Your one stop shop for all things Collectable!

Suspend Selwood and let Headland off, if this is true....

Richo said:
Yeah we knew you last year when they were winning :lol:
Haven't heard much from you this year (tic)(lol)

As for Selwood ! yeah nice call, you call him a w*nker and you don't even know what he said !
Nice work ! and Nice language !
Click to expand...

yeah my boyz are stuggling it's no secret, but they'll still play their part in the finals, black & johnson are the two most missed, Solomon is a piece of rubbish- what a waste of draft picks

If that is what Selwood said then he is a tosser, if not who cares really what I think of one eagles player..Des still has to control his rage no matter what was said
 
I think selwood is a wanker
just cause I do so what about that! Has anyone ever heard of good sportsman ship from both parties bit like chris jud wishing the dockers the best after the game, normally the good sports man are the best like James duncan judd pavlich and agreed with "reign" headland should of saved his anger and channeld into the biggest shouder charge possible I know thats what I would of done and knocked him out with a kidney blow. Either way you dont say you slept with a 6 year old and im pretty sure selwood would of known who that was on his arm and I think he new that headland would of reacted like that and im friends with hedlans little sister 23 and she is one of the nicest people ive meet so dont go maiking hedland the bad guy well as bad as you make him out to be! hell get suspened and hopefully learn ..........come on dockers! wait till jhonson and farmer be back whoop whoop.
 
well now he's come out saying that he got punched first and that led him to say what ever he said.

poor baby :(

now if that isnt the worse excuse ever. i tried that back in year 5 and got the cane so he's goooonnnneeeeeeeeee.
 
ducky_poo said:
well now he's come out saying that he got punched first and that led him to say what ever he said.
Click to expand...

Given that reasoning, you are condemning someone for using words as opposed to physical violence to defend themselves?

Interesting
 
HBM said:
Given that reasoning, you are condemning someone for using words as opposed to physical violence to defend themselves?

Interesting
Click to expand...

I think more than anything it is an interpretation that he realises he is in trouble so why not say he was hit first..... but even then that would NOT excuse the specific words he said. Again not saying Headland should have reacted the way he did, but if its true, I don't blame him.
 
wolvesjr34 said:
I think more than anything it is an interpretation that he realises he is in trouble so why not say he was hit first..... but even then that would NOT excuse the specific words he said. Again not saying Headland should have reacted the way he did, but if its true, I don't blame him.
Click to expand...

If Headland did indeed strike Selwood before anything was said, then all bets are off, in my book. If Selwood was assaulted prior to him saying anything to Headland, then Headland should cop it sweet.
 
HBM said:
If Headland did indeed strike Selwood before anything was said, then all bets are off, in my book. If Selwood was assaulted prior to him saying anything to Headland, then Headland should cop it sweet.
Click to expand...

Yeah he should, but doesn't matter what Headland did there is no excuse in today's society to say what was allegedly said, and that itself has brought the game into disrepute. Selwood should be punished.

It was about a six year old girl for crying out loud!
 
Are they going to be able to PROVE what was said either way? Selwood is not going to admit that he dished out that level of verbal abuse, so they are going to have to have lip readers and excellent video footage (I doubt there will be any witnesses coming forward) to be able pin it to him.

Now, I don't think that the things that Selwood has allegedly said are at all appropriate.....but I myself can't see their full "power" as many outraged others clearly can. Just because something is said doesn't make it happen, they are still just words. If he had of substituted daughter for mother then it wouldn't even be an issue I guess, but would that difference really make the slur any less 'offensive'? I think the most likely scenario would be that Selwood refered to the picture not knowing who it was, then may have added a stupid regretable statement in the heat of the moment. If he actually said what Hedland accused him of in a premeditated way, then that certainly justifies any negativity toward Selwood.

Does anyone find it strange that Hedland would have a tattoo of that nature depicting his six year old daughter in the first place?
 
they should put a recording device on each player so they know exactly what was said

Does anyone find it strange that Hedland would have a tattoo of that nature depicting his six year old daughter in the first place?
Click to expand...

It is a bit much, but not strange, I have a mate who tattooed his wife & kids names on his arm - and they're quite big.
 
card_craze said:
they should put a recording device on each player so they know exactly what was said



It is a bit much, but not strange, I have a mate who tattooed his wife & kids names on his arm - and they're quite big.
Click to expand...

Tattoo with names of loved ones...not surprising at all. A picture of a six year old girl that another man could mistake for an adult, that is a bit much, no?

On the listening devices...it would be a bit of a logistical nightmare to have 40-50 odd mics all operating/recording in the area of a field for the purposes of catching someone saying something offensive. But I guess it could be looked at if it doesn't contavene any privacy laws.
 
Well, I guess Justice is kind of served in a bizarre twist Headland found guilty, but free to play due to a compelling provocation case.

Even if Headland misheard Selwood... the provocation defence should probably stand, because he clearly lost control of his emotions for a very long time....

Of course problem being, this opens the floodgates for more provocation defences.....
 
Happy to see Selwood off, but Headland???

If Selwood was cleared, does that not mean that Headland's assault was unprovoked, thereby making it even worse?
 
what does this mean? a player can verbally abuse another and got away with it? or that a player can bash another and not punished?

...interesting conclusion, indeed
 
Very strange situation?!? Headland found guilty, but under extenuating circumstances is let off. I heard he was crying like a baby during hearing? Anyone back this up?
 
Not an AFL man myself, so a bit of a non-event for me personally. But after seeing a few on hear calling Selwood a wanker and worse, what are the thoughts of those same people now that he's cleared? Not meaning to stir things, but it seems some on here and in the wider community too, let their personal feelings for the teams/players involved get the better of them. Anyway, it seems a fair result with no conclusive proof either way, no-one gets suspended... But I do wonder how things will play out between Selwood and those who called him a paedophile in the press...
 
Not an AFL man myself, so a bit of a non-event for me personally. But after seeing a few on hear calling Selwood a wanker and worse, what are the thoughts of those same people now that he's cleared? Not meaning to stir things, but it seems some on here and in the wider community too, let their personal feelings for the teams/players involved get the better of them. Anyway, it seems a fair result with no conclusive proof either way, no-one gets suspended... But I do wonder how things will play out between Selwood and those who called him a paedophile in the press...
Click to expand...

I think you missed the conclusive proof of Selwood being hit by Headland which is also on video footage. ;)
 
Actually, the only info I had on the entire thing was in print form, so I didn't see a thing of it. What I meant was, if Selwood honestly thinks (knows) he didn't say it, but the other guy honestly believes he did, both sides could be justifiably agrieved. And from that, neither player being charged may be the best thing to help everyone move on. Wasn't taking the other guy's side by any means, matey... ;)


jvalles69 said:
I think you missed the conclusive proof of Selwood being hit by Headland which is also on video footage. ;)
Click to expand...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom