Jimmy and John and 'that' day...

[Toy Saint]

Was at the game and the incident was in my 'line of sight', although I was watching the ball, some +50 meters further afield, and cannot sat I saw what happened, but I did see Greening hit the deck. From memory the pair had been 'niggling' each other for most of the game (was the incident in the 2nd quarter?). Because Greening was a very good player, I assumed O'Dea was the primary antagonist in the niggle.

I actually cheered when Greening hit the deck, but it became pretty obvious pretty soon that he was very seriously injured, and an eerie feeling engulfed the crowd.

In those days there was a lot of thuggery in the game, every team had half a dozen players who would dish it out. I wonder if anybody has ever assembled the 'Thug's Team of the Century'?

[satchmo]

Satchmo

I know it's a childish comment... But why am I a weak prick? How did you come to that conclusion? Did I king hit a bloke, and never even take responsibility for it and apologise?

No

Why are you so defensive about it? Strike a chord?

Nah, I just hate it when people bang on and preach some sort of higher morality based on something that they have to accept they know nothing about. I was there. I saw it. I know very little about it.
The very same people that have informed you about the abhorrently violent act committed that day actually celebrate the same sort of thing committed by their players in a Grand Final. They LOVE it!

As to the "weak prick" comment, I would suggest that you have a chat to Jim one day and tell him what you think of him and why. And then I would admit I was wrong.

[kosifantutti]

Oh,

Kosifan...

Was Greening destined to play 9 more games after 22?.... Whilst leading the Brownlow at the time of the incident?...

C'mon man...

He may have played again... Briefly...

But so did Jason McCartney after the Bali bombings but I would suggest they ended his career

Nine more than Darren Bourke played.

I'm also interested in your sources. Where did you read that O'Dea never apologised. Where did you read that Greening was leading the Brownlow. Given that they didn't say who got votes in which match, you must have a very good source.

[PADDLEPOP1001]

Greening was leading the Brownlow and nearly all the media awards at that time,Jimmy O"dea has never apologised!

[The Fireman]

Greening was leading the Brownlow and nearly all the media awards at that time,Jimmy O"dea has never apologised!

Oh well...

[PADDLEPOP1001]

Just answering Kosifanutti!

[linz]

Infamous day, no hiding from the fact it was a shameful act!

Greening was seriously injured by an intentional behind the play king hit..... No excuses... O'Dea has to live with the fact he ruined the career of a spectacular footballer... And really, that's what he's best remembered for....

Not sure why anyone would commit such an act on the footy field?

You've got to be joking. People have been king hitting people since the game was invented. Whitten, Ditterich, Muir, Nicholls, Balme etc etc are lucky they didn't hit their opponents in a vulnerable spot to cause them life changing injuries. Pure luck or bad luck.

[satchmo]

Just answering Kosifanutti!

How do you know that he hasn't apologised?

[PADDLEPOP1001]

Greening has said he hasn "t at his induction to the pies hall of fame and said after all this time he doesn't " t expect him to and wouldn't "t care if he did!

[satchmo]

Infamous day, no hiding from the fact it was a shameful act!

Greening was seriously injured by an intentional behind the play king hit..... No excuses... O'Dea has to live with the fact he ruined the career of a spectacular footballer... And really, that's what he's best remembered for....

Not sure why anyone would commit such an act on the footy field?

You've got to be joking. People have been king hitting people since the game was invented. Whitten, Ditterich, Muir, Nicholls, Balme etc etc are lucky they didn't hit their opponents in a vulnerable spot to cause them life changing injuries. Pure luck or bad luck.

That's it.
It's not saying that it's a good thing. Plenty of Saints players went the knuckle, no doubt about it.
The problem is the confusion between the action and the consequence. How many players have done a knee as a consequence of a certain Swans player giving them a gentle but well timed nudge in the back? Certainly not reportable.
The fact that Greening was badly injured does not necessarily mean that action that caused it was any worse than we see on a weekly basis now. Len Thompson always said that it was unfortunate that he hit his head on the cricket pitch. Might just have been your average weekly whack that went wrong.

The point being that pretty much NONE of the internet warriors that bang on about it have the slightest clue, because the players and spectators who were actually there don't.

[BigMart]

What does Darren Bourke and all the others have to do with ODea.... Is that some sort of excuse/defence of his actions... Does the fact that others err make ODea's incident ok?

All of those players also committed poor acts, did I ever say otherwise?! As did ODea....

ODea was unlucky? He was not unlucky, he purposely hit someone in the head causing a head injury... That's not unlucky, that's poor!

