TOPIC:

Thank you for your concern.
PFC's financial position is fine and won't be impacted.

Grump wrote: Interesting piece in the Worst today which will elicit a range of responses that will perhaps polarise the Oz footy community.

O'Donoghue has put forward the argument that if guilty of domestic violence or maybe just violence against women then that is it no career at the highest or second tier.

A crime is a crime no matter what it is but this suggests that this issue is one that carries an attached penalty. Is that fair, is it just and will it have an impact on the football community not just players.

For me I agree with him unreservedly. If you are found guilty of an act of violence against a woman, that is it go and find a sport that tolerates thus type of behaviour. The community standards and expectations for all of us has changed and if you cannot meet that standard then bye bye.

Yes
two things -
this starts at the family level and each and every parent should be forcing the prevention of this to their offspring at every opportunity regardless but unfortunately the bleeding obvious is problem in some cases and that bleeding obvious is passed on
if governments are responsible in eradicating this then the subject should be at education curriculum level at every single school

I've also wondered why the WP individual was sentenced being a lower level comp player yet the AFL level individual wasn't - after breaching a National quarantine as well

as for these two being given second chances , well it really is up to the relevant clubs or league administrations to decide upon - unless a national code is developed for all to adhere to of course

BC wrote: I guess you've got to ask if we ban players with DV convictions what about others with equally as serious strikes against them like assault for instance? If you apply it to those types of felonies as well, then the likes of Andrew Krakouer, the late Shane Yarran, Marley Williams and the list goes on would have been delisted as well. DV is a particularly disgraceful act but where do you draw the line? I don't think Taylor should be stopped from playing footy but I'd be asking a more salient question, does PFC really want someone like him at the club with his long list of indiscretions? Clearly he has a discipline problem.

MMMMM Billings

I’m a believer in second chance. If the offender shows genuine remorse, accepts counselling or retraining, then give them a chance. No such thing as a third chance though.

A more positive option rather than banning a convicted person would be to ask them as a condition of being allowed to play footy, to participate in the education of other young men in making changes to their attitudes towards women and finding more positive ways of dealing with anger and conflict. These programs would be run by professionals but the footballer would need to assist by sharing their story with the participants and helping with group discussions. Being involved in this might also help give the footballer a new perspective as well.

For once you and I are on the same page STD. It's like saying that he'll never work again because it will mean prospective employers are condoning DV. Riddoch is a bit different but where do you draw the line and should the line be drawn at all? I'm not sure the WAFL should be making stands on non-footy issues when its own house is not ideal. Worry about footy I say and let others set social agendas.

Southerner wrote:

Grump wrote: Interesting piece in the Worst today which will elicit a range of responses that will perhaps polarise the Oz footy community.

O'Donoghue has put forward the argument that if guilty of domestic violence or maybe just violence against women then that is it no career at the highest or second tier.

A crime is a crime no matter what it is but this suggests that this issue is one that carries an attached penalty. Is that fair, is it just and will it have an impact on the football community not just players.

For me I agree with him unreservedly. If you are found guilty of an act of violence against a woman, that is it go and find a sport that tolerates thus type of behaviour. The community standards and expectations for all of us has changed and if you cannot meet that standard then bye bye.

Yes
two things -
this starts at the family level and each and every parent should be forcing the prevention of this to their offspring at every opportunity regardless but unfortunately the bleeding obvious is problem in some cases and that bleeding obvious is passed on
if governments are responsible in eradicating this then the subject should be at education curriculum level at every single school

I've also wondered why the WP individual was sentenced being a lower level comp player yet the AFL level individual wasn't - after breaching a National quarantine as well

as for these two being given second chances , well it really is up to the relevant clubs or league administrations to decide upon - unless a national code is developed for all to adhere to of course

Southerner, Rudy didn't have the dollars that The "AFL" lad had to hire the very best Lawyer/Barrister/QC. Sadly in so many cases, it's money that buys better court outcomes.

BC wrote: For once you and I are on the same page STD. It's like saying that he'll never work again because it will mean prospective employers are condoning DV. Riddoch is a bit different but where do you draw the line and should the line be drawn at all? I'm not sure the WAFL should be making stands on non-footy issues when its own house is not ideal. Worry about footy I say and let others set social agendas.

Absolutely agree BC but I bet my left nut the WAFC buckle to pressure from women's groups and the likes of Craig O'Donoghue because they worry about their image and introduce a rule from next year banning any player found guilty of domestic violence against women from playing in the WAFL which I believe should be challenged in court if it happens.

As you say where do we draw the line? Perhaps there can be a term of suspension and certain rehabilitation/education requirements they must fulfill before being allow back in. I think Perth have put some measures in place for Elijah that he must undertake and ex Docker Brady Grey was sitting a few metres away from Elijah when he was being interviewed by Mark Readings on Wednesday night and he has been assigned as a mentor for Elijah Taylor.

If you start sacking an individual for DV, then you must do the same for all violence against any individual, man or woman otherwise you devalue the assault against another bloke. I agree, I personally think violence against a female is abhorrent and cowardly, like the coward punch issue that has caused so much trouble in our community that almost always involves young men, so it's important that the WAFC look at this with clear eyes and don't get swayed by media pressure and pressure from certain self interest groups to make a knee jerk decision.

Second chances? yes in most cases I would agree, if the individual shows genuine remorse and is committed to rehabilitation. But do it twice and you are banned for life.

Senior Seagull wrote:

Southerner wrote:

Grump wrote: Interesting piece in the Worst today which will elicit a range of responses that will perhaps polarise the Oz footy community.

O'Donoghue has put forward the argument that if guilty of domestic violence or maybe just violence against women then that is it no career at the highest or second tier.

A crime is a crime no matter what it is but this suggests that this issue is one that carries an attached penalty. Is that fair, is it just and will it have an impact on the football community not just players.

For me I agree with him unreservedly. If you are found guilty of an act of violence against a woman, that is it go and find a sport that tolerates thus type of behaviour. The community standards and expectations for all of us has changed and if you cannot meet that standard then bye bye.

Yes
two things -
this starts at the family level and each and every parent should be forcing the prevention of this to their offspring at every opportunity regardless but unfortunately the bleeding obvious is problem in some cases and that bleeding obvious is passed on
if governments are responsible in eradicating this then the subject should be at education curriculum level at every single school

I've also wondered why the WP individual was sentenced being a lower level comp player yet the AFL level individual wasn't - after breaching a National quarantine as well

as for these two being given second chances , well it really is up to the relevant clubs or league administrations to decide upon - unless a national code is developed for all to adhere to of course

Southerner, Rudy didn't have the dollars that The "AFL" lad had to hire the very best Lawyer/Barrister/QC. Sadly in so many cases, it's money that buys better court outcomes.

That's rubbish SS. Taylor was a first year player would have been on 60 - 80k max and was suspended for 10 matches by Sydney so never played another game after the Covid hub breach. And Rudy I think already had a spent conviction from a previous DV charge and the Aboriginal Legal Service would have come to his aid.