TOPIC: You're A Bald Headed Flog

Walter the baker You're A Bald Headed Flog 3 months 1 week ago #141

Walter the baker
Roger, I can’t imagine any Slime supporter even admitting to eating a pie . On the other hand, if they threw some of their mum’s cucumber sandwiches it would be a different story. They would be instantly ejected for displaying such shockingly bad manners.
Login to reply,

The_Yeti You're A Bald Headed Flog 3 months 1 week ago #142

The_Yeti
So, you're saying that Nicholls was spooked because the guy ran 2 bays over to hurl an insult.

Are you seriously putting up that Nicholls watched this guy running from 2 bays over and that spooked him?

An umpire could pick out a single fan and somehow know he was coming his way?

Yeah, no. Nicholls wasn't spooked by a fan running from 2 bays over because Nicholls wouldn't have known until AFTER the fan was ejected.

A far more likely scenario was that Nicholls got the dirts on because some bloke ticked him off about a poor decision and all this running from 2 bays over is the AFL trying to justify Nicholls stupid reaction.

Yeah Nicholls acted the flog
Egurls Suck!
Login to reply,
Raglan Matt said You Beaut

shane You're A Bald Headed Flog 3 months 1 week ago #143

shane
He was taken by private security into an interrogation room, photographed and removed from the ground without just cause. That's humiliating and distressing.

Nicholls has the backing of a huge, very powerful organisation. Their influence, their lawyers and his private wealth from a very lucrative profession. He even has private security guards protecting him.

The bloke they carted off is the vulnerable one here. Your opinion of his character shouldn't have any bearing on his rights.
Login to reply,
The_Yeti, pollyanna, Raglan Matt said You Beaut

hypen You're A Bald Headed Flog 3 months 1 week ago #144

hypen
You just don't do that at the footy (run two bays to abuse) or bloody anywhere else and if security saw him doing it I reckon they should tell him to calm down - it's the talk the Collingwood fan got from the cops. It's not on.

If Nicholls did nothing more than point him out, it really sits with security and not Nicholls. But in true umpire fashion he said he felt "threatened" - the flog.

Speaking of flogs Bob is on TV right now.
Login to reply,

Corporal Agarn You're A Bald Headed Flog 3 months 1 week ago #145

Corporal Agarn
I can't believe the beer at Optus is being criticised compared to the water down dishwater that used to be the go at Subi.
Login to reply,

hypen You're A Bald Headed Flog 3 months 1 week ago #146

hypen
I'd just like a normal beer. I feel like I'm inhaling soap every time I have one of those beers. Just give me a draft beer. Swan Draught at the Grosvenor, Corporal. Good stuff.
Login to reply,
Corporal Agarn said You Beaut

rogerrocks You're A Bald Headed Flog 3 months 1 week ago #147

rogerrocks
I saw security take an opposition fan away at Subi once. As they went past me I told them that there was nothing amiss with his behaviour. Two minutes later he was back in his seat. But I don't trust the current crop of security staff to be as good.
Login to reply,
Raglan Matt said You Beaut

Morgan You're A Bald Headed Flog 3 months 1 week ago #148

Morgan
So, where do we stand on “"F--- you, you f---ing c---s, let's go" with the caption "F--- these c---s"?

www.theage.com.au/sport/afl/loud-colling...20190612-p51x1c.html
Login to reply,

shane You're A Bald Headed Flog 3 months 1 week ago #149

shane
Good Lord. I'm complaining about over reach in crowd security and you show me an article about his social media feed.

What's your next idea? Background checks before you can get into the footy? Two letters of recommendation? Peerage?
Login to reply,

Morgan You're A Bald Headed Flog 3 months 1 week ago #150

Morgan
Do you think he took himself out of context?
Login to reply,
purple kit, rogerrocks said You Beaut

The_Yeti You're A Bald Headed Flog 3 months 1 week ago #151

The_Yeti
This is a very unusual approach, even for you, Morgan.

How do you feel about convicting people based on their social media posts from previous years?

There were a whole stack of witnesses that have confirmed he didn't swear, didn't say anything aggressive, basically didn't do anything except yell too loud.

