Speculation Tarryn Thomas

[MisterMarcus]

Then on top of this there is the indigenous side of things and his rough childhood. None of that excuses his actions, but I think it is more than fair if we invest in people more so who come from disadvantage and can work on their behavour inside the system rather than just outcasting them forever. It would be different for different cases, there are levels of abuse, it's not one size fits all.

The thing is: North were openly saying that TT hadn't made progress despite undertaking counselling and courses on respecting women. It suggests he didn't believe what he did was wrong, or he didn't care.

The cultural difference/upbringing type excuse only gets you so far. If hypothetically there was genuine ignorance due to these sorts of circumstances, you'd expect he'd wake up to himself, or at least invest in trying to understand why his situation doesn't match mainstream standards.

If there'd been an "I was brought up to believe XYZ and I didn't truly understand how backward and stupid this was" kind of moment, MAYBE the rehabilitation arc would have been different. People could at least see a redemption story there.

But that didn't seem to happen at North. Would anyone really trust if it suddenly happened now?

 

[HirdsTheWord]

The thing is: North were openly saying that TT hadn't made progress despite undertaking counselling and courses on respecting women. It suggests he didn't believe what he did was wrong, or he didn't care.

The cultural difference/upbringing type excuse only gets you so far. If hypothetically there was genuine ignorance due to these sorts of circumstances, you'd expect he'd wake up to himself, or at least invest in trying to understand why his situation doesn't match mainstream standards.

If there'd been an "I was brought up to believe XYZ and I didn't truly understand how backward and stupid this was" kind of moment, MAYBE the rehabilitation arc would have been different. People could at least see a redemption story there.

But that didn't seem to happen at North. Would anyone really trust if it suddenly happened now?

the upbringing issues gives you the 1st and possible second chance, which he has had at North and didn't learn from it.

Thomas is beyond that IMO.

Some blokes just can't be helped.

 

[Jazny]

The thing is: North were openly saying that TT hadn't made progress despite undertaking counselling and courses on respecting women. It suggests he didn't believe what he did was wrong, or he didn't care.

The cultural difference/upbringing type excuse only gets you so far. If hypothetically there was genuine ignorance due to these sorts of circumstances, you'd expect he'd wake up to himself, or at least invest in trying to understand why his situation doesn't match mainstream standards.

If there'd been an "I was brought up to believe XYZ and I didn't truly understand how backward and stupid this was" kind of moment, MAYBE the rehabilitation arc would have been different. People could at least see a redemption story there.

But that didn't seem to happen at North. Would anyone really trust if it suddenly happened now?

You're ignoring the fact that they were then satisfied with whatever he was doing and then played games for North Melbourne after that statement about Tarryn not progressing enough for their liking initially when he was undertaking that course?

 

[MisterMarcus]

You're ignoring the fact that they were then satisfied with whatever he was doing and then played games for North Melbourne after that statement about Tarryn not progressing enough for their liking initially when he was undertaking that course?

.....and then had another incident of inappropriate behaviour towards a woman, which led North to sack him.

He was given chances to improve himself, was falling far short of expectations repeatedly, eventually after much effort and pressure he made 'progress', and then immediately regressed.

Suggests any 'progress' he made was all words and BS.

 

[Jazny]

.....and then had another incident of inappropriate behaviour towards a woman, which led North to sack him.

He was given chances to improve himself, was falling far short of expectations repeatedly, eventually after much effort and pressure he made 'progress', and then immediately regressed.

Suggests any 'progress' he made was all words and BS.

Not necessarily. He obviously didn't make enough progress though.

I don't really get how we can have Gary Ablett Sr in the hall of fame and people still call him god, but Tarryn Thomas can never play football again for what he has done no matter what he does to make up for it or become a better person. Domestic violence advocates, professionals in their fields, who have been asked directly about him in the media are not saying he should be banned for life. There is room for a person to change their behaviour, for some people it will take a lot of time and investment.

 

[Sphynx]

Not necessarily. He obviously didn't make enough progress though.

I don't really get how we can have Gary Ablett Sr in the hall of fame and people still call him god, but Tarryn Thomas can never play football again for what he has done no matter what he does to make up for it or become a better person. Domestic violence advocates, professionals in their fields, who have been asked directly about him in the media are not saying he should be banned for life. There is room for a person to change their behaviour, for some people it will take a lot of time and investment.