I would suggest the others were lucky the didn't (as seriously) cause injury! The ones behind the plar without warning reprehensible!
Greening had just kicked the ball before he was felled....

Why is this incident defended whatsoever? It was disgraceful..... Surely that can be admitted

[BigMart]

But you say Len Thompson did?....

Wasn't he hit on the wing?

[satchmo]

What does Darren Bourke and all the others have to do with ODea.... Is that some sort of excuse/defence of his actions... Does the fact that others err make ODea's incident ok?

All of those players also committed poor acts, did I ever say otherwise?! As did ODea....

ODea was unlucky? He was not unlucky, he purposely hit someone in the head causing a head injury... That's not unlucky, that's poor!

I would suggest the others were lucky the didn't (as seriously) cause injury! The ones behind the plar without warning reprehensible!
Greening had just kicked the ball before he was felled....

Why is this incident defended whatsoever? It was disgraceful..... Surely that can be admitted

Surely you can admit that you didn't see the incident, have know idea how much contact was made or to what part of the body, and that you may as well have read about it in a comic book.

The FACT is that Collingwood players (by your definition I'm sure that means unbiased) that were only metres away have NO IDEA what happened, yet you who was probably in nappies and not there, by virtue of wikipedia and bigfooty can tell us the shameful truth.

Tell us who killed JFK. I'm betting it was Neil Roberts?!

[kosifantutti]

What does Darren Bourke and all the others have to do with ODea.... Is that some sort of excuse/defence of his actions... Does the fact that others err make ODea's incident ok?

All of those players also committed poor acts, did I ever say otherwise?! As did ODea....

ODea was unlucky? He was not unlucky, he purposely hit someone in the head causing a head injury... That's not unlucky, that's poor!

I would suggest the others were lucky the didn't (as seriously) cause injury! The ones behind the plar without warning reprehensible!
Greening had just kicked the ball before he was felled....

Why is this incident defended whatsoever? It was disgraceful..... Surely that can be admitted

I'm not defending O'Dea's actions, just trying to put them into context.

It was disgraceful, so was Hall (a number of times), Matthews, Fraser Brown, Jim Jess,
and many others. Only the result of O'Dea's actions wer worse in most cases than than the others.

I don't know why you interpret every post as some wrong that has to be righted. One or two people make comments that you twist to give the impression that we are all a bunch of idiots and only you have a clear vision of the future and the past.

I was at that game and I don't know what happened. I assume you weren't but you seem to know exactly what happened on the day and in the intervening years.

[BigMart]

I know what resulted.....

The tribunal made their decision.

I think the 'I don't know what happened' defence is a bit ignorant IMO .... Not too many other explanations

Why can't it just be accepted??... It's obvious he king hit him? When you king hit someone, you're intentions are clearly to incapacitate.... He did that very well it seems?

[plugger66]

I know what resulted.....

The tribunal made their decision.

I think the 'I don't know what happened' defence is a bit ignorant IMO .... Not too many other explanations

Why can't it just be accepted??... It's obvious he king hit him? When you king hit someone, you're intentions are clearly to incapacitate.... He did that very well it seems?

What does King hit mean? Cant it be to the stomach as well? If it can which I believe then obviously it isnt to knock him out as you claimed. As I said now you are changing tact and saying it to incapacitate him. Well it may very well have been to do that but none of us know he wanted to knock him out. None of us including you that may not have been born when it happened. Just admit what you initially said was wrong and stick with I havent got a clue what was going through his mind but it was a terrible act and i wont defend it.

[Mr Magic]

I will repeat it.
IMHO a 'king hit' requires pre-meditated consent.

How does anybody know that is what happened in this instance.
All we know is that O'Dea struck Greening either with a fist, elbow or arm (nobody who actually witnessed the incident has come forward to tell)

We don't know what was said/done (if anything) just prior to the incident.
We don't know if O'Dea just whacked Greening deliberately or if he 'lashed out' in response to something.

And yet, we have our 'Self Professed Forum Expert On All Things' berate us for not accepting his version of what happened.
His 'version' based on
Not being there
Never seeing any vision of the incident
Never speaking to anybody who saw the incident

But he knows what happened to a 'fellow' Taswegian (maybe even a boyhood idol of his?) and that is enough for our 'Self Professed Forum Expert On All Things' to categorically state that he 'knows best' and if you don't agree with his 'expert views' then you are an apologist and the reason why our Club lacks respect.

