The Great Big Consolidated Alan Didak thread

[spikey]

some one told me some pie supporters called him a murder if that is true that is so wrong he did not kill anyone ! all people i have talked to including hawk supporters thinks that is wrong shame on those who did no matter what team they support !

[Neil Appleby]

In today's Age Tim Lane makes some very good points re Didak.
Here is a quote.

A club banning an adult from drinking is surely an outrageous breach of his rights. Didak says he doesn't believe he has a drinking problem. From now, if he sits down and has a can of beer while watching a movie or a game of footy on TV, he violates his contract.

If he chooses to exercise his rights as a citizen and do it publicly, he's a goner. Such a draconian measure looks suspiciously like one intended to speak of firm action. Unfortunately, it's firm but not fair.


Couldn't agree more; smacks of of a knee jerk reaction; is impossible to enforce and is a breach of civil liberties.

A suspension for a week would have sent a message and given Didak some rest from the public and media spotlight.

[Dark Lord]

If it wasn't for the disgraceful media witchhunt, then such "draconian measures" would not have been necessary to placate them.

[Joel]

He could choose not to agree - but he'd look like an idiot, and he certainly wouldn't be at Collingwood next year. There would also be a chance of a similar thing happening again if this sort of action wasn't taken. Hopefully it's a wake up call.

[~Madness~]

When are we actually going to stop talking about the penalty on here?

[Zakal]

Yes its a fair point, but its also a logically inconsistent one.


If its Didak's inalienable right to drink in public...why exactly is he being punished?

[Magpie Since 1986]

What a load of crap. If we are going to speak of Didak's autonomy as a competent adult then what about freedom of contract? Didak is free to negotiate for whatever terms he likes, if he doesn't like it he is free to walk away, any restrictions on his liberty are self-imposed.

[Captain_MyCaptain]

[Dale61]

Is it just me or does anyone else think that an employer has the right to decide what one of it's employees can and cannot do?

As a full time footballer, Dids, or any other player for that matter, is a representative of the club 24/7, and as the club pays their wage, the club has every right to tell the player what he can and cannot do.

I know that if I was paying someone $300,000+ a year to represent me, I'd certainly make sure I was represented in the best possible way at ALL times.

[STOKA35]

Big Al would be allowed to have a few quiet ones out in public but not to go out past his curfew and turn one on.

[skaman]

The Prez said today during half time it was Dids who wanted to change his lifestyle to stay a Pie. Ed said he as well as a couple of other players and personel around the club offered to do the same, in support. Club is being very supportive in my view. Two things are crystal clear, Dids wants to clean up his act, and Dids wants to remain a Pie. Game on.

[DaVe86]

If i believe Ed, it is Didak who wanted this penalty, not the club. Eddie spoke of his hesitations as one slip up means he could be gone at any time.

[Zakal]

[Cam]

What happens if we win the flag though lol

[Proud Pies]