Bock's IN

[jackster83]

Damn media and their indoctrination on the public. People are so quick to judge without even knowing the facts for themselves. Obviously it was no where near as bad as some think if he is back this week. He obviously has had a fantastic attitude with regards to this issue and has done everything possible to get himself in a healthy situation. I really do hope this doesn't ruin his reputation of being a top bloke but sadly it probably has.

I hope he just concentrates on his form and continues to play well because even though he doesn't play for my team, he really hasn't deserved this tag that has put upon him when no one really know what happened.

Post of the week

Some people (especially in the media) need to just STFU until they know what really happened. All this conjecture bull**** is a very dangerous practice.

 

[cmndstab]

For someone who appears to be a respected, intelligent poster on this site, thats just a really disappointing comment.

Glad to hear I generally appear intelligent and respected I'm not sure I see why this would be any different though. I am not saying whether I think the one week is right or wrong, all I'm saying is that regardless of whether it is right or wrong, I can guarantee you that we'll see a hysterical response from sections of the community who are not actually aware of any facts that will go off at the club for being "weak" on an indefinite term suspension that was never defined to the public for an incident that was never disclosed to the public. People hear "assaulting his girlfriend" and instantly assume she was left bruised and battered and that the club doesn't care less and just wants to win matches. It's not true, but people will carry on utterly convinced it is because they are too swept up in the emotion of the words assault. That's what I was saying and I think it's a completely reasonable comment.

See below.

Sooner the AFL brings in thier own code of conduct the better.

Bashing a woman is weak

It has never been said that he bashed the woman. You don't know the facts, none of us do since they haven't been reported yet. Assault is an extremely broad term, and it has been intimated that this case was on the low end of the range. It's never acceptable to assault anyone but "bashing" lives on the opposite end of the spectrum we've been led to believe this case lies on.

And the AFL does have their own code of conduct and worked with the Crows on this case. You need to check your facts before you attack a player and a club over an incident you know next to nothing about mate.

 

[Cruiser23]

Post of the week

Some people (especially in the media) need to just STFU until they know what really happened. All this conjecture bull**** is a very dangerous practice.

I live in Melbourne and it just annoys the hell out of me at the amount of times his name is being referenced with bashing his girlfriend. "Bock? Isn't that the guy who bashed his girlfriend?", i've heard that some many times from people i know and it is all the media and their narrow minded thoughts. They only write what they want to write and they couldn't care less if it is the expense of someones well being. I hope Bock comes out on Saturday and gives either Mooney or Hawkins (even though he's a good mate of mine) a touch up.

 

[crowsarethebest]

I live in Melbourne and it just annoys the hell out of me at the amount of times his name is being referenced with bashing his girlfriend. "Bock? Isn't that the guy who bashed his girlfriend?", i've heard that some many times from people i know and it is all the media and their narrow minded thoughts. They only write what they want to write and they couldn't care less if it is the expense of someones well being. I hope Bock comes out on Saturday and gives either Mooney or Hawkins (even though he's a good mate of mine) a touch up.

Yeah thats what shits me as well. Some clowns on the Main Board still think he bashed his girlfriend when It's no where near that. If he bashed his girl friend he'd be sacked and no way would he have a 1 week suspension. People have been saying it was a very very minor issue and the one week Bock took off shows that it was a minor issue. I'm pretty confident the club gave him a harsher penalty than most other clubs would as well.

 

[jenny61_99]

Starting?

Peter wants to pretend he has all this good oil, but of course can't share it. now that might be because it's inappropriate for a public forum - at which point, it has no purpose other than self aggrandisement; or it could be because he's making it up for self aggrandising purposes. either way, all credibility was lost when he started the "I know a secret" routine.

In defence of "Peter" - who I don't know from a bar of salt - it is just quite possible that he "knows" and can't tell us because it's a public forum (as you suggested) but can't stand by and do nothing either? I've had to stifle myself on numerous occasions because I "know" stuff no-one else does about particular situations, but also know I can't reveal this publicly however when someone runs off at the mouth (clearly knowing nothing but proclaiming that they do) I find it really hard to NOT say anything.

LOL Good lord does that make sense??

 

[chadleverington]

I'm happy with Shirley in.
He will play up forward too.

Ablett has more TOG now (rests up forward) so if Shirley goes forward then who is on Ablett? The other question i will ask is, Shirley hasn't played an AFL game this year, and first one back is on Ablett is he match fit? I think there is too much focus on Ablett. Bartel is the one time after time that does well against Adelaide.

