|
|
|
View previous topic :: View next topic |
Author |
Message |
Jezza
2023 PREMIERS!
Joined: 06 Sep 2010 Location: Ponsford End
|
Post subject: | |
|
With a quick search around various forums, it isn't too hard to identify the relevant player. _________________ | 1902 | 1903 | 1910 | 1917 | 1919 | 1927 | 1928 | 1929 | 1930 | 1935 | 1936 | 1953 | 1958 | 1990 | 2010 | 2023 | |
|
|
|
|
ronrat
Joined: 22 May 2006 Location: Thailand
|
Post subject: | |
|
Yes Jezza but whose tits where they _________________ Annoying opposition supporters since 1967. |
|
|
|
|
stui magpie
Prepare for the worst, hope for the best.
Joined: 03 May 2005 Location: In flagrante delicto
|
Post subject: | |
|
Jezza wrote: | With a quick search around various forums, it isn't too hard to identify the relevant player. |
Even this one. _________________ Every dead body on Mt Everest was once a highly motivated person, so maybe just calm the **** down. |
|
|
|
|
K
Joined: 09 Sep 2011
|
|
|
|
|
David
I dare you to try
Joined: 27 Jul 2003 Location: Andromeda
|
|
|
|
|
Pies4shaw
pies4shaw
Joined: 08 Oct 2007
|
Post subject: | |
|
Who is Nathan Broad? |
|
|
|
|
watt price tully
Joined: 15 May 2007
|
Post subject: | |
|
Pies4shaw wrote: | Who is Nathan Broad? |
Careful, while Tannin's signature is "Commas can kill" apostrophes can make all the difference & unintentionally invite sexist claims.
Who is Nathan's Broad? _________________ “I even went as far as becoming a Southern Baptist until I realised they didn’t keep ‘em under long enough” Kinky Friedman |
|
|
|
|
watt price tully
Joined: 15 May 2007
|
Post subject: | |
|
3 weeks suspension is really piss weak. Should have been 12 months.
Had this type of behaviour be deemed "revenge porn" Broad could have been jailed for up to two years.
I like his seemingly remorseful behaviour but 3 weeks seems really far too little a consequence for Broad's irresponsible and destructive behaviour.
The more this type of behaviour is outed the better. _________________ “I even went as far as becoming a Southern Baptist until I realised they didn’t keep ‘em under long enough” Kinky Friedman |
|
|
|
|
David
I dare you to try
Joined: 27 Jul 2003 Location: Andromeda
|
Post subject: | |
|
^ Really? Its wrong and I agree that it needs to be cracked down upon; but, as mentioned above, this is pretty mild as 'revenge porn' goes a) the victim could not have been identified, which is a pretty major aspect of the harm committed in such cases; b) it was not an explicitly sexual or sexualised photograph, which again makes it much less harmful than the 'revenge porn' most of us would be familiar with; and c) the victim elected not to pursue charges. So, no, I don't think there's any way a jail term could have been applied here, and a 12-month suspension for an 'off-field' incident would have been an outrageously draconian finding, particularly given the much shorter suspensions players have faced for physical assaults and the like. (On that note, I wonder if there's something a bit old-fashioned about some of the responses to this act like, a woman having her 'honour' besmirched by having a partially naked photo of herself circulated is seen as somehow tantamount to, or worse than, a man being punched in the face. And we know from experience that men who are victims of this kind of 'revenge porn' aren't treated with nearly as much sympathy.)
Ultimately, the player has been publicly named, been forced to endure a humiliating press conference and is going to miss the start of the next season. That seems a sufficient punishment for the crime (inasmuch as the AFL should be doling out punishments for off-field behaviour at all, but you all know how I feel about that). _________________ All watched over by machines of loving grace |
|
|
|
|
watt price tully
Joined: 15 May 2007
|
Post subject: | |
|
David wrote: | ^ Really? Its wrong and I agree that it needs to be cracked down upon; but, as mentioned above, this is pretty mild as 'revenge porn' goes a) the victim could not have been identified, which is a pretty major aspect of the harm committed in such cases; b) it was not an explicitly sexual or sexualised photograph, which again makes it much less harmful than the 'revenge porn' most of us would be familiar with; and c) the victim elected not to pursue charges. So, no, I don't think there's any way a jail term could have been applied here, and a 12-month suspension for an 'off-field' incident would have been an outrageously draconian finding, particularly given the much shorter suspensions players have faced for physical assaults and the like. (On that note, I wonder if there's something a bit old-fashioned about some of the responses to this act like, a woman having her 'honour' besmirched by having a partially naked photo of herself circulated is seen as somehow tantamount to, or worse than, a man being punched in the face. And we know from experience that men who are victims of this kind of 'revenge porn' aren't treated with nearly as much sympathy.)
