Lance Collard

[St Dave]

Now
you're just clutching
Take your moral and intellectual superiority of to the many other forums you frequent, no doubt

I'm sure their missing you

Yeah in hindsight it was a bit of a stretch to think we might have had common ground on which to build understanding and empathy, you clearly think you are happy stewing in your hate.

[sks023]

Have the last word !
We can all call it a day now

[Killa]

7 pages and counting!!!!

Just as well such interactions were not penalised yonks ago

Mind you we developed our own code such as “Ankles”, so lower than a …. And Lloyd, being Lloyd Bridges from Sea Hunt

So even back all those years ago it was a nod to what was acceptable in regards direct words (even aimed at Umpires so contributing “Thank you Lloyd”)

The kid at the centre of this is just 19 years of age, living on the other side of the Continent from family and now the subject of naming and shaming across media (including AFL media)

So the Club will need to support him

There were a couple of old sayings including he who has no sins can throw stones and what happens on the field stays on the field

And we had a beer afterwards - and a laugh

These days everything is just so polarised and intense and society per se appears to reflect this

And division is sought

Next we will have barbed wire around communities and at sporting venues seeking a cohesive and respectful society by segregating

[Yorkeys]

7 pages and counting!!!!

Just as well such interactions were not penalised yonks ago

Mind you we developed our own code such as “Ankles”, so lower than a …. And Lloyd, being Lloyd Bridges from Sea Hunt

So even back all those years ago it was a nod to what was acceptable in regards direct words (even aimed at Umpires so contributing “Thank you Lloyd”)

The kid at the centre of this is just 19 years of age, living on the other side of the Continent from family and now the subject of naming and shaming across media (including AFL media)

So the Club will need to support him

There were a couple of old sayings including he who has no sins can throw stones and what happens on the field stays on the field

And we had a beer afterwards - and a laugh

These days everything is just so polarised and intense and society per se appears to reflect this

And division is sought

Next we will have barbed wire around communities and at sporting venues seeking a cohesive and respectful society by segregating

Yes.
You could see the Williamstown boys getting a social justice award and being as proud as punch they called the youngster out. Rightly so of course. No sins in Willy. What you walk past etc, don't you know.

[Killa]

That said, even back then you never targeted based on race or culture

And, if someone did so, you called them out

Mind you this response was far from universal - and remains so it could be suggested

The same principals apply today including because we have educated our children and they are educating their children

So hopefully we now exist in a more cultured society

And when we disagree you prosecute that disagreement based on the facts presented and contested

Hopefully education sees less disagreement

We still get a laugh among ourselves over “Thank you Lloyd” - but only we know what we are talking about and what we were talking about were in regard on field events we took exception to (rightly or wrongly)

The kid got it wrong, should have been counselled on field by leadership

It is part of his education

That said, I question the naming and shaming and being made an example - at 19 years of age

Because it sticks

There are some things you attend behind closed doors seeking resolution and agreement

So Consent Orders

[SAINT-LEE]

One week less than JWeb got for injuring Simpkin.

A word is just a word.

Throw that word around a sporting field and it's purely a sledge.

Why are the AFL being so stupid about a word?
Stupid as in ramping up the penalty.
Finlayson got 3, which was manifestly excessive.

In law, no court in the damned world would give a harsher penalty to a crim for the same offence purely to send a message.
Doesn't happen. If it ever did, the crim would appeal and win

agree.

Ignoring the word is just a word rubbish that has been addressed a number of times in this thread, you guys understand that is basically exactly how criminal sentencing is intended to work right? The purpose of a criminal punishment is to create a disincentive to commit a crime. If the crime keeps being committed the penalties can be reviewed and increased to increase the disincentive. Look at stuff like mandatory minimum sentences to see how punishments change over time.

That is all beside the point though because in the other instances this year the abusive word was said once. Lance is alleged to have spouted it 10 times. Clearly an increase in the level of offending

So his a criminal now is he

Wellard brought up the criminal comparison if you didn't notice

And you expanded on it

The arse lickin football league pull these sentences out of a hat

Yeah that's how discussions on a forum work, Wellard was confused how sentencing acts as a deterrent for crime so I tried to help him understand.

