t sandwich or I'll pull the trigger, one may claim you ate it by choice, but that's not the full story. I changed the status quo and created a scenario where you had to "choose" something you would never have otherwise chosen had I not changed the status quo.

Yes, Jones made a choice, but he was forced to make that choice.

EDIT: And I know no one put a gun to Jones' head. If you can't separate processes from details or are seeking perfect analogies, don't bother replying. (not you guys, but other posters I've not quoted)

 

[Elmer_Judd]

I think the problem with the posts replying to mine is the illusion of choice. If I put a gun to your head and said eat a sh*t sandwich or I'll pull the trigger, one may claim you ate it by choice, but that's not the full story. I changed the status quo and created a scenario where you had to "choose" something you would never have otherwise chosen had I not changed the status quo.

Yes, Jones made a choice, but he was forced to make that choice.

And I know no one put a gun to Jones' head. It processes over details. If your beef is about perfect analogies, don't bother replying. (not you specifically btw)

In an ideal world, Jones or any other person shouldn't be put in such a position if they have (and I do believe there are many out there) sincere reasons for not getting the jab, unfortunately this is unprecedented times dealing with an disease that has killed millions worldwide, and put a stop to our day to day lives for the last 2 years

I am certainly not going to bad mouth Liam Jones for his decision to walk, the bloke got knocked out/sent to hospital several times in acts of courage playing for our club.

 

[FRUMPY]

I think the problem with the posts replying to mine is the illusion of choice. If I put a gun to your head and said eat a sh*t sandwich or I'll pull the trigger, one may claim you ate it by choice, but that's not the full story. I changed the status quo and created a scenario where you had to "choose" something you would never have otherwise chosen had I not changed the status quo.

Yes, Jones made a choice, but he was forced to make that choice.

EDIT: And I know no one put a gun to Jones' head. If you can't separate processes from details or are seeking perfect analogies, don't bother replying. (not you guys, but other posters I've not quoted)

In your scenario he was offered a sandwich 95% of the population have eaten, not sure 95% of the population would eat a s**t sandwich

Liam chose to quit and will sit at home doing nothing until he is jabbed

Sent from my CPH2005 using Tapatalk

 

[blue healer]

In your scenario he was offered a sandwich 95% of the population have eaten, not sure 95% of the population would eat a sh*t sandwich

Liam chose to quit and will sit at home doing nothing until he is jabbed

Sent from my CPH2005 using Tapatalk

Whether he quit or not he was still going to be sitting at home doing nothing until he was jabbed.

And why was it that he quit again?

 

[Healer]

Whether he quit or not he was still going to be sitting at home doing nothing until he was jabbed.

And why was it that he quit again?

As it is Liams right to choose.
He can sit at home until he gets vaccinated or sit at until he contracts Covid, gets ill, then perhaps gets vaccinated later.
I absolutely support his right to choice but there seems to be an inevitable outcome at some point.

 

[Brackets]

The AFL compensate teams each year due to losing players that chose to leave.

To frame the Jones situation as an alternative scenario, would you support a draftee's vaccination status remaining confidential until drafted?

 

[Monkey King]

In your scenario he was offered a sandwich 95% of the population have eaten, not sure 95% of the population would eat a sh*t sandwich

Liam chose to quit and will sit at home doing nothing until he is jabbed

So because 95% of people would do something, the 5% who wouldn't aren't being forced? Sorry, but this is nonsense.

And Liam is studying a university course btw. Not sure why you wish to misrepresent him as a person. Poor form.

 

[mickelboy182]

The AFL compensate teams each year due to losing players that chose to leave.

To frame the Jones situation as an alternative scenario, would you support a draftee's vaccination status remaining confidential until drafted?

Nope, it's something that they need to be totally upfront about.

 

[FRUMPY]

Whether he quit or not he was still going to be sitting at home doing nothing until he was jabbed.

And why was it that he quit again?

No-one knows why. But either way he is to blame for the situation, no-one else.

Sent from my CPH2005 using Tapatalk

 

[FRUMPY]

So because 95% of people would do something, the 5% who wouldn't aren't being forced? Sorry, but this is nonsense.

And Liam is studying a university course btw. Not sure why you wish to misrepresent him as a person. Poor form.

How have I misrepresented him as a person?

I don't care if he got jabbed or not, it's his choice. But the AFL don't need to compensate us for anything. It is no different to any other player retiring at this point of the year.

He could have done it before the list lodgement deadline if he wanted to but chose not to. It's his fault we are in this situation, no one else's (not that it's a big deal - he wasn't going to part of our next flag)

Sent from my CPH2005 using Tapatalk

 

[Monkey King]

How have I misrepresented him as a person?

I don't care if he got jabbed or not, it's his choice. But the AFL don't need to compensate us for anything. It is no different to any other player retiring at this point of the year.

He could have done it before the list lodgement deadline if he wanted to but chose not to. It's his fault we are in this situation, no one else's (not that it's a big deal - he wasn't going to part of our next flag)

Sent from my CPH2005 using Tapatalk

By suggesting he's going to sit around and do nothing, rather than be actively pursuing education, as he is. It wasn't necessary to say that.

That's fine you don't agree with my thoughts on compensation. I accept that.

But suggesting Jones' retirement wasn't forced from a policy change is something I don't accept.

 

[Arr0w]

No one forced Jones to do anything. Forced implies a lack of options

Players can chose to be vaccinated or not