Well for starters Gary Ablett Sr's major infractions were post retirement.

Secondly, I don't think you are going to get very far comparing professional and community standards with those of 30 years ago. South Africa was still an apartheid state......


Based on AFL rules, he should be banned for life.

Tell me, what's worse:

8 x 2 weeks suspensions across a career in the current climate for head high knocks and auto suspensions.

or

What Thomas did and his 18 week AFL suspension + change for his North suspensions last year?


The first example would have the AFL player deregistered from all competitions for life, for merely football acts. So Thomas would be hard done by how?

Someone like Jimmy Webster is close to another Simpkin bump away from de-registration and a life ban post AFL retirement under the current tribunal rules.

 

[sydney_gws]

The thing is: North were openly saying that TT hadn't made progress despite undertaking counselling and courses on respecting women. It suggests he didn't believe what he did was wrong, or he didn't care.

The cultural difference/upbringing type excuse only gets you so far. If hypothetically there was genuine ignorance due to these sorts of circumstances, you'd expect he'd wake up to himself, or at least invest in trying to understand why his situation doesn't match mainstream standards.

If there'd been an "I was brought up to believe XYZ and I didn't truly understand how backward and stupid this was" kind of moment, MAYBE the rehabilitation arc would have been different. People could at least see a redemption story there.

But that didn't seem to happen at North. Would anyone really trust if it suddenly happened now?

The fact he faced police charges shows he must have known it is illegal to threaten someone via text, voicemail etc.

 

[Jazny]

Well for starters Gary Ablett Sr's major infractions were post retirement.

Secondly, I don't think you are going to get very far comparing professional and community standards with those of 30 years ago. South Africa was still an apartheid state......

He was put into the hall of fame in 2005, he could be removed from it at any time. He is still spoken of in glowing terms in the AFL community. I'm not saying that is right or wrong, I dont know the answer, people are very complicated and can do horrific things, but if we never forgive anyone the world will be a worse place in ways too, i think. Also Tarryn is still only 24 and his behaviour can be changed.

The first example would have the AFL player deregistered from all competitions for life, for merely football acts. So Thomas would be hard done by how?

Someone like Jimmy Webster is close to another Simpkin bump away from de-registration and a life ban post AFL retirement under the current tribunal rules.

I dont think a player at AFL level would be suspended for life for two Jimmy Webster like incidents. If Toby Greene bumps someone and gets another 4 weeks or whatever, they surely won't deregister him. I could be wrong but I dont think its how it works at the highest level. Is Toby Greene a Jimmy Webster bump from ending his career?

 

[Sphynx]

He was put into the hall of fame in 2005, he could be removed from it at any time. He is still spoken of in glowing terms in the AFL community. I'm not saying that is right or wrong, I dont know the answer, people are very complicated and can do horrific things, but if we never forgive anyone the world will be a worse place in ways too, i think. Also Tarryn is still only 24 and his behaviour can be changed.

I dont think a player at AFL level would be suspended for life for two Jimmy Webster like incidents. If Toby Greene bumps someone and gets another 4 weeks or whatever, they surely won't deregister him. I could be wrong but I dont think its how it works at the highest level. Is Toby Greene a Jimmy Webster bump from ending his career?

I really think we don't need to get into the Ablett stuff, it's completely different, a different era, post playing days and to do with the HOF rather than his playing career.

In terms of the rest.

In that instance the player is not banned for life whilst playing AFL football, but is once not on an AFL list.

Has happened a number of times over the last decade, to some fairly high profile players with 16+ weeks of tribunal suspensions.

In this instance, Thomas wouldn't be able to play VFL (if not AFL listed) or local football as he would be de-registered from playing football outside of the AFL, it's for life also.

 

[FlyHigh18]

Everyone deserves to keep working. So I don't mind him having "another chance", but why does that chance have to be AFL? He doesn't deserve to be a role model, or in the public eye playing footy on tv.

 

[Corkie]

AFL won’t ban him.

But I feel they will certainly put out a reminder memo to clubs to strongly consider their ethics, values & reputation when recruiting players.

 

[The 747]

AFL won’t ban him.

But I feel they will certainly put out a reminder memo to clubs to strongly consider their ethics, values & reputation when recruiting players.

