5AA in Deep Schmitt OFFICIAL AFLUA RELEASE

[Portia]

Originally posted by roobear
Good golly, how did this become a club v club or state v state thing?

I think it became an underdog thing. Stephen Rowe is an ex-Norwood centreman of very little brain, he says something stupid, and now he's got the rep of the biggest football media company hunting him down, and now the umpire whose name was involved is coming in on the deal after this rumor was spread nation wide by channel nine.

If Eddie in his two-hat position hadn't blown it up on live TV, then would a) Collingwood have accepted an apology, or b) would the umpire be worried if some idiot said something on SA radio?

The fact that it all got relayed in primetime on a national TV network is what has him going for defamation....Stephen Rowe can thank Two Hat Eddie for using Channel Nine as his Collingwood forum.

 

[roobear]

Originally posted by Porthos
If Eddie in his two-hat position hadn't blown it up on live TV...

...we would have heard "someone in Adelaide said there were rumours that Collingwood bribed the umpire in the figjam case", and if the Pies and umpires weren't pursuing it with relentless vigour, many members of the general public would have wondered if there was any truth.

Also, the head of the umpires association was on Triple M the following morning and left no doubt that they were taking legal advice about what avenues for action were available, so to suggest they were tacking on to the back of Collingwood "after the event" is a bit misleading, too.

 

[JUBJUB]

Originally posted by Porthos


And the next time Sam Newman calls Graham Cornes or KG a peabrain, it'll be interesting to see what the lawyers do.

What if its proven they are peabrains ?

 

[Portia]

Originally posted by roobear
...we would have heard "someone in Adelaide said there were rumours that Collingwood bribed the umpire in the figjam case", and if the Pies and umpires weren't pursuing it with relentless vigour, many members of the general public would have wondered if there was any truth.

But most likely, I would imagine that the umpire involved would've been amenable to a full on-air apology. Now that its nationwide, and Eddie has made a big deal out of it, the umpires have no real choice but to make an example of him.

Also, the head of the umpires association was on Triple M the following morning and left no doubt that they were taking legal advice about what avenues for action were available, so to suggest they were tacking on to the back of Collingwood "after the event" is a bit misleading, too.

Sure, no problem. Didn't Smorgon make a similar statement after whoever it was (McMahon) had a big serve at the Dogs? I don't recall any legal action resulting from that.

If it was a Doug Hawkins that had made a comment like this, I feel sure that there would be no legal action, and an apology would be accepted, because of the poor public perception of having a go at a likeable ex-footballer who is a bit thick and says dumb things sometimes.

But because most of Australia has no idea who Rowe is, he's going to get the lot - no media sympathy there. He's too small to avoid being made an example of, and thats pretty average.

 

[Pessimistic]

I expect Collingwood to take this all the way in the courts - not wimp out to an 'out of court settlement' etc.

We had to sit through an Eddie 'sulk' on friday night and if he does not make good his threat to take it 'all the way' then he should apologise to TV watchers for his self indulgence.

Do it Eddie.

 

[FIGJAM]

Originally posted by Porthos
So as long as the group is large enough, you can call them whatever you like? Nice.

Originally posted by Jars458
Get lost you Collingwood moron

Go and eat off the floor with your fellow pie supporters

Aparantly!

 

[Jars458]

Originally posted by FIGJAM



Aparantly!

Surely on BigFooty reataliation is not an offence!!

 

[Jars458]

Originally posted by Pessimistic
I expect Collingwood to take this all the way in the courts - not wimp out to an 'out of court settlement' etc.

We had to sit through an Eddie 'sulk' on friday night and if he does not make good his threat to take it 'all the way' then he should apologise to TV watchers for his self indulgence.

Do it Eddie.

The legal bills will be far higher than any damages awarded and there is no gurantee that costs will be awarded against teh losing party.

If he takes it all the way - its a disgrace - accept the apology and move on.

 

[FIGJAM]

Originally posted by Jars458
Surely on BigFooty reataliation is not an offence!!

Technically retalliation is a defence, but having a go at a group of people with the insinuation that they eat of the floor is an abomination!! Frankly it disgusts me.

We Collingwood folk have moved from the floor to the "Stable Table" years ago!!

 

[Docker_Brat]

Originally posted by FIGJAM

Technically retalliation is a defence, but having a go at a group of people with the insinuation that they eat of the floor is an abomination!! Frankly it disgusts me.

We Collingwood folk have moved from the floor to the "Stable Table" years ago!!

Pleased to see that you guys are taking evolutionary steps. Next you'll be using cutlery.

Kudos!

 

[hotpie]

If you listen closely to the transcripts Steven Rowe said that Collingwood went "to no lengths" to get Buckley acquitted.

That means he alleged Collingwood did nothing at all....

Maybe Steven Rowe can use bad grammar as his defence?

Collingwood will go "to any length" to hang him high.

Remember the Pies are still ****ed at Adelaide for letting Whitnall off at the tribunal last year after an Adelaide game.... thus allowing the Crows an easier path to the finals at Collingwood's expense...

 

[PrideOf]

Rowe was just dumb.

