An interesting precedent

[chook2734]

I know there is countless threads on the Taz incident, but I thought the club's actions in 'inviting' the AFL to conduct the investigation and it's ramifications for future incidents deserved it's own thread. I don't think we even need to discuss the Tarrant case here, just more the reasoning behind what the club has done, and what it means for the future.

I'll admit my first reaction was severe disappointment in the club (be it Schwab, Hart or whoever has made this decision) I'm willing to give them the benefit of the doubt and wait for the outcome, but I do wonder whether the player was consulted prior to this happening, whether the Dockers own investigations had concluded (and if they will be made public) and what circumstances led them to make this decision in the first place.

If the decision to allow the AFL to carry out the investigation is to provide a more 'credible' outcome, then I find it extraordinarily sad that the club feel they have less credibility than the AFL (an organisation with zero credibility in my eyes in any case).

If the AFL has approached the club, I'd like an answer from Demetriou and Anderson as to why this is the case. Why have they not investigated other incidents that are current or very recent and what criteria will they be setting for determining which incidents require their involvement in the future.

If the club has called on the AFL to step in for reasons other than 'credibility' then what were those reasons? I think as members we deserve some kind of explanation, and I'm certain that the players deserve some kind of explanation or illustration as to what circumstances will lead to the club handing them over to the AFL in any future incidents.

The club showed outstanding leadership and understanding of the situation in the Farmer case and I believe they handed out an appropriate penalty. I don't understand the necessity for the AFL's involvement here - Schwab, Connolly, Shaw, Hart and the board have shown us they are all capable of putting the club before their emotions or personal needs. Why can't they do that in this case?

 

[dugrene]

Pontius Pilot would be proud of our Club.

 

[dominguez]

If the club has called on the AFL to step in for reasons other than 'credibility' then what were those reasons? I think as members we deserve some kind of explanation, and I'm certain that the players deserve some kind of explanation or illustration as to what circumstances will lead to the club handing them over to the AFL in any future incidents.

I'd say it's because of the fact that many of the witnesses live in Darwin, and because the club has other more pressing issues to discuss. I do think it was a strange move, especially considering the AFL's crack down on offending women. I'm expecting their report to be quite damning, and Tarrant to miss a fortnight. If the AFL aren't satisfied with the punishment they may step in like they did with Braun.

The Fremantle Football Club will still decide on Tarrant's punishment (if any), the AFL will interview witnesses and report on what happened.

 

[chook2734]

Pontius Pilot would be proud of our Club.

And some would say thay hve already crucified (Purple) Jesus

 

[voodoo_86]

Apparently the club did finish its investigation. Perhaps it was going to result in no serious punishment being handed out. The media would have a field day.

If the AFL investigates, and the same result applies, then they have - not a more credible - but at least a more impartial investigation to back that up.

If in fact this has been forced by the AFL then its utter crap, but I personally believe the above scenario.

 

[chook2734]

I'd say it's because of the fact that many of the witnesses live in Darwin, and because the club has other more pressing issues to discuss. I do think it was a strange move, especially considering the AFL's crack down on offending women. I'm expecting their report to be quite damning, and Tarrant to miss a fortnight. If the AFL aren't satisfied with the punishment they may step in like they did with Braun.

The Fremantle Football Club will still decide on Tarrant's punishment (if any), the AFL will interview witnesses and report on what happened.

If that's the explanation then that is weak by the club. If I was Tarrant I'd be telling my manager to do everything possible to get me back to Melbourne at the end of the year. They spend ridiculous amounts of money on frivolous things, but they aren't prepared to spend a bit of time or effort in sorting this out? If the club conducted it's own investigation, they could have concluded it by today, handed down their conclusion and any punishment if required. We get a story or two in the paper tomorrow and then it blows over. Instead, it drags on for another 48 hours, we get more degrading press and Tarrant is hung out to dry. I guess it does take a fair bit of pressure off the coach and his mate though (I may be completely wrong, but I don't know how else to look at this situation)

As for the offending women thing - seriously, how many women do you know that would be offended by Taz showing a butt cheek? Who made the AFL the bastion of women's rights? What gives them the right to decide what is or isn't offensive to women? I think the women of Australia need to tell Demetriou and Anderson to get ******.

