Tom Bugg - In trouble? how many weeks? - now with a poll!

[threesixpio]

So Gillon's crack down on punching and other penalties could influence a court to think it was not within the culture of the sport. Likewise you could argue that the crackdown is evidence of the sporting authority being able to handle these matters - catch 22....

edit: my argument is very tenuous but still interesting in terms of long term cultural shifts...

 

[kickazz]

This is a pretty interesting case:

http://www.5rb.com/case/r-v-barnes/

Playing culture is relevant to consent... its not just about whether it is within the rules or not.

I said that it was "all about the law" and that the AFL had no influence on the criminal law in a post above...I actually think I was wrong about this. Have a read if you're interested.

A good read and not too long.

On playing culture and leaving it to the AFL - that makes me think there needs to be guidelines, set out by the given sport's governing body, as to what should be reffered to the courts and what shouldn't.

Maybe not now or soon, but i think we'll at some point see some movement in this area. Courts have been traditionally hands off citing cultural norms; and some sports like footy have, let's face it, a long cultural history of violence. The acceptance of this is rapidly changing, and the old "it's part of the game" hold less credence than ever.

Jimmy Bartel's words around "football acts" and "non football acts" may be the start of something.....

 

[kickazz]

So Gillon's crack down on punching and other penalties could influence a court to think it was not within the culture of the sport. Likewise you could argue that the crackdown is evidence of the sporting authority being able to handle these matters - catch 22....

edit: my argument is very tenuous but still interesting in terms of long term cultural shifts...

If we take the prevailing culture as being relevant, then yes, it could have an effect.

Going on 1950s standards, within cultural standards.

On today's standards it is not. Bit you'd feel the first couple of people to get convictions could be seen as a bit unlucky.

We need either a clear cut case, potentially like this, to enforce that new cultural norms; or at the very least, something needs to be written down outlining what is and isn't in the culture of the game

 

[Snake_Baker]

On today's standards it is not. Bit you'd feel the first couple of people to get convictions could be seen as a bit unlucky.

Where does this notion that today's standards are holier than thou arise from?

It's utter bullshit, utilised to justify a political agenda.

 

[parishfever]

The moment you start charging people for on field actions is the moment you get a a depth player trying to sue the AFL for providing an unsafe work environment after hes been laid out behind the ball.

It creates a domino effect of which the AFL would not want to see, no way of predicting where it leads. Even if the player had no case in court, it'd be terrible publicity for the game and its much easier for them to put on a hard exterior and quietly sweep these under the rug when they rarely happen

 

[Biggy_Boy]

Cue the personal attacks and calls for sacking etc for Danny Green having an opinion that goes against the PC driven message as is the way of 2017

Damn political correctness taking aim at the last bastion of Australian culture - punching blokes in the head.

It would be especially wrong for anyone to chastise Green for going against this PC message when he's the face of the campaign that supports it. No, that's not hypocritical at all.

 

[kickazz]

Where does this notion that today's standards are holier than thou arise from?

It's utter bullshit, utilised to justify a political agenda.

Well, in the eighties i stayed at my cousin's place and his mum rented out a video called "footy brawls" that showed heaps of fights and hits.

No way the AFL would sanction that today.

 

[threesixpio]

Where does this notion that today's standards are holier than thou arise from?

It's utter bullshit, utilised to justify a political agenda.

I don' think its uncontroversial to say that acts of violence are less tolerated in Australia. Whether this is holier than thou is irrelevant

 

[astro1212]

Don't tell astro1212

He'll literally melt.

I call out those that contradict themselves or who they represent. Such as you..."dont tell astro1212" yet you link me into this thread. Ah yes, watever u want to call it....Sarcasm, baiting etc.... im here. Yay!

As for what green says:

"he’s got knocked out and got concussed pretty badly".

Yes. It definately sounds like nothing. Gee, wasnt one of your fans arguing Mills was not knocked out:

Mills certainty wasn't knocked out cold!

 

[threesixpio]

Well, in the eighties i stayed at my cousin's place and his mum rented out a video called "footy brawls" that showed heaps of fights and hits.

No way the AFL would sanction that today.

Devils' Advocate - the media sells outrage. You have media commentators going on and on about how certain acts are bringing the game into disrepute and that "you really shouldn't see this in the game" and then they play the incident over and over and over again. its kind of hilarious

 

[jack son 5]

You sound like the kind of bloke who goes out and gets drunk on a Saturday night and enjoy getting into punch ons with strangers

He doesn't sound like that at all.

Was just laughing at your moronic post.

 

[kickazz]

Cue the personal attacks and calls for sacking etc for Danny Green having an opinion that goes against the PC driven message as is the way of 2017

If you express an opinion publicly then others equally have the right to denounce it publicly.

 

[Snake_Baker]

Well, in the eighties i stayed at my cousin's place and his mum rented out a video called "footy brawls" that showed heaps of fights and hits.

No way the AFL would sanction that today.

The AFL doesn't "sanction" any violence.

 

[threesixpio]

Lol hahahahahaha

as I said above unconsciousness can be classed a serious injury... at law

IF you could prove that Bugg intended or, was reckless to the possibility, that he would cause unconsciousness, that's either Intentionally Causing Serious Injury, Recklessly Causing Serious Injury or Intentionally Causing Injury.

RCSI would not at all be impossible in this scenario if off the sporting field and people can definitely serve gaol time for that but priors are relevant etc...

 

[iluvparis]

Who does Danny Green barrack for? He has weighed in previously on tribunal matters.

I don't think he's yet come to grips with the foundation of AFL sentencing - that the penalty is largely determined by the consequences.

Given his penchant for crazy post event rationalization I'd say Essendon.

 

[Seedsfan]

as I said above unconsciousness can be classed a serious injury... at law

IF you could prove that Bugg intended or, was reckless to the possibility, that he would cause unconsciousness, that's either Intentionally Causing Serious Injury, Recklessly Causing Serious Injury or Intentionally Causing Injury.

RCSI would not at all be impossible in this scenario if off the sporting field and people can definitely serve gaol time for that but priors are relevant etc...

But for all we know Bugg has no priors and was elbowed in the chest from Mills immediately before the punch. Also Mills was concussed but never lost consciousness

 

[theyellowsash]

The moment you start charging people for on field actions is the moment you get a a depth player trying to sue the AFL for providing an unsafe work environment after hes been laid out behind the ball.

It creates a domino effect of which the AFL would not want to see, no way of predicting where it leads. Even if the player had no case in court, it'd be terrible publicity for the game and its much easier for them to put on a hard exterior and quietly sweep these under the rug when they rarely happen

thats total crap. the afl would be no different to any other workplace. the fact that someone employed by the afl hits someone is not the afls fault any more than if it happened in a regular office.

 

[threesixpio]

thats total crap. the afl would be no different to any other workplace. the fact that someone employed by the afl hits someone is not the afls fault any more than if it happened in a regular office.

I don't think its total crap at all. It is definitely a slippery slope and you cannot compare it to other workplaces. Other places do not have a long held court sanctioned public policy of court non-interference.

 

[threesixpio]

But for all we know Bugg has no priors and was elbowed in the chest from Mills immediately before the punch. Also Mills was concussed but never lost consciousness

Sure. You raise good points except the elbow to the chest which is only mildly important unless you're saying its some sort of self defence ... anyway ....

 

[Coops93]

Cue the personal attacks and calls for sacking etc for Danny Green having an opinion that goes against the PC driven message as is the way of 2017

Considering he is pushing the coward punch can kill campaign I think he deserves it.

 

[MC Extra Dollop]

I agree to him to a point. Not sure about the weak chin part, but I don't think Bugg intended to KO him, just reckon when he threw the punch, he flushed him in the right/wrong spot and KO'd him.

Deserves his 6 wks or whatever he gets, for throwing the punch, but I think he's as much unlucky as he is stupid.

Like all those blokes that just feel like punching someone outside a nightclub at 4am and end up on manslaughter charges? Chances are most of them weren't heading out that night, intending to kill a stranger.

This is an absolutely staggering position for Green to take, considering his aggressive campaign against one punch violence. Bugg threw a punch. I can't see any reasonable reason, other than he felt like throwing a punch. There's his intent, he wanted to throw a punch, not he wanted to knock someone out. I can't imagine many players in the past 10 years legitimately trying to knock an opponent out, even Barry Hall probably didn't want to knock Staker out. So I'm not sure how it's relevant.

 

[Mcarcherey]

One of the greatest boxers of all time has weighed in on the Bugg hit on Mills, saying there was nothing in it and that Mills was incredibly unlucky to be knocked out.

Danny Green has said that Bugg did not intend to hit Mills in the head and that the only reason Mills was knocked out was because he has a weak chin.

This has changed my opinion on the incident. Danny Green is a champion Boxer, it's his job to throw punches. He knows the force required to knock someone out, what is deliberate and what isn't. I think people should give Bugg a break, as an expert on the topic has given an opinion that sheds new light on the incident.

Article:
https://www.google.com.au/amp/s/cou...s/news-story/2e646e3e2e3aeb072727f91b25f9c2b1

stopped reading 8 words in

 

[Marc_Remillard]

His summation is fair
Was a fluke hook that connected perfectly in the right spot. Unlucky for mills and for bugg.
But he chose to swing his fist at a players head. So you cop the consequences of your actions.

Good summary

 

[MC Extra Dollop]

Danny Green had a bit to say about Ali Fahour.

“It will be interesting to see what they (the AFL) do, because it’s a very delicate situation for them.

“But it would appear like a black and white situation, and I would be very surprised if they don’t take this very seriously, because all eyes are on them and how they react to this.

“It was the exact thing I’m campaigning against,’’ Green said. “The bloke didn’t see it coming in the end and it didn’t need to happen.”

I realise the incidents aren't exactly the same but really Danny...

Geez...he's quite the dial-a-quote these days, isn't he?

I've always had a feeling that Green was at least as big a flog as Mundine and that once Mundine no longer needed to put on the villain hat to try to generate interest in his fights, that he'd actually turn out to be a much better bloke. I'm very happy to stick with that.

 

[smasha]

Media trying to get Bugg off when Houli was crucified for his actions.

#