He should have done it like Eddie does on the CFS on Thursday night. He should have said that there is a red hot rumour that a club may have been involved in some underhanded dealings with the tribunal during the season and he couldn't say any more.

The way Eddie does means he doesn't get sued, but manages to throw mud at anyone who may be remotely connected.

 

[Crow54]

Originally posted by Porthos



If it was a Doug Hawkins that had made a comment like this, I feel sure that there would be no legal action, and an apology would be accepted, because of the poor public perception of having a go at a likeable ex-footballer who is a bit thick and says dumb things sometimes.

But because most of Australia has no idea who Rowe is, he's going to get the lot - no media sympathy there. He's too small to avoid being made an example of, and thats pretty average.

Porthos, I can't believe I'm agreeing with a Port supporter!

But you are entirely right!

Taken from today's 'Tiser: "Collingwood Football Club and AFL field umpire Justin Schmitt have offered radio station 5AA settlement terms to avoid a defamation battle in court over its unsubstantiated bribery allegations.

(A) C/wood board member.....said the Magpies "wanted a sensible solution" to bring a quick end to the fallout to the alleged bribery scandal. It is understood the Magpies want another set of apologies and cash from the top-rating AM station."

The article goes on to say that 5AA has offered another round of on-air apologies to C/wood (including Eddie) and the umpire concerned, and financial compensation to the Magpies and Schmitt.

The article points out that Stephen Rowe is a breakfast sports announcer, and commentator at AFL games. Stephen Rowe is not a journalist.

 

[Zack]

The best rumour I heard about this, this week was that Eddie paid Stephen Rowe to say it in an attempt to help Buckley win the Brownlow and because he had heard about the McMahon Article and was worried it had taken too much publicity off himself and Collingwood.

Could expalin the undisclosed sum out of court settlement... nah I don't believe it either.

Still nobody questioned the AFL for fixing the Phil Matera umpire getting in the way case as a favour to collingwood? for him not getting anything for knocking out the collingwood player the week before. (which I agree he should have for the player not the umpire)

Mmm BTW I thought what Buckley did was fair and within the rules and that he should have got off.

 

[TheFoxhat]

Sue the SCUM

 

[rubberman]

Eddie makes it harder to believe that hes only wearing one hat when in a game that didnt involve collywobbles, he opened with the bribery allegations, then put on the other hat to call the game, changed at halftime again and i didnt bother to watch the rest. What a ****er he is (so sue me).

 

[Joffaboy]

What in hell is wrong with you South Australians (rhetorical question I suppose)?
The inference you are making is that this Rowe fool is being victimised because he is from South Australia.

What a crock!!!

The umpire is a former croweater and Collingwood needs to nip these broadcast rumors in the bud.

If these is fire to the smoke let Rowe and 5AA prove it.

Wake up guys. If a talkback caller defames somebody the radio station can be sued.
It isn't just a case of "lets bash a South Australian" for the sake of it.
Collingwood would have taken this action if it was radio Kalgoolie or Radio Cairns or radio Devenport. It is not where it is what.

Get over your screaming provincial insecurities GEEEEZ!!!!

 

[Portia]

Originally posted by Joffaboy
What in hell is wrong with you South Australians (rhetorical question I suppose)?

And already you have the points against you.

The inference you are making is that this Rowe fool is being victimised because he is from South Australia.

No, he's being victimised because he has no friends in the football media, which is based in Victoria, because he's not played footy in Victoria.

The umpire is a former croweater and Collingwood needs to nip these broadcast rumors in the bud.

Which is no problem. What is a problem is making what could have been worked out out of court into an enormous national issue by means of Eddie kicking up a stink about a Collingwood matter in primetime on Channel Nine, where it could have been worked out relatively amicably otherwise.

Now they're hunting Rowe down to make an example of him, which they wouldn't do if he was a likeable but stupid ex-AFL/VFL player instead of a Norwood player who did a little at the Crows.

Wake up guys. If a talkback caller defames somebody the radio station can be sued.

Agreed. Yet for all the defamatory comments that have been thrown around in the last several years, this is the only one that is being followed through. Is it because Rowe is too small to fight back? Yes.

It isn't just a case of "lets bash a South Australian" for the sake of it.

No, I'm sure a Western Australian would have been just as ****ed. Or pretty much anyone on the periphery of the media that isn't a nationally likeable personality[/B][/QUOTE]

Collingwood would have taken this action if it was radio Kalgoolie or Radio Cairns or radio Devenport. It is not where it is what.

If Eddie is short on news and wants to make a mountain range out of a hill, then yes, they could. Of course, they could have used some discretion and not tried to ruin an ex-player's career, but it appears that the new Collingwood doesn't go for that.

Get over your screaming provincial insecurities GEEEEZ!!!!

Whatever.

 

[Crow54]

All of the above. Porthos, you'll have to stop sounding so sensible, I'm starting to like you!

 

[Lockyer24]

So youre saying Victorians wouldn't have heard about Rowes comments if he hadnt have brought it up on Friday Night Football? Eddies role that night was in the media, he presents the latest news, Collingwood or non Collingwood related. If you think he only said it because he is the President of the club as well you are dreaming. Shifting the blame of which your own stupidity started.