I was hoping from past interactions that you might be actually willing to learn and move past intolerance, but based on your last few digs maybe not.

Only issue is the discussion is completely out of context...literally moot.

Criminal offenses committed multiple times receiving increased sentences factor:

How many separate instances of offense occurred

How often this offense occurs

How many other interactions & interventions have occurred to alter offending

How many convictions for this offense are recorded

Defendants plea



This is Law 101. Since 1987 I've sat in court at least 500 times with people facing minor to horrific charges.

Lance has NO recorded instances of offending with the AFL.

Lance has had NO interaction / interventions to modify his offending - particularly as their are NO recorded previous offenses.

Every judge in Australia is instructed to weight these factors and sentence accordingly.

In a criminal court Lance would receive the MOST LENIENT sentence due to 1st recorded offense, guilty plea, age of offender.

The sentence doesnt fit the person offending. It is an unjust, unfair sentence that is a virtue signal/warning.

In Australia everytime a person is murdered we dont increase the sentence on the next offender, actually custodial sentences for murder have reduced significantly with the average now 11.8yrs before parole on a 25yr sentence. Compared to 1970 when murder was a life sentence with avg time served before parole of 26.7yrs.

Those are the facts.

It is a disgusting and UNAUSTRALIAN action to "make an example" of a young person as a lesson for all. It is not how we are as a nation, its repulsive.

There must be consequences to our actions both natural & implied but they must fair.

[Killa]

And I will go one step further

It is my view that the body politic is at fault along with their media - so opposition no matter

The outcome in the UK is interesting to me because there was a split between the austerity forces and the racist forces and in first past the post those forces were obliterated

It would be the same in the USA if guns and religion split (noting the contradiction between religion and guns)

And in Australia, when the stickiness of inflation globally is referred to by a recognised Global organisation there is domestic attack seeking domestic advantage

We are all part of a wider World

And along comes a 19 year old cutting a career in Australian Rules Football

And the media response

[sks023]

Reading through your post Saint Lee,maybe the AFL could have handed out a suspended sentence

[Scollop]

The AFL players association has spoken out to get an understanding of why the sanction for players is somewhat different to what Clarkson got.

They asked the question when Finlayson and Powell copped suspensions.Would have been good if Finlayson or Powell (and their respective clubs) appealed their initial suspensions.

Saint-Lee makes a good point. Why is the penalty increasing every time?

Unfairly treated for a mistake by a young fella and needs to be supported by St Kilda. Is there a way we can appeal?

[SAINT-LEE]

Reading through your post Saint Lee,maybe the AFL could have handed out a suspended sentence

If they properly assessed the situation and a suspended sentence with a raft of behavioural & education targets were set it may be appropriate, or a the "minimum" sentence applied ( which unjustly doesnt exist its just whatever they feel like). I think 2-3 weeks would possibly be a fair minimum.

[Scollop]

Good luck trying to take on the AFL and the
LGBQT community

The gay community are very well organised. They have members of their community in positions of power. They have allies in industry and government and in the media.

[sks023]

Good luck trying to take on the AFL and the
LGBQT community

The gay community are very well organised. They have members of their community in positions of power. They have allies in industry and government and in the media.

So do the Mafia

Sorry I need to stop my attempts at humour

[The_Dud]

We get it guys, you love dropping f and n bombs, probably time to move on yeah?

[SAINT-LEE]

Good luck trying to take on the AFL and the
LGBQT community

The gay community are very well organised. They have members of their community in positions of power. They have allies in industry and government and in the media.

To which Im not opposed so much as to say, why not? Why wouldnt any demographic be representated in any aspect of society.

However, I agree with the writings and research of many far greater than I. There is a distinct sense that the gay community is demanding any offense be dealt with in the harshest manner far greater than other marginalised groups. One author says they seem to believe they are by far "the winners of the most afflicted".

Yet, take me, I'm a black fella.

When I was born everyone knew I was black and it was even written on my birth notice.
Ever see anyone point to a newborn and say, "that's a gay baby". But be a black newborn, before you ever know who or what you are, society has already imposed a set of beliefs about you.

Do you know of any stolen gay generations? Taken from their families that stretch back thousands of years of being gay...gay parents have gay child taken and given to straight people to raise as a straight?