 

[relapse]

dunno, does your imagination keep stats?

I guess I just imagined him not playing for the first 3 rounds and I guess I also imagined Neil Craig coming out commenting publicly about his lack of an offensive game.

You're obviously one of those supporters that bags the guy that receives the bad kick or dumb handball rather than the person who actually does it.

I saw it again in the Adelaide V Sydney trial this year. Shirley looks around and then dishes out a backwards hand grenade in the back fifty to Thompson (I think?) who is tackled immediately ball spills loose another Swans player picks up the ball and kicks a goal. The know nothings were bagging Thompson whereas the reality was that Thompson had no chance at all.

 

[maccas_no1]

I guess I just imagined him not playing for the first 3 rounds and I guess I also imagined Neil Craig coming out commenting publicly about his lack of an offensive game.

You're obviously one of those supporters that bags the guy that receives the bad kick or dumb handball rather than the person who actually does it.

I saw it again in the Adelaide V Sydney trial this year. Shirley looks around and then dishes out a backwards hand grenade in the back footy to Thompson (I think?) who is tackled immediately ball spills loose another Swans player picks up the ball and kicks a goal. The know nothings were bagging Thompson whereas the reality was that Thompson had no chance at all.

Reilly does exactly the same thing time after time so whats your point???? Perhaps like Reilly this is Shirley's 'breakout' year

 

[Wood_Duck]

For those complaining that Shirley shouldn't be getting a game, or that the kids should get a game ahead of him..... please note: No "kid" was sacrificed in the naming of Robert Shirley. Maybe, just maybe, one of our "young blokes" will attempt to tag a different player to Robert - seeing as Geelong have a plethora of talent in the midfield. Craig has done nothing to jeopardise his youth policy and has done everything to enhance his chances on Saturday. I still would have liked to see Griffin in to co-ruck with Maric and leave Tippy up forward full time... but knowing how Geelong's mids can run amuck, I can see the advantages in his selection.

Given that Stevens didnt come up and we didnt have to drop anyone, I'm comfortable with Shirley being picked.

 

[Tex200]

Glad to hear I generally appear intelligent and respected I'm not sure I see why this would be any different though. I am not saying whether I think the one week is right or wrong, all I'm saying is that regardless of whether it is right or wrong, I can guarantee you that we'll see a hysterical response from sections of the community who are not actually aware of any facts that will go off at the club for being "weak" on an indefinite term suspension that was never defined to the public for an incident that was never disclosed to the public. People hear "assaulting his girlfriend" and instantly assume she was left bruised and battered and that the club doesn't care less and just wants to win matches. It's not true, but people will carry on utterly convinced it is because they are too swept up in the emotion of the words assault. That's what I was saying and I think it's a completely reasonable comment.


See below.



It has never been said that he bashed the woman. You don't know the facts, none of us do since they haven't been reported yet. Assault is an extremely broad term, and it has been intimated that this case was on the low end of the range. It's never acceptable to assault anyone but "bashing" lives on the opposite end of the spectrum we've been led to believe this case lies on.

And the AFL does have their own code of conduct and worked with the Crows on this case. You need to check your facts before you attack a player and a club over an incident you know next to nothing about mate.

Thanks I think thats a far better explanation than branding everyone who has a domestic violence concern as a "bleeding heart".

To those urging me to put up or shut up I think thats quite fair enough. Clearly I cant put up and betray confidence so rest assured I will be shutting up.

 

[Rollerball]

First post here so g'day to all.

Anyone else think that the advertiser front page today was a bit weird? Calling Bocky a 'hard hitting defender' and then a nice picture of his crotch?

 

[Dandy_GO]

Haha yeah.
Not to make light of the situation, but it was really a hilariously inappropriate headline.

 

[King Elvis]

To those urging me to put up or shut up I think thats quite fair enough. Clearly I cant put up and betray confidence so rest assured I will be shutting up.

Thanks Peter - I hope my previous post didn't come across as too rude.

 

[CaptainDangerfield]

I hindsight you would have to say Trigg and co. have handled this whole Bock affair really poorly. Their initial tough stance now reeks of amateur hour or panic in needle park.

They came out and said he will do community service at a womans shelter without consulting someone from a womens shelter thereby creating a sh@t storm. They also said he will be suspended "indefinately" and then only give him 1 week.

Really poorly handled.

 

[cmndstab]

Thanks I think thats a far better explanation than branding everyone who has a domestic violence concern as a "bleeding heart".

To those urging me to put up or shut up I think thats quite fair enough. Clearly I cant put up and betray confidence so rest assured I will be shutting up.