 

[dugrene]

If that's the explanation then that is weak by the club. If I was Tarrant I'd be telling my manager to do everything possible to get me back to Melbourne at the end of the year. They spend ridiculous amounts of money on frivolous things, but they aren't prepared to spend a bit of time or effort in sorting this out? If the club conducted it's own investigation, they could have concluded it by today, handed down their conclusion and any punishment if required. We get a story or two in the paper tomorrow and then it blows over. Instead, it drags on for another 48 hours, we get more degrading press and Tarrant is hung out to dry. I guess it does take a fair bit of pressure off the coach and his mate though (I may be completely wrong, but I don't know how else to look at this situation)

As for the offending women thing - seriously, how many women do you know that would be offended by Taz showing a butt cheek? Who made the AFL the bastion of women's rights? What gives them the right to decide what is or isn't offensive to women? I think the women of Australia need to tell Demetriou and Anderson to get ******.

Good post chooky.

As for the offending women thing - seriously, how many women do you know that would be offended by Taz showing a butt cheek? Who made the AFL the bastion of women's rights? What gives them the right to decide what is or isn't offensive to women? I think the women of Australia need to tell Demetriou and Anderson to get ******.

We havnt heard from any females involved yet. So the investigation should not comment on hearsay regarding anything that might have been offensive to them.


If I was Tarrant I'd be telling my lawyers to make sure I havn't been defamed.

Seriously... I think FFC have made a smart move to pass the hot potato to the AFL.
No one ever said Pilot was fool.

 

[dominguez]

If that's the explanation then that is weak by the club. If I was Tarrant I'd be telling my manager to do everything possible to get me back to Melbourne at the end of the year. They spend ridiculous amounts of money on frivolous things, but they aren't prepared to spend a bit of time or effort in sorting this out? If the club conducted it's own investigation, they could have concluded it by today, handed down their conclusion and any punishment if required. We get a story or two in the paper tomorrow and then it blows over. Instead, it drags on for another 48 hours, we get more degrading press and Tarrant is hung out to dry. I guess it does take a fair bit of pressure off the coach and his mate though (I may be completely wrong, but I don't know how else to look at this situation)

I like the section that is highlighted. Anyone who has a crack at the relationship between Connolly and Schwab is a mate of mine, it's a farcical situation. Imagine your best mate deciding if you get to keep your job.

I can see the clubs point in going to the AFL though. The AFL will be able to round up the bloke that got whacked, his lady friend, bar staff, other patrons, McCartney, Tarrant and Solomon. If the club were to begin a thorough investigation today (assuming Tarrant has denied the reported chain of events) it would probably take them until Thursday to speak to everyone face to face anyway, and they would have less access to people involved.

The board are conducting their midyear assessment (thank f*** Ben Allan is on that board) during the break. I'd say they'd want to interview all coaches and players by Friday, to allow the focus to shift to Carlton. If the Tarrant situation were to tie them up until Thursday eveining it would leave little time for the more important matters.

I would say that regardless of the outcome Tarrant would be very apologetic. He said himself that he thought he didn't warrant his reputation in Melbourne and was going to prove his detractors wrong. At this point those who said he is an angry yobbo who can't kick are correct.

I'm confident that Farmer and Tarrant will return to the side with greater determination, it's a shame that our season will probably be down the toilet when they finally get to play together.

 

[West Coast 06]

Firstly I would just like to say that I really couldn't give a toss what Tarrant did or didn't do in Darwin. However the comments that you have made here certainly are amusing considering the Headland / Selwood case and the hoo-har that went with it.

Who made the AFL the bastion of women's rights? What gives them the right to decide what is or isn't offensive to women? I think the women of Australia need to tell Demetriou and Anderson to get ******.

Are these the same women who Selwood was made to apologise to for a comment (no matter whose version of events you choose to believe) that would never have been heard if it had stayed on the football field as it was intended?

Good post chooky.

We havnt heard from any females involved yet. So the investigation should not comment on hearsay regarding anything that might have been offensive to them.


If I was Tarrant I'd be telling my lawyers to make sure I havn't been defamed.

Seriously, you have got to be joking? How exactly has Tarrant been defamed? Did someone go on national radio and call him a pedophile or something? Has the media dragged his name through the mud without any right of reply because the incident is going before the AFL tribunal?

Has anyone made death threats against him, or indeed actually punched the crap out of him? No? Then statements like this may be a little bit of an over reaction then.

When all of this did happen to Selwood, Fremantle supporters scoffed at the thought that it could be considered defamation, funny how views change when it is one of your own isn't it? Thank God we didn't get Tarrant after all, you lot would have had him hung, drawn and quartered by now.