A gay person may decide to not reveal their identity of being gay if they chose. They can live as privately or openly as they chose.

Ever try to chose to not tell anyone you are not a black guy? Nobody wonders, nobody. You're 109% tagged from afar by people you'll never meet walking down the street.

I dont know if you're gay unless you wear a sign.

I can go on and on.

I don't look for any cuddles or a pat on my poo poo. I'm far removed from needing validation by forced acknowledgement of my worth or demanding those who despise me are penalised.

I am absolutely NOT saying there is no suffering, oppression, abuse, etc for LGBTIQ+ persons.
We need a safe environment for everyone. But we need some perspective to see clearly.

[Scollop]

Good luck trying to take on the AFL and the
LGBQT community

The gay community are very well organised. They have members of their community in positions of power. They have allies in industry and government and in the media.

So do the Mafia

That's no joke. It's true

[sks023]

Good luck trying to take on the AFL and the
LGBQT community

The gay community are very well organised. They have members of their community in positions of power. They have allies in industry and government and in the media.

So do the Mafia

That's no joke. It's true
[

[St Dave]

One week less than JWeb got for injuring Simpkin.

A word is just a word.

Throw that word around a sporting field and it's purely a sledge.

Why are the AFL being so stupid about a word?
Stupid as in ramping up the penalty.
Finlayson got 3, which was manifestly excessive.

In law, no court in the damned world would give a harsher penalty to a crim for the same offence purely to send a message.
Doesn't happen. If it ever did, the crim would appeal and win

agree.

Ignoring the word is just a word rubbish that has been addressed a number of times in this thread, you guys understand that is basically exactly how criminal sentencing is intended to work right? The purpose of a criminal punishment is to create a disincentive to commit a crime. If the crime keeps being committed the penalties can be reviewed and increased to increase the disincentive. Look at stuff like mandatory minimum sentences to see how punishments change over time.

That is all beside the point though because in the other instances this year the abusive word was said once. Lance is alleged to have spouted it 10 times. Clearly an increase in the level of offending

So his a criminal now is he

Wellard brought up the criminal comparison if you didn't notice

And you expanded on it

The arse lickin football league pull these sentences out of a hat

Yeah that's how discussions on a forum work, Wellard was confused how sentencing acts as a deterrent for crime so I tried to help him understand.

I was hoping from past interactions that you might be actually willing to learn and move past intolerance, but based on your last few digs maybe not.

Only issue is the discussion is completely out of context...literally moot.

Criminal offenses committed multiple times receiving increased sentences factor:

How many separate instances of offense occurred

How often this offense occurs

How many other interactions & interventions have occurred to alter offending

How many convictions for this offense are recorded

Defendants plea



This is Law 101. Since 1987 I've sat in court at least 500 times with people facing minor to horrific charges.

Lance has NO recorded instances of offending with the AFL.

Lance has had NO interaction / interventions to modify his offending - particularly as their are NO recorded previous offenses.

Every judge in Australia is instructed to weight these factors and sentence accordingly.

In a criminal court Lance would receive the MOST LENIENT sentence due to 1st recorded offense, guilty plea, age of offender.

The sentence doesnt fit the person offending. It is an unjust, unfair sentence that is a virtue signal/warning.

In Australia everytime a person is murdered we dont increase the sentence on the next offender, actually custodial sentences for murder have reduced significantly with the average now 11.8yrs before parole on a 25yr sentence. Compared to 1970 when murder was a life sentence with avg time served before parole of 26.7yrs.

Those are the facts.

It is a disgusting and UNAUSTRALIAN action to "make an example" of a young person as a lesson for all. It is not how we are as a nation, its repulsive.

There must be consequences to our actions both natural & implied but they must fair.

Thanks for this additional context. I agree it is all irrelevant to the punishment Lance unfortunately has to serve, because the AFL had the ultimate power over sanctions it wants to enforce. I was only seeking to address wellards point that the same crime can be sentenced differently, but your demonstration of that point is much clearer.

I agree that the punishment is unfair on a young kid in his first year, but given how punishments for this exact issue have escalated this year, from a fine to 3 weeks to 5 weeks, anyone could see that the next instance was going to cop more than that. For all we know the fact that Lance is alleged to have abused people 10 times (so clearly not just a slip of the tongue) might have lead the AFL to a harsher punishment, but after considering that he is still a dumb kid in his first year they might have pulled it back to only 6 weeks.

Out of curiosity, if you made similar comments in your job, do you think you would be suspended for 6 weeks?

I would think I would be sacked, so maybe we need to reframe it and be thankful that Lance still gets a chance to show us what he is really about next year.

[Moods]

The AFL players association has spoken out to get an understanding of why the sanction for players is somewhat different to what Clarkson got.

They asked the question when Finlayson and Powell copped suspensions.Would have been good if Finlayson or Powell (and their respective clubs) appealed their initial suspensions.

Saint-Lee makes a good point. Why is the penalty increasing every time?

Unfairly treated for a mistake by a young fella and needs to be supported by St Kilda. Is there a way we can appeal?

Pretty sure the AFL came out and said, Finlayson copped 3 you're all on notice, or words to that effect. Finlayson said it once. Could be interpreted as a heat of the moment thing for which he showed remorse straight away. Our player allegedly said it 10 times and showed no remorse. Sorry, but I think some education and a lengthy holiday is called for.

You call it a mistake? A mistake happens once. This happened throughout the game apparently. This wasn't a mistake. This was a conscious decision to use offensive language. Whether the players concerned took offence is irrelevant. We don't tolerate racism, why are we tolerating this? If Lance was racially abused the entire game I would expect a hefty penalty to the offending player. No brainer for me. The kid needs to grow up. And fast

[Vortex]

This is what you get when an insanely profitable game is quasi-controlled by big business with a government dovetail.


SAINT-LEE speaks the truth.


Hopefully this incompetent overreaching doesn't have an unintended consequence on Lance's life.

I also hope the same for anyone that may have been impacted by Lance's abuse.

Surely there is a better way to get the desired outcome.

Little Hitler's coming out of our universities and taking over government and big business...globally.

[Dis Believer]

This is what you get when an insanely profitable game is quasi-controlled by big business with a government dovetail.


SAINT-LEE speaks the truth.


Hopefully this incompetent overreaching doesn't have an unintended consequence on Lance's life.

I also hope the same for anyone that may have been impacted by Lance's abuse.

Surely there is a better way to get the desired outcome.

Little Hitler's coming out of our universities and taking over government and big business...globally.

Lord help me, I am in furious agreement!!!!

[Killa]

Vortex and Dillon should view the footage of games and particularly the footage on the audience and the reactions of that audience must obviously gesticulating and shouting abuse - noting there are others in the audience who would not appreciate going to a football match and being subjected to such behaviour

Those the television cameras focus on are most obviously not educated people holding responsible positions in society across commerce and industry because, in associating with the public you would have no client base given your characteristics

We note such trash on this site also

And THAT is where the problem is

Football is entertainment needing an audience and the behaviour of that audience gesticulating and yelling abuse and presenting their persona deters many including families with children from attending games

The question in regards those filmed is where the hell would they live and work because you would hate to have to pass them going about your life

That includes you and your uneducated bias Vortex (and others who contribute to this site)

IF you are an electrician or a doctor or a solicitor you require the discipline and abilities to study to take the skills you study to society

And you are regarded accordingly

[Life Long Saint]

A word is just a word.

Throw that word around a sporting field and it's purely a sledge.

Why are the AFL being so stupid about a word?
Stupid as in ramping up the penalty.
Finlayson got 3, which was manifestly excessive.

In law, no court in the damned world would give a harsher penalty to a crim for the same offence purely to send a message.
Doesn't happen. If it ever did, the crim would appeal and win

The AFL stopped being a sporting field 30 years ago.
It became a work place the minute AFL players became full time footballers.
Like it or not, people need to come to accept that reality.

Certain "sledges" that attack race, religion, sexuality, gender are not acceptable in a workplace. All carry consequenses.

[amusingname]

A word is just a word.

Throw that word around a sporting field and it's purely a sledge.

Why are the AFL being so stupid about a word?
Stupid as in ramping up the penalty.
Finlayson got 3, which was manifestly excessive.

In law, no court in the damned world would give a harsher penalty to a crim for the same offence purely to send a message.
Doesn't happen. If it ever did, the crim would appeal