Steven Hocking Conflict of Interest

Remove this Banner Ad

Meteoric Rise

Premiership Player
Suspended
Feb 4, 2008
3,491
10,056
Melbourne
AFL Club
Richmond
I inferred that from your statement, “Who decides what the AFL argues for? You guessed it, Steven Hocking”.
How the hell do you make the leap from me saying Hocking decides what penalty Gleeson argues for at the Tribunal to that meaning I am suggesting Hocking controls the Tribunal?

Anyone with their eyes open should be able to see I am not saying that.
 

CatToTheFuture

Brownlow Medallist
Aug 18, 2018
10,422
15,683
AFL Club
Geelong


What about the latest instance Joel Selwood eye-gouging which he was charged for "Misconduct" but only received a small fine?

Selwood also received a fine for stomping on Taylor Duryea's shin in the same game. James Sicily received a 1 match ban for stepping on Shaun Atley's leg a couple of years ago. But the difference is the Hawks don't have Dermott Brereton working for the AFL and fixing things so our blokes get away with their dirty transgressions.



It's not as though Selwood doesn't have prior form for eye-gouging either...














Watch these two similar incidents from the same round and have a guess who was fined and who was suspended for 1 match.

Thanks for actually responding with something that's at least based on interpretation of actual events rather than what's been said to here so far. But if you're using Cooper "Scoops" Gretch as a source then it's probably not a great way to add credibility

I'll agree with you Tom Stewart's was worth a week, though I can see why it wasn't given a week as he slid over the top of Cameron. Can also see why the other one was as he clearly drove his head into the ground. Not sure the blurred line between wrestling and striking is a strong indication of a conspiracy.

On the "eye gouges" I would challenge you to find any of those victims getting up and rubbing their eye afterwards. If you get your eyes interfered with your vision is affected afterwards. None of these incidents are eye gouges. He was pushing a players head into the ground.

Pushing a players head into the ground is a bad look and unsportsmanlike and deserves more than a fine in my opinion but fines are what the rules say they're worth. I challenge you to find a different grading to what it got.

And on the stomping, if you think that what Sicily did to Atley is at all similar to what Selwood did then I don't know what to say to you.
 

CatToTheFuture

Brownlow Medallist
Aug 18, 2018
10,422
15,683
AFL Club
Geelong
How the hell do you make the leap from me saying Hocking decides what penalty Gleeson argues for at the Tribunal to that meaning I am suggesting Hocking controls the Tribunal?

Anyone with their eyes open should be able to see I am not saying that.
Your inferring a level of control on the outcome which clearly doesn't exist.
 

Log in to remove this ad.

Back One Out

Brownlow Medallist
Mar 2, 2015
16,350
28,333
AFL Club
Hawthorn
Thanks for actually responding with something that's at least based on interpretation of actual events rather than what's been said to here so far. But if you're using Cooper "Scoops" Gretch as a source then it's probably not a great way to add credibility

I'll agree with you Tom Stewart's was worth a week, though I can see why it wasn't given a week as he slid over the top of Cameron. Can also see why the other one was as he clearly drove his head into the ground. Not sure the blurred line between wrestling and striking is a strong indication of a conspiracy.

On the "eye gouges" I would challenge you to find any of those victims getting up and rubbing their eye afterwards. If you get your eyes interfered with your vision is affected afterwards. None of these incidents are eye gouges. He was pushing a players head into the ground.

Pushing a players head into the ground is a bad look and unsportsmanlike and deserves more than a fine in my opinion but fines are what the rules say they're worth. I challenge you to find a different grading to what it got.

And on the stomping, if you think that what Sicily did to Atley is at all similar to what Selwood did then I don't know what to say to you.
Using Scoops Gretsch as a "source" ??? You mean that image of Selwood clawing his opponent's eyes & face? I actually remember the incident quite well. I think I posted about on here at the time and questioned why he wasn't cited.

Just so we're clear, when you say Selwood was "pushing the players' heads into the ground", what you mean is Selwood was pushing his hand into their faces and then feeling around for their eye sockets and pressing his finger briefly into their eyeball. Just so we're clear...

As for comparisons between Selwood and Sicily stepping/stomping on their opponent's legs, they were pretty similar and drew the same angry response from their opponent. So I don't know why you're acting as though they were radically different... I know why: probably because Gerard and Robbo and rest of the media always gives Captain Courageous, Joel Selwood a pass. Whereas everything Sicily ever did was sensationalised and replayed over and over in order to give him the maximum penalty.


 
Last edited:

CatToTheFuture

Brownlow Medallist
Aug 18, 2018
10,422
15,683
AFL Club
Geelong
Just so we're clear, when you say he was "pushing the players' heads into the ground", what you mean is Selwood was pushing his hand into their faces and then feeling around for their eye sockets and pressing his finger briefly into their eyeball.
No I do not mean that

As for comparisons between Selwood and Sicily stepping/stomping on their opponent's legs, they were pretty similar and drew the same angry response from their opponent. So I don't know why you're acting as though they were radically different.

I know why: probably because Gerard and Robbo and rest of the media always gives Captain Courageous, Joel Selwood a pass. Where everything Sicily ever did was sensationalised and replayed over and over in order to give him the maximum penalty.

Sicily ran to the player, stopped, and looked directly at him when he stepped on his ankle.

Selwood was stepping backwards not looking where he was putting his foot and stepped on someone. One was careless, one was intentional. Would think that was pretty clear
 

Back One Out

Brownlow Medallist
Mar 2, 2015
16,350
28,333
AFL Club
Hawthorn
No I do not mean that


Sicily ran to the player, stopped, and looked directly at him when he stepped on his ankle.