 

[chook2734]

I like the section that is highlighted. Anyone who has a crack at the relationship between Connolly and Schwab is a mate of mine, it's a farcical situation. Imagine your best mate deciding if you get to keep your job.
.

dom, I'm not one to generally have a problem with that relationship (I am one of the 'eternal optimists' or 'blind faithful' if you prefer) but I am just so angry and at such a complete loss to understand what is going on down there right now that it's the only thing I can think of.

How is Tarrant dealing with all this? He's the first player in the league to be left at the AFL's mercy, for showing his bum and whacking a bloke - that's pretty standard practice for a lot of AFL players it would seem -why has he been singled out? I honestly can't see how this can be any good for player relations at the club - if I was one of the players I'd be kicking up one hell of a racket. (Which makes me wonder where the AFLPA is right now??)

The club with the worst player behaviour in the league is telling the league to butt out and is dictating their own terms - what are we doing? apparently 'inviting' the AFL to investigate our players who are involved in a bit of a scuffle! This whole 'invitation' thing sounds like rubbish to me - this stinks of Demetriou and Anderson - I think the FFC is in for more punishment from the AFL and Taz is going to be the scapegoat.


We've kind of got a little off topic of what I was hoping to discuss though- do you think this is a good precedent? Are we going to see more of this happening?(obviously the answer is hopefully not, but we all know someone is going to screw up at some stage).

 

[chook2734]

Firstly I would just like to say that I really couldn't give a toss what Tarrant did or didn't do in Darwin. However the comments that you have made hear certainly are amusing considering the Headland / Selwood case and the hoo-har that went with it.Are these the same women who Selwood was made to apologise to for a comment (no matter whose version of events you choose to believe) that would never have been heard if it had stayed on the football field as it was intended?

This is completely not on topic and I know we shouldn't feed the trolls, but honestly, the Selwood/Headland case is completely different. You believe Selwood, I believe Headland. The AFL decided it was too hard to believe or not believe both of them. I don't think it was the women who demanded an apology, I think it was men who think they know what women want that demanded an apology to women. It's irrelevant, but if Selwood said what Des said he did, then I'd consider that to be pretty offensive regardless of your gender.

 

[anchor man]

Heard Heath Black on radio today saying that a female had been throwing bottles at the players,not sure if it was the woman that Tarrant allegedly flashed.But Interesting if it was.
I think the club has done the right thing in handing it over to the AFL to resolve.We as a club suspend him for 2 weeks and all and sundry,even some of our so called supporters will squeal like stuck pigs.
I think we have handled all of these type of situations very well in the past.Remember the Dodd,Polak thing.Done and dusted immediately,the Farmer issue fixed in a flash.To my way of thinking both dedcisions were right.

 

[kp junior]

The AFL won't suspend him. They will give him a big fine, or recommend to Freo to fine him. Freo will do so happily, he won't miss any weeks, and everyone's happy.
If Freo does the investigation themselves they might feel they have to give him a week or 2,, but this way he won't do any time.
Look out Carlton, the first team to face the full strength Freo forward line.

 

[sabre_ac]

Did the doggies go out while they were in Darwin? Hit any of the local night spots like our mob?

 

[dont bowl there]

Did the doggies go out while they were in Darwin? Hit any of the local night spots like our mob?

What does that have to do with anything?

 

[estibador]

Did the doggies go out while they were in Darwin? Hit any of the local night spots like our mob?

It would appear they were wise enough not to.

On topic, I'm optimistically hoping the club are deliberately getting the AFL involved for one of two reasons.

i) They already know the whole incident is a beat up and Taz doesn't deserve to be punished. But they also know that this needs to be verified by an 'independant' body to avoid it appearing like the club is sweeping it under the carpet.

ii) They already know what Taz is guilty of but, as kp junior said, they realise that the AFL will probably recommend a fairly lenient punishment. The club can then implement this punishment and since it was the AFL's recommendation, avoid the local media starting a witchhunt about us being too lenient on our players.

Either way I hope the club already know what happened. Like they say - never ask a question if you don't already know the answer.

 

[Alvin Purple]

Agree Estibador, I think the club know that it is a bit of a beat up and I believe the pollie Hale is already backpedalling a bit, he had apparently had quite a few and in his own words "had a red hot go at Tarrant".
Also heard that Tarrant didn't pull his pants down completely but just showed a bit of a cheek.
I think they are relying on the fact that Hale and the female involved etc will find it a bit more daunting to fabricate or exagerate a story under the scrutiny of the AFL.