Certainly I wouldn't want to make light of domestic violence which is a terrible thing. Sorry that my post was written in a way to make you think that. Hopefully now it is clearer what me intentions were.

 

[King Elvis]

I hindsight you would have to say Trigg and co. have handled this whole Bock affair really poorly. Their initial tough stance now reeks of amateur hour or panic in needle park.

They came out and said he will do community service at a womans shelter without consulting someone from a womens shelter thereby creating a sh@t storm. They also said he will be suspended "indefinately" and then only give him 1 week.

Really poorly handled.

I'll forgive you for not reading Ruccis Roast - but he revealed yesterday that the direction to have Bock do 50 hours Community Service in a Women's Shelter came directly from Adrian Anderson, not the Crows.

 

[macca23]

I hindsight you would have to say Trigg and co. have handled this whole Bock affair really poorly. Their initial tough stance now reeks of amateur hour or panic in needle park.

They came out and said he will do community service at a womans shelter without consulting someone from a womens shelter thereby creating a sh@t storm. They also said he will be suspended "indefinately" and then only give him 1 week.

Really poorly handled.

Springy, apart from the incorrect spelling of indefinitely , you like so many others are virtually interpreting the word indefinitely to mean "forever".

It doesn't. All it means is that no exact time has been placed on it.

I think they have handled it better than most clubs handle their dirty linen. The AFL obviously agree because they have endorsed the club's actions.

PS After all this adverse publicity, fine, game missed, community service etc, he still has to go to court, which is all that you would have to do if it were you.

 

[Tex200]

Thanks Peter - I hope my previous post didn't come across as too rude.

No absolutely not, as I said it was fair comment. I kept saying to myself dont write anything you will only regret it. Emotions took over.

 

[slippery crow]

IMO the Club has handled this better then North Melb handled the Chicken video

North tried to hide the fact that 2 senior players were involved by making the entire player group take responsibility

 

[WALL-e]

LOL at everyone on the radio who can't seem to understand the term 'indefinitley'.

It it not 'infinity'.

It means a term has not been made.

 

[Willis]

LOL at everyone on the radio who can't seem to understand the term 'indefinitley'.

It it not 'infinity'.

It means a term has not been made.

Seems to be 99% of the posters on BigFooty as well. I CAN'T BELIEVE THEY SAID INDEFINITELY BUT ONLY LEFT HIM OUT FOR ONE WEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEK.

The club handled it well, lets just move on.

 

[Wood_Duck]

The more I think about whats transpired over the last 2 weeks I cant help but think that the clubs reaction last week was forced upon them from above. It wouldnt surprise me if the suspension was only ever put in place to placate Adrian Anderson.

 

[Tex200]

I see Rob Shirley has been copping some flak. I think the thing to remember with Rob is that he always had a defensive job to do and, generally, has done it pretty well. I can remember occasions where we have been pretty grateful for the job he's done on the likes of Judd etc.

Its only been this year that NC has challenged him to add something further to his game, tomorrow will be his first real opportunity to show what he has got. But NC must live up to his part of the bargain. If he asks Rob to go and play a hard tag on Ablett, then he is back to square one.

I did not see the game but from all reports he cut up the SANFL in round 1 as a running midfielder, so he has some form. Lets hope NC gives him the opportunity to prove himself.

 

[CaptainDangerfield]

I'll forgive you for not reading Ruccis Roast - but he revealed yesterday that the direction to have Bock do 50 hours Community Service in a Women's Shelter came directly from Adrian Anderson, not the Crows.

Hmmm that figures. The Crows should have said as much as it made them look unprofessional. Why cover for an incompetent AFL, they do us no favours.

 

[CaptainDangerfield]

Springy, apart from the incorrect spelling of indefinitely , you like so many others are virtually interpreting the word indefinitely to mean "forever".

It doesn't. All it means is that no exact time has been placed on it.

I think they have handled it better than most clubs handle their dirty linen. The AFL obviously agree because they have endorsed the club's actions.

PS After all this adverse publicity, fine, game missed, community service etc, he still has to go to court, which is all that you would have to do if it were you.

I agree. Most clubs would have tried to sweep it under the carpet, as Port has done regularly. However, if we only intended for a 1 week suspension we should have said so. To me, and alot of other people "indeafernetlee" implies longer than 1 week.

This would not have been an issue if we didn't already have all the negativity with regard to the womens shelter community service. However, as King has said this was an Anderson blunder so I take back my original comment.

Carry On.