Selwood was stepping backwards not looking where he was putting his foot and stepped on someone. One was careless, one was intentional. Would think that was pretty clear
The same way he was "not looking" when he raked the fingers of right hand back across Duryea's eyes immediately before stepping on his leg.. :rolleyes:

 

Igavemyloveachicken

Team Captain
May 8, 2021
422
630
AFL Club
Port Adelaide
The same way he was "not looking" when he raked the fingers of right hand back across Duryea's eyes immediately before stepping on his leg.. :rolleyes:

I really like Selwood as a player, his courage is such that I think he might have long term issues post career.
He's better than those actions, there's a bit of Adam Goodes about him though in resorting to dirty tactics whilst frustrated that his end in near.
 

z547043

Debutant
Aug 17, 2009
88
131
AFL Club
Geelong
How the hell do you make the leap from me saying Hocking decides what penalty Gleeson argues for at the Tribunal to that meaning I am suggesting Hocking controls the Tribunal?

Anyone with their eyes open should be able to see I am not saying that.
‘effectively limited’ was the phrase used. Check the definition of limited.

5B49BB3C-E8F0-4ED5-AAB4-4AABC017A074.png

Restricted or bounded… Interesting, in fact anyone with a set of eyes or rudimentary knowledge of the English language would infer exactly as Sttew has. Honestly, it might be time to move on with your life after this thread. Your grip on reality is slipping…

As an aside the greatest irony is that given your hatred for Geelong (openly declared), much like Steven Hocking you find yourself unable to remove yourself from any threads involving Geelong. Seems like a direct conflict of interest to the existence of balanced, reasonable and unbiased debate in Geelong related threads…
 

Meteoric Rise

Premiership Player
Suspended
Feb 4, 2008
3,491
10,056
Melbourne
AFL Club
Richmond
‘effectively limited’ was the phrase used. Check the definition of limited.

View attachment 1171690

Restricted or bounded… Interesting, in fact anyone with a set of eyes or rudimentary knowledge of the English language would infer exactly as Sttew has. Honestly, it might be time to move on with your life after this thread. Your grip on reality is slipping…

As an aside the greatest irony is that given your hatred for Geelong (openly declared), much like Steven Hocking you find yourself unable to remove yourself from any threads involving Geelong. Seems like a direct conflict of interest to the existence of balanced, reasonable and unbiased debate in Geelong related threads…
1. Richmond supporter realises AFL Football Operations Manager has a conflict of interest, starts a thread about it to draw people’s attention to the matter.

2. Bigfooty says you are a Richmond supporter therefore anything you say about this matter doesn’t count.

3. Some time later it emerges there was a clear conflict of interest, and no apparent effort made by Hocking or the AFL to deal satisfactorily with it.

4. Bigfooty says you were right all along Richmond supporter.

5. Random Cats supporter emerges saying Richmond supporter has lost his grip on reality. 😂😂😂😂😂

Let me clear some things up for you stray sheep.

I declared my hatred of Geelong FC along with my hatred of Collingwood, Carlton, Essendon, so in other words I do not hate any of these clubs more than is my duty to do so as a Balme-fearing Tiger supporter.

I suppose you must love all opposition clubs, thus giving you the right to comment on matters relating to them….is that your view of the world?

You are so credible that you are posting now under at least 3 separate profiles, Sttew, CatToTheFuture and this one. So I am not going to respond to your nonsense about me saying Hocking controls the Tribunal, when I have already responded to your other two profiles on the matter.
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

z547043

Debutant
Aug 17, 2009
88
131
AFL Club
Geelong
1. Richmond supporter realises AFL Football Operations Manager has a conflict of interest, starts a thread about it to draw people’s attention to the matter.

2. Bigfooty says you are a Richmond supporter therefore anything you say about this matter doesn’t count.

3. Some time later it emerges there was a clear conflict of interest, and no apparent effort made by Hocking or the AFL to deal satisfactorily with it.

4. Bigfooty says you were right all along Richmond supporter.

5. Random Cats supporter emerges saying Richmond supporter has lost his grip on reality. 😂😂😂😂😂

Let me clear some things up for you stray sheep.

I declared my hatred of Geelong FC along with my hatred of Collingwood, Carlton, Essendon, so in other words I do not hate any of these clubs more than is my duty to do so as a Balme-fearing Tiger supporter.

I suppose you must love all opposition clubs, thus giving you the right to comment on matters relating to them….is that your view of the world?

You are so credible that you are posting now under at least 3 separate profiles, Sttew, CatToTheFuture and this one. So I am not going to respond to your nonsense about me saying Hocking controls the Tribunal, when I have already responded to your other two profiles on the matter.
So you didn’t clearly imply that he controls the tribunal which would be a distortion of the reality? And then vehemently deny it in a gaslighting manner. If that’s the case, we’re all good then 😂😂
 

Meteoric Rise

Premiership Player
Suspended
Feb 4, 2008
3,491
10,056
Melbourne
AFL Club
Richmond
So you didn’t clearly imply that he controls the tribunal which would be a distortion of the reality? And then vehemently deny it in a gaslighting manner. If that’s the case, we’re all good then 😂😂
I am hardly going to imply he controls the Tribunal whilst openly stating he doesn’t control the Tribunal. You are lost.
 

BruceTempany14

Loving the Eagles and Cats Salt
Aug 4, 2016
1,043
2,587
AFL Club
Richmond
I can honestly say I have never seen alt accounts used worse than you are doing now. About as subtle as a brick. But well done, had me going for a while.
I love the Geelong supporters getting all upety about the truth .

Since 2018 Geelong had had an armchair ride with the tribunal and AFL fixturing .
Now they have an administrator with intricate knowledge of player payments .
But no conflict …

Like an Adminsitration with an asterisk *




Sent from my iPhone using BigFooty.com
 

Remove this Banner Ad

Remove this Banner Ad