The idea of AFL house lecturing the clubs about ethics, values and reputation is pretty funny.

 

[CatToTheFuture]

Where did you get this mail?

I have seen nothing from our club saying they have any interest in Thomas?

Not sure why you are throwing shade at us by the way? Considering you keep racists on your list?

Scott just went in to bat for the character of a player he used to coach. It's nothing

 

[TazHawk15]

AFL won’t ban him.

But I feel they will certainly put out a reminder memo to clubs to strongly consider their ethics, values & reputation when recruiting players.

After the respect woman focus the AFL wheeled out in the weekend surely even they can’t let him play after that?

 

[CatToTheFuture]

After the respect woman focus the AFL wheeled out in the weekend surely even they can’t let him play after that?

They would need to give it at least a week

 

[Corkie]

After the respect woman focus the AFL wheeled out in the weekend surely even they can’t let him play after that?

My personal ethics & values are I hope they don’t let him return. But it’s a mighty big legal precedent to set. Not sure if the AFL have got it in them?

 

[Farang83150]

Wouldn't want my club to go anywhere near the POS.

 

[Makeshift Park]

I think it’s pretty simple. He either:

• has a lightbulb moment, realises his behaviour was problematic, reflects a bit about who he is and how to better himself, and then makes a public commitment confirming as much; or
• he wastes his extraordinary football talent in a local league somewhere.

 

[Rob R]

I think it’s pretty simple. He either:

• has a lightbulb moment, realises his behaviour was problematic, reflects a bit about who he is and how to better himself, and then makes a public commitment confirming as much; or
• he wastes his extraordinary football talent in a local league somewhere.

And in the first case, just after signing a new contract he would fall back on his old ways. No football club at any level should go near him if they actually believe what they preach about DV.

On SM-A125F using BigFooty.com mobile app

 

[Strapping Young Lad]

Should be deregistered.

 

[MisterMarcus]

My personal ethics & values are I hope they don’t let him return. But it’s a mighty big legal precedent to set. Not sure if the AFL have got it in them?

This is the thing. I'm sure the AFL want him to be banned but don't want to officially 'ban him' because of potential legal consequences.

So I imagine they'll be very strongly everyone behind closed doors to steer clear of TT, while simultaneously washing their hands and claiming "it's up to individual clubs to decide".

 

[The 747]

This is the thing. I'm sure the AFL want him to be banned but don't want to officially 'ban him' because of potential legal consequences.

So I imagine they'll be very strongly everyone behind closed doors to steer clear of TT, while simultaneously washing their hands and claiming "it's up to individual clubs to decide".

The AFL should get right out of this if they don't have the stomach to de-register him.

If they don't de-register him then a club can pick him up, if they decide to. That decision will be on that club.

 

[Jazny]

The AFL should get right out of this if they don't have the stomach to de-register him.

If they don't de-register him then a club can pick him up, if they decide to. That decision will be on that club.

If the AFL thought what he did merited de-resgistration they would have done it. The condition for Tarryn to come back is he has to complete a course on respect, and the AFL still needs to approve his move to the next club. If the AFL wanted to, they could just not approve it. Don't know why they would need to be sneaky about it.

 

[GoEaglesGoSGIO]

Society's ability to maneuver their moral compass based on their ability to benefit from that change never ceases to amaze me

 

[Kobe Gryant]

Society's ability to maneuver their moral compass based on their ability to benefit from that change never ceases to amaze me

We judge others by their actions, we judge ourselves by our intentions.

It's very easy for people to convince themselves that they're morally correct in the "Hey, maybe my club could rehabilitate him and everyone wins?" style of belief.

There are people out there who genuinely believe that, and kudos to them...but most are just masquerading behind that stance knowing that he could help their footy club.

If TT or Jordan De Goey for instance were just normal 9-5 guys who found themselves on the news one day through their actions, 99% would think 'what a scumbag' and forget about it 10 minutes later.

It's only when these people can be of benefit that everybody suddenly becomes an amatuer psychologist, and bothering to worry about the circumstances that may have caused these events to happen.

FWIW, I believe there is room for both examples in that every situation should be treated individually, with the same fine tooth comb going over all the details.

Unfortunately, that would require everybody holding themselves accountable to caring about the mug on the news as much as they do the footballer who can help their team...which we all know will never happen.