[satchmo]

I think the 'I don't know what happened' defence is a bit ignorant IMO .... Not too many other explanations

Actually, the 'I don't know what happened, but I know more than those involved' stuff is not just "a bit ignorant", it is a lot arrogant. Why can't you accept that your only 'knowledge' comes from wikipedia and bigfooty?

[BigMart]

Show me a column, blog, forum, article, tribunal hearing, news report, player account or even a comment from the man himself which says it wasn't a 'Behind the play' strike ..... a strike of such magnitude which resulted in a man being in a coma for two days and in hospital for two weeks or out of the game for two years... Never to return the same player?

Gawd almighty... What sort of evidence does one need? So if no one saw it, it didn't happen... Cut me a break!

It will go down in infamy for a reason... Believe what you like... He was knocked out by O'Dea... Is that really what you're disputing?

It was behind the play... Is that what you're disputing?

It caused an internal head bleed ..... Is that what you're disputing?

It was Jim O Dea..... Is that what you're disputing?

What exactly are you disputing? His guilt? Because on the evidence and behind close door statements he was found guilty?!

Now Satchmo.... If you didn't see the incident either...... How can you be so sure I am wrong?....I definitely was not there... I am just going on the numerous articles, conversations, reports, comments, descriptions, outcomes... however, you can so definitely deny or refute the comments I made.... Really, it's just that you don't like the comments isn't it? and i teckon you know there is a distinct possibility they are on the mark... But rather hope not.... In the face of a likely reality...

BTW my old boss.... Played at StK in the early 70s..... He too didn't see it either, but it was the hot topic of conversation for many weeks/years ensuing... And without me saying too much, he indicated that it wasn't an accident.... Of which I replied... That's ordinary.

[plugger66]

Show me a column, blog, forum, article, tribunal hearing, news report, player account or even a comment from the man himself which says it wasn't a 'Behind the play' strike ..... a strike of such magnitude which resulted in a man being in a coma for two days and in hospital for two weeks or out of the game for two years... Never to return the same player?

Gawd almighty... What sort of evidence does one need? So if no one saw it, it didn't happen... Cut me a break!

It will go down in infamy for a reason... Believe what you like... He was knocked out by O'Dea... Is that really what you're disputing?

It was behind the play... Is that what you're disputing?

It caused an internal head bleed ..... Is that what you're disputing?

It was Jim O Dea..... Is that what you're disputing?

What exactly are you disputing? His guilt? Because on the evidence and behind close door statements he was found guilty?!

Now Satchmo.... If you didn't see the incident either...... How can you be so sure I am wrong?....I definitely was not there... I am just going on the numerous articles, conversations, reports, comments, descriptions, outcomes... however, you can so definitely deny or refute the comments I made.... Really, it's just that you don't like the comments isn't it? and i teckon you know there is a distinct possibility they are on the mark... But rather hope not.... In the face of a likely reality...

BTW my old boss.... Played at StK in the early 70s..... He too didn't see it either, but it was the hot topic of conversation for many weeks/years ensuing... And without me saying too much, he indicated that it wasn't an accident.... Of which I replied... That's ordinary.

I disputing that his intention was to delibrately knock him out. Your words. No proof. matter of fact unlikely IMO. As for your old boss who cares what he thinks unless you bother naming him. Could be the same story as you usually go with.

[BigMart]

Wow.... P66 replying so quickly to BM... Unusual?

Must be fully agreeing with me?

[plugger66]

Wow.... P66 replying so quickly to BM... Unusual?

Must be fully agreeing with me?

Actually you have asked me questions on the topic. Think it would be starnge to ask questions but not expect a reply. Actually really strange. I think what O'Dea was poor. I dont think like you i know what he was thinking.

[satchmo]

The point is that I did see it.
Yet you and many others that didn't know exactly what happened.

Jim hit John. John was badly injured. Jim was suspended. That is accepted as fact.
How could you possibly have any insight as to motivation, or force, or any other factor?
I've seen many more violent acts on the footy field. I haven't enjoyed any of them.
The only thing that I refute is that you have any more knowledge of the incident than my ten year old daughter.

BTW a colleague of mine did some business with Greening after the incident. And without saying too much, somebody is lying.

[PADDLEPOP1001]

Maybe that's just it he wasn't"t thinking!

[BigMart]

Oh... You saw it?... One of the very few...

What is your explanation of injury suffered by John? It was near fatal, and no accident... Those facts are well known

1/ has your ten year old daughter read as much about the history of StK as me?

2/ has your ten year old daughter spoken to a guy that knows O Dea very well having played with him?

Being from the same place as John I can tell you he and those who know him, hold O Dea absolutely responsible for wrecking his career.... Rightfully so...