Ultimately, the player has been publicly named, been forced to endure a humiliating press conference and is going to miss the start of the next season. That seems a sufficient punishment for the crime (inasmuch as the AFL should be doling out punishments for off-field behaviour at all, but you all know how I feel about that). |
I was under the impression:
That if the victim went ahead with legal action she then get's named.
By not pursuing legal action she doen't get named
Punish it hard now & set this up as learning expreience for the future.
3 games is nowhere near enough to act as a deterrent. _________________ “I even went as far as becoming a Southern Baptist until I realised they didn’t keep ‘em under long enough” Kinky Friedman |
|
|
|
|
David
I dare you to try
Joined: 27 Jul 2003 Location: Andromeda
|
Post subject: | |
|
On the contrary, I think a lot of players will be thinking twice about doing this kind of thing after today and given the comparative mildness of the offence, the club and AFL's response sends a pretty strong message. I don't think many players would want to be in Nathan Broad's shoes right now. _________________ All watched over by machines of loving grace |
|
|
|
|
watt price tully
Joined: 15 May 2007
|
Post subject: | |
|
David wrote: | On the contrary, I think a lot of players will be thinking twice about doing this kind of thing after today and given the comparative mildness of the offence, the club and AFL's response sends a pretty strong message. I don't think many players would want to be in Nathan Broad's shoes right now. |
3 weeks is hardly a disincentive. Broad should feel highly embarrassed by his serious wrongdoing here.
Reinforce "players thinking twice" about it by sending a stronger message - by applying a consequence on the field than a mere and paltry 3 weeks. _________________ “I even went as far as becoming a Southern Baptist until I realised they didn’t keep ‘em under long enough” Kinky Friedman |
|
|
|
|
luvdids
Joined: 22 Mar 2008 Location: work
|
Post subject: | |
|
David wrote: | On the contrary, I think a lot of players will be thinking twice about doing this kind of thing after today and given the comparative mildness of the offence, the club and AFL's response sends a pretty strong message. I don't think many players would want to be in Nathan Broad's shoes right now. |
Really? Although it wasn't too graphic (ie: no genitals) and wasn't a picture showing her identity, surely the fact that he thought it was ok is more the issue? Not what's in it, not if you can see her face, just the simple fact he thought it was a good idea. IMHO that's more than "mild", that's what the main problem is for me. Glad to see he looked genuinely remorseful.
(and interesting to note he knew her before the GF, she wasn't some 'let's find a GF winning footballer as some here have claimed") |
|
|
|
|
David
I dare you to try
Joined: 27 Jul 2003 Location: Andromeda
|
Post subject: | |
|
What he did was ethically wrong and against the law, and I think all have acknowledged that. What I mean by mild is that it was on the low (perhaps, indeed, the very lowest) end of this type of offending. _________________ All watched over by machines of loving grace |
|
|
|
|
stui magpie
Prepare for the worst, hope for the best.
Joined: 03 May 2005 Location: In flagrante delicto
|
Post subject: | |
|
David wrote: | ^ Really? Its wrong and I agree that it needs to be cracked down upon; but, as mentioned above, this is pretty mild as 'revenge porn' goes a) the victim could not have been identified, which is a pretty major aspect of the harm committed in such cases; b) it was not an explicitly sexual or sexualised photograph, which again makes it much less harmful than the 'revenge porn' most of us would be familiar with; and c) the victim elected not to pursue charges. So, no, I don't think there's any way a jail term could have been applied here, and a 12-month suspension for an 'off-field' incident would have been an outrageously draconian finding, particularly given the much shorter suspensions players have faced for physical assaults and the like. (On that note, I wonder if there's something a bit old-fashioned about some of the responses to this act like, a woman having her 'honour' besmirched by having a partially naked photo of herself circulated is seen as somehow tantamount to, or worse than, a man being punched in the face. And we know from experience that men who are victims of this kind of 'revenge porn' aren't treated with nearly as much sympathy.)
Ultimately, the player has been publicly named, been forced to endure a humiliating press conference and is going to miss the start of the next season. That seems a sufficient punishment for the crime (inasmuch as the AFL should be doling out punishments for off-field behaviour at all, but you all know how I feel about that). |
Like AFL footballers who send nude picks to trolls pretending to be women? Reiwoldt and the St Kilda Schoolgirl photos? _________________ Every dead body on Mt Everest was once a highly motivated person, so maybe just calm the **** down. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum You cannot attach files in this forum You cannot download files in this forum
|
|