Heath Shaw... dear oh dear

[Clegs11]

Looks like his new contract did come into effect immediately:
http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2008/07/18/2307482.htm

Interesting article...seems like a premeditated act from Didak to go out and get wasted. "It's good that I'm going to be treated like any other individual in the team, and I'm looking forward to the challenge." Must be a tough challenege to not get wasted and encourage ya mate to drink drive, I feel ya pain Alan.

That said, find it funny that the only guy who commited an illegal act is the one who's staying:
Alan Didak to be boned by Collingwood | The Australian

Just have to ask, does anyone honestly think Johnathon Brown is going to give up a chance to finish his career at Brisbane, who actually look like they're developing fast, to go to a team that is doing nothing but going backwards? I guess money will talk

 

[33WING]

I'm not even going to comment on the actions of Collingwood's soft approach towards this recent drink driving case but J.Brown could be a chance to come back to the big V, he wants a 5 year contract and it looks like the Lions don't want to come to the party, Hopefully it's not Collingwood.

I hope he comes back home to Victoria.

 

[nenjabin]

I'm not even going to comment on the actions of Collingwood's soft approach towards this recent drink driving case but J.Brown could be a chance to come back to the big V, he wants a 5 year contract and it looks like the Lions don't want to come to the party, Hopefully it's not Collingwood.

I hope he comes back home to Victoria.

It's off topic but I say let the Pies have him. He's got 4 years left in him at the most the way he bashes and crashes around and he'll likely miss a bunch of games with injury and perhaps suspension, so if they're willing to give him 1/8th of the salary for that and be locked up for years, eh.

 

[Dr. Curlytek]

What biased judgement? The only biased judgement I am seeing here is that of a Collingwood supporter and Didak fan who can't see the harm that the actions of Didak has done to the club.

Ok maybe I stepped a little too far saying it was in his contract, cause it likely isn't, but you're telling me that Collingwood didn't give Didak a final warning/ultimatum last time when all that stuff went down? Yes they did, it was even stated in the press. The exact details would be behind closed doors, but do open your eyes. That's why they lied. Not because they're stupid, but because he knew that if it got back to the club he'd be on shakey ground. As it turns out, it came out and he's on even worse standing, but Didak knew that if he got caught doing something of this nature again then he was going to be under heavy review/out the door and so he and Shaw lied to try and save his arse. That is why it is wrong and what they did wrong. Does an employer need any more? No.

What biased judgements did I make? I'm just reading between some very wide open lines because there are holes everywhere in this whole debarcle that have to be filled and 'stupidity' doesn't begin to fill any of them.

I think the strongest words in this thread were spoken in Cal's last post. I wouldn't be handing in my Melbourne membership if this centered around a Melbourne player, but I'd certainly be ropable at a management that didn't act to remove the cancer.

Well, biased judgments was probably the wrong wording, I was referring to the reading between the lines as I don't think it is valid to base arguments on filling the blanks.

I myself am trying not to be biased, if you think my statements on this matter are then that is fine, everyone is entitled to their opinion. I still find it hard to comprehend how someone (anyone, not a Collingwood player, a footballer, an Australian, but anyone) can be hung out to dry over what to my eye are set of pretty tame incidents all of which the root problem is getting drunk. Maybe clubs need to start putting stricter conditions in all players contracts determining their everyday behaviour.

Anyway, sorry to anyone offended by my line of arguments, none intended.

 

[nenjabin]

Well, biased judgments was probably the wrong wording, I was referring to the reading between the lines as I don't think it is valid to base arguments on filling the blanks.

I myself am trying not to be biased, if you think my statements on this matter are then that is fine, everyone is entitled to their opinion. I still find it hard to comprehend how someone (anyone, not a Collingwood player, a footballer, an Australian, but anyone) can be hung out to dry over what to my eye are set of pretty tame incidents all of which the root problem is getting drunk. Maybe clubs need to start putting stricter conditions in all players contracts determining their everyday behaviour.

Anyway, sorry to anyone offended by my line of arguments, none intended.

Ah I see Yeah between the lines can be bodgy, but then your president actually stated after the underworld incident that next time he acts up, the players contract will be terminated. So I guess the hot water that surrounds all this really was actually put on by the Eddie in the first place!

Also, RE: "Maybe clubs need to start putting stricter conditions in all players contracts determining their everyday behaviour", they should I guess, but it's clear that Didak has been told what guidelines to follow in the past since it's not the first club tainting incident so it wouldn't have been needed in his case. Mind you, it shouldn;t be needed in any player case given the media scrum that occurs when a Fevola, Didak, Tarrant, now Shaw, Uhhh...Cousins? etc etc get drunk and do something stupid. Surely they realise that if it's bad for 1 it's bad for all and just don't do it? Now there is where the stupidity comes in!

 

[drewjulz]

Alan Didak is was and always will be scum!! from ameteur league footy throught to Port Magpies and now Collingwood,Has never and will never change.Waste of a good football,not the first and wont be the last!

 

[Clegs11]

Anyway, sorry to anyone offended by my line of arguments, none intended.

I'm not offended dude. I always love a good rant and bash with a Collingwood supporter

I keep seeing the common argument thrown up in the papers that the Collingwood board obviously views lying to the club more serious then drink driving because of the penalties dished out. Just think it's funny the same people who view Collingwood as soft don't look at the communities punishment of what Shaw did, a $463 fine and lose of licence, as opposed to Collingwood's $10,000 fine. Pretty sure any lose of licence could be well and truely covered with $10,000 worth of taxi fares, so Collingwood's punishment seems greater then the general publics in my opinion.