- Joined
- Nov 8, 2000
- Posts
- 74,154
- Likes
- 53,123
- Location
- Ask me tomorrow
- AFL Club
- Carlton
- Other Teams
- Cronulla, Dallas Cowboys, Forest
Moderator
#1,776
This isn't semantics - don't get precious. This is a leader of our club (king?) hitting a bloke.
Scotland's wife or child wasn't hit - and he was retaliating for a man who was arguably fully capable of diffusing the situation himself. And whilst the quote from the manager says Scotland 'went out of his way to stay under the radar', it doesn't say the same for his brother.
Maybe if you'd lost a wife or child in this situation, (not that I have) you'd appreciate the gravity more.
I'm failing to see the 'good' in Scotland's reasoning.
Scotland's wife or child wasn't hit - and he was retaliating for a man who was arguably fully capable of diffusing the situation himself. And whilst the quote from the manager says Scotland 'went out of his way to stay under the radar', it doesn't say the same for his brother.
Maybe if you'd lost a wife or child in this situation, (not that I have) you'd appreciate the gravity more.
I'm failing to see the 'good' in Scotland's reasoning.
He made a poor decision being out and about at that time, and he made a bad decision by taking matters into his own hands. The fact that the guy he hit had hit his brother, human response mechanisms being quite different and all, I find his actions a step down from coldcocking a random stranger. Nothing more, nothing less.