 

[The Night Shift]

Heard Heath Black on radio today saying that a female had been throwing bottles at the players,not sure if it was the woman that Tarrant allegedly flashed.But Interesting if it was.
I think the club has done the right thing in handing it over to the AFL to resolve.We as a club suspend him for 2 weeks and all and sundry,even some of our so called supporters will squeal like stuck pigs.
I think we have handled all of these type of situations very well in the past.Remember the Dodd,Polak thing.Done and dusted immediately,the Farmer issue fixed in a flash.To my way of thinking both dedcisions were right.

They were correct discissons, and yes a quick resolution is the best way to deal with incidents. This Tarrantino thing is seemingly dragging out a bit though. It's media and forum fodder 'till done and dusted.

 

[dugrene]

Seriously, you have got to be joking? How exactly has Tarrant been defamed? Did someone go on national radio and call him a pedophile or something? Has the media dragged his name through the mud without any right of reply because the incident is going before the AFL tribunal?

Has anyone made death threats against him, or indeed actually punched the crap out of him? No? Then statements like this may be a little bit of an over reaction then.

I bet Chris will sleep better knowing West Coast 06 QC. is on his case.

 

[Dr Ralph Dagg]

It would appear they were wise enough not to.

On topic, I'm optimistically hoping the club are deliberately getting the AFL involved for one of two reasons.

i) They already know the whole incident is a beat up and Taz doesn't deserve to be punished. But they also know that this needs to be verified by an 'independant' body to avoid it appearing like the club is sweeping it under the carpet.

ii) They already know what Taz is guilty of but, as kp junior said, they realise that the AFL will probably recommend a fairly lenient punishment. The club can then implement this punishment and since it was the AFL's recommendation, avoid the local media starting a witchhunt about us being too lenient on our players.

Either way I hope the club already know what happened. Like they say - never ask a question if you don't already know the answer.

I'm opting for point (i). The rule of thumb is never hold an inquiry unless you know the outcome.

We've all had digs at WCE for their internal enquiries that find nothing. If the Dockers looked into the Tarrant thing and found nothing everyone can say of course they would -- just like we've said about WCE.

By asking the AFL to investigate the club can't be accused of hiding anything.

The other thing is given Hales (the alleged victim) political connections, any finding that he is a boofhead not telling the truth shouldn;t come from the club because they'll have been seen to be on Tarrant side.

All in all a fairly astute decison by the club.

And some trivia. Hale -- is running for the seat of Solomon. How weird. And the six degrees of separation doesn't end there. The seat is named after a distant relative of mine.

 

[Clay Davis]

Looks like estibador was correct!

http://realfooty.com.au/news/news/tarrant-was-provoked-witnesses/2007/06/20/1182019200971.html

 

[estibador]

Looks like estibador was correct!

There's a first time for everything hey?

 

[ImperialPurple]

Either way I hope the club already know what happened. Like they say - never ask a question if you don't already know the answer.

I'm opting for point (i). The rule of thumb is never hold an inquiry unless you know the outcome.

My first reaction was "Clever move by the club. They already know what happened, and now are putting the onus on the AFL, who will arrive at the same outcome, and see that there are always two sides to the story."

And now this:

Probe hears allegations Tarrant was provoked
Digby Beacham, Perth | June 21, 2007

AN AFL investigator has heard allegations from witnesses that the political candidate Chris Tarrant punched in a Darwin nightclub was confrontational, inebriated and challenged the Fremantle forward to a physical fight.

As the fallout from Fremantle's disastrous trip to Darwin continued, coach Chris Connolly also admitted his future is bleak if the Dockers fail to make the finals.

It is believed AFL investigator Allan Roberts was informed yesterday that Damian Hale and Tarrant exchanged words in the early hours of Sunday morning and the ALP candidate and football coach sought to continue the altercation outside.

It was then that Tarrant struck Hale before moving to another part of the nightclub.

Hale has accused Tarrant of baring his buttocks to a female colleague and then punching him. He has refused to press charges against Tarrant.

Fremantle asked the AFL to conduct an independent investigation of the Darwin incident, with Hale's alleged behaviour prior to the punch being thrown a major reason for its unusual request.

Originally posted by the Good Dr Dagg
All in all a fairly astute decison by the club.

Yep.