What he's posted on social media in the past has nothing to do with his behaviour at the time in question. Dragging up his social media posts in relation to this occurrence is nothing more than character assassination as it has zero relevance to the events being discussed.
Egurls Suck!
Login to reply,

Morgan You're A Bald Headed Flog 3 months 1 week ago #152

Morgan
Yeti, nothing about this is black and white. We all agree that there is line between ‘supporting’ and something that’s not acceptable. The problem is that line is a vague social construct and so it’s impossible to define precisely and people will have very different opinions of where it is.

Accordingly, there will be times when security will get this wrong: if they let fans stray too far into genuinely obnoxious and unsociable behaviour then the crowd around them suffers, and there can even be instances of violence; the reputation of the game suffers and people will stop going to games. If they are too heavy handed then people on the right side of the line (but likely only just) will be unfairly singled out, it affects the reputation of the game and people will stop going to games.

If a Port supporter this weekend yelled ‘feeling anxious Jesse’ every time Hogan got near the ball at the top of his lungs and looking in my direction I would tell him to knock it off, and if he didn’t I would probably feel inclined to take a swing or tell security, depending on how many beers I had and whether I was with my kid or not. If security told him to tone it down he could say ‘well, I’m not swearing and I’m just being loud, but I think that’s crossing the line because it’s personal. I reckon most on here would agree, but a lot of idiots would think it was funny.

What people are trying to parse is how well or badly security and the police did in this instance with very little information. Remember, this bloke wasn’t kicked out of the game, and the issue people have is too many police officers were on the scene (my guess being they are on alert after recent instances of violence where they were probably worried they didn’t do enough to stop it). Of 75,000 fans at the game there was something about this one supporter that caused police to tell him to pipe down.

None of this is conclusive of whether the police were right to tap him on the shoulder, including in the numbers they did, but if you are going to hitch the civil liberty wagon to a horse, this is a particularly sweary and abusive horse that has been flagged by supporters of at least two different teams, and whom security and the police felt comfortable intervening with. His stated view of what is appropriate at the football is at odds with footage he posted of himself at the football acting in an abusive way. I think that is relevant and it makes him a less reliable witness in my eyes relative to the police.
Login to reply,
Bizkit, rogerrocks said You Beaut

The_Yeti You're A Bald Headed Flog 3 months 1 week ago #153

The_Yeti
That's complete garbage, morgan.

You continue to try to obfuscate the events that took place because you cannot admit you were wrong.

He was in a Collingwood section, cheering for a Collingwood player who had just kicked a good goal and was reported by opposition supporters for 'being loud'. Not swearing, not abusive, not aggressive and certainly not crossing any liones with his comments about an opposition player's mental health.

This is not a grey area. This IS black and white. On this occasion, he did nothing wrong.

Dragging up social media posts from last year to try an engineer some sort of guilt by association is just poor on your behalf. There is a very good reason why that is not allowed to happen in a courtroom as it is dishonest and prejudicial.

There were witnesses to the events and they ALL state he did and said nothing wrong.

You carefully ignored all of that while taking a cheap shot over something that did not happen during the events under discussion.

What you are trying to justify is convicting someone because they had done it in the past so they are probably guilty again. Try running that argument past one of your managing partners and see how long you last.
Egurls Suck!
Login to reply,

Morgan You're A Bald Headed Flog 3 months 1 week ago #154

Morgan
Yeti, the only version of events we’ve heard is from Mr Grech. He has a view on what led to him being told to pipe down, but that is just his view. In the same way the Carlton bloke thought he was tossed for what he said, others have made the point that it was what he did (ie, run up to the umpire’s exit like a crazy person).

On Grech’s words the police accused him of ‘unsociable barracking’. Maybe that was ‘just being too loud’ or maybe that was any number of things that happened from the time the game started, to the time Melbourne alerted security, to the time the police turned up. Maybe they were keeping a closer than usual eye on him because he’d been dobbed in before. Again, you might think that’s overreach, but others might think if there’s a pattern of supporters complaining about one individual security has an obligation to keep a bit more of an eye on that person. It’s a tough call for the ground security.

Like I said, we are all trading in the absence of certain facts (in part because the police and the Melbourne fans haven’t called up the radio to give their side of the story), but if you want to demonstrate massive AFL/security/police overreach, I just don’t see this example as being particularly persuasive.

We’ve run this topic into the ground a bit, so perhaps I’ll leave it at that.
Login to reply,