In regards to Rowe some responsibility comes with being in the media..we have to put up with anti-Collingwood crap all the time, this guy crossed the line saying we cheated in a serious context.

I dont care if the station/Rowe is sued personally. Nothing will ever drag our great club down let alone some stupid South Australian's allegations.

Go Pies

 

[PrideOf]

It isn't just a case of "lets bash a South Australian" for the sake of it.

Firstly, everything Porthos said.

Secondly, if all this "that South Australian scum" crap wasn't just a case of bash a South Australian for the sake of it, then why aren't Caroline Wilson, Robert Walls, Mike Sheahan etc etc etc called those Victorian ****ers when they cop flak?

They're just called idiots or worse. No reference to state at all.

You're sure it isn't just a case of let's bash a South Australian?

Get over your screaming provincial insecurities GEEEEZ!!!!

Happy to. But one of the arguments in this thread is apparently that Rowe is a South Australian idiot in the media. You lot put the provincial argument up in the first place.

 

[Jars458]

Originally posted by Joffaboy
What in hell is wrong with you South Australians (rhetorical question I suppose)?

Please don't generalise

I do not endorse teh comments of Crow54 and Porthos on this matter

Rowe is an idiot and deserves what he gets.

The Umpire at least deserves financial compensation

As far as the Magpies go - I am not sure they have really suffered any damage here. For a company - any publicity is good publicity

 

[Portia]

Originally posted by Lockyer24
So youre saying Victorians wouldn't have heard about Rowes comments if he hadnt have brought it up on Friday Night Football?

I'm saying that any impact made by Rowe's rumor was incredibly greatened by Eddie's making a fuss out of it on Friday Night Football.

Eddies role that night was in the media, he presents the latest news, Collingwood or non Collingwood related. If you think he only said it because he is the President of the club as well you are dreaming.

So when the Collingwood president is on air talking about an allegation that he has decided that Collingwood will look into, he's not wearing two hats? My arse.

In regards to Rowe some responsibility comes with being in the media..we have to put up with anti-Collingwood crap all the time, this guy crossed the line saying we cheated in a serious context.

I agree. Yet in other cases, when the story isn't immediately blown out on prime time TV, things can be worked out better. I'm sure the umpire involved would have appreciated a more low key affair, rather than have the rumor of him taking bribes spread across the nation. And most clubs would rather keep it down.

The problem is that when Eddie speaks in his role as a commentator, about a Collingwood issue, which this is, he's carrying the weight of both the Collingwood FC and Channel Nine behind whatever he says. This is why, when in other situations Rowe might be at least be seen as some kind of underdog within the media, this isn't happening this time.

Channel Nine is the biggest TV conglomerate in Australia, and when you're their spokesman on football issues, then mixing it up with what was really a Collingwood issue is going to result in big explosions and messy situations like this, rather than the amicable apologies and so forth that have been seen previously in defamation cases involving the AFL.

I dont care if the station/Rowe is sued personally. Nothing will ever drag our great club down let alone some stupid South Australian's allegations.

Then why sue him, get him sacked, and make such a big deal about it?

 

[Crow54]

Exactly!

 

[Joffaboy]

Originally posted by Porthos

Then why sue him, get him sacked, and make such a big deal about it?

Because he deserves to be sued. It will serve notice that you just cant say unsubstainiated defamatory rubbish on the public record and get away with it.

Let me ask put forward a senerio.
A Victorian club had been knocked back by the AFL when they wanted the go ahead with a fund raising exercise, and in the following week Port Adelaide got the go ahead to do something similiar (but not quite the same) as the Victorian club.
The parochial minority of the Victorian media and supporters are up in arms over the decision and proclaims this is again proof that the AFL favours interstate sides.
This bubbles along in the media and on footy forums such as bigfooty.
It is still fresh in the minds of footy followers when a media personality openly states on a radion broadcast that the AFL has been bribed by the interstate club so they could get the go ahead.

The furore from across would be (understandably) huge.
The club and the AFL would have their reputations damaged by these unsubstaintiated claims (that are a product and feed on to already help prejudices ie Victorians believing that the AFL is bias toward interstate sides).

Now in the above situation the club and the ruling body have had their reputations sullied. This could affect all types of sponsorships, and deals such as TV rights. The two parties have every right to test the claims of bribery in a court of law where evidence is tested and judged.

What is the difference between the above and what this Rowe did?
His comments fed on preconceived prejudices (ie the tribunal favours Vic - Buckley, over South Assies- McLeod) and tried to sully the reputations of both a respected football club (and with most people Collingwood is respected - it is only their supporters who are suspect), and a young man who not only is an AFL umpire, but an aspiring lawer.
The allegation also put umpiring in a very bad light at a time when umpires are already in short supply.

The station must work on a seven second time delay and had the chance to cut Rowe, but wanted to run with it.

I say good on you Collingwood and Umpire Schmitt. If my club was defamed in such an appalling manner I hope they would react in the same way.