Western Bulldogs accused of earlier, 'raunchier' video

[Ant_]

Yeah I must have a miss spent youth, as I thought of merkin as well

 

[Captain Sensible]

She's fairly good looking, pity about the last few stories she's written

A google image search of her name proves that she's used to skating on thin ice;

 

[Captain Sensible]

Yeah I must have a miss spent youth, as I thought of merkin as well

Not so much a misspent youth. It probably proves that we havent quite grown up yet!

 

[Ant_]

Not so much a misspent youth. It probably proves that we havent quite grown up yet!

Yeah or it could be that.

 

[dogwatch]

A firkin is a 9 gallon (40.5 litre) barrel, sometimes used for holding butter.

 

[Werewolf]

A firkin is a 9 gallon (40.5 litre) barrel, sometimes used for holding butter.

Well that figures, her stories didn't hold water did they?

 

[RoyBoyTurnedDog]

Well that figures, her stories didn't hold water did they?

Bada-bing, bada-boom. Nice work.

 

[The Coon Dog]

Not too sure why everyone seems so uptight about what has been reported.

If it's fact (& I've no reason to believe it isn't) then all the journo has done is her job, that of reporting the facts.

Yeah, it might seem trivial, but the journo has only told the truth ie: it was up on YT, it was pulled, it contained nudity.

 

[comrade]

Not too sure why everyone seems so uptight about what has been reported.

If it's fact (& I've no reason to believe it isn't) then all the journo has done is her job, that of reporting the facts.

Yeah, it might seem trivial, but the journo has only told the truth ie: it was up on YT, it was pulled, it contained nudity.

Come on TCD.

The 'reporter' (and I use the word very lightly) is clearly trying to leverage off the Hong Kong clip and create a stir. We're talking about a video clip that is 14 years old, features no current players and has no relevance whatsoever to the Hong Kong clip despite the tenuous link the article tries to create.

Earlier, raunchier video. Yeah, 14 years earlier for Pete's sake.

The fact that the article has been taken off the front of their website suggests they trying to distance themselves from it after realising it was pure gutter journalism.

Next she'll be bring up Captain Groenewegen's antics as an example of the Bulldogs culture.


[FONT=&quot][/FONT]

 

[Kelvin31]

So let me get this straight, and this is not reteorical. This HS "reporter" that some are defending, found out that there was a raunchy video from 1996 (Year of the Dog doco?) which can be purchased anywhere (JB Hifi etc..) and tried to make a You Tube story out of it early this morning? (The Age didn't report it).
Only to have the HS pull it from there website home page today without any clarification? What's the bigger story here, Melbourne journos not doing their research on old aired docos, that she hasn't seen and were probably made when she was a kid? Is this fairdinkum or a hoax?

 

[Dry Rot]

So let me get this straight, and this is not reteorical. This HS "reporter" that some are defending, found out that there was a raunchy video from 1996 (Year of the Dog doco?) which can be purchased anywhere (JB Hifi etc..) and tried to make a You Tube story out of it early this morning? (The Age didn't report it).
Only to have the HS pull it from there website home page today without any clarification? What's the bigger story here, Melbourne journos not doing their research on old aired docos, that she hasn't seen and were probably made when she was a kid? Is this fairdinkum or a hoax?

That journo is a ****ing disgrace. Ditto her newspaper and website.

IIRC The doco got an AFI award for Best Doco of the Year. And made me a Dogs supporter.

 

[XXX5]

The sad thing about 'the Elephant' scene in the film was that it was shown in the context of what the players were doing to raise money for their end of season trip.

Things have really changed significantly since then for the financial position of the Club and it's players.

More of a story in that in my opinion than a cheap pot shot.

 

[XXX5]

Oops! Double post.

 

[Kelvin31]

I noticed there is no retort or apology to our club in todays HS paper or on their website......nice.
Thres a couple of of Food Recalls and Safeway catalogue misprint apoligies, buit that is it. I hope the club have spoken to this "journo".

 

[Johnno_6]

The journalist is "firkin" typical of the Herald Sun. A big beat up, the whole thing.

 

[Dogs Rule]

I noticed there is no retort or apology to our club in todays HS paper or on their website......nice.
Thres a couple of of Food Recalls and Safeway catalogue misprint apoligies, buit that is it. I hope the club have spoken to this "journo".

Demand an apology. Not one of current playing list was part of that 1996 season or that elephant walk.

Bloody disgrace.

God help us all if Firkin is a reflection of today's crop of young journalists. Muckracking of the worst kind.

 

[DoggyStyle]

Not too sure why everyone seems so uptight about what has been reported.

If it's fact (& I've no reason to believe it isn't) then all the journo has done is her job, that of reporting the facts.

Yeah, it might seem trivial, but the journo has only told the truth ie: it was up on YT, it was pulled, it contained nudity.

What was reported was a deliberate disclosure of only part of the story (albeit truthful) to sell newspapers.

If she was reporting the facts she would have stated that the YouTube vision was out of commercially available and produced documentary called the "year of the dog".

Although who would have bought a paper to read about a piece of vision that they already had seen or new about.

bordering on libelous IMHO

 

[always right]

What was reported was a deliberately disclosure of only part of the story (albeit truthful) to sell newspapers.

If she was reporting the facts she would have stated that the YouTube vision was out of commercially available and produced documentary called the "year of the dog".

Although who would have bought a paper to read about a piece of vision that they already had seen or new about.

bordering on libelous IMHO

Was it in the paper or just online?

 

[Dogs Rule]

Was it in the paper or just online?

Both.

The girls going along to this players review in 1996 would have known what they were going to get served up on the night, and if they were at all offended by it, they wouldn't have gone.

One of the biggest non-stories of the year. However, mud sticks, so the club should get on the front foot and put this clown of a reporter and her newspaper in their place.

 

[cramdogs]

Was it in the paper or just online?

It was in the actual printed paper, I think bottom of page 3 or 5.

Absolutely disgraceful reporting. If it was footage from Year of the Dogs, it would have been obvious and should have been disclosed in the article. But the reporter deliberately chose to omit information to paint a different picture.

You just wonder what other news/information the HS withholds to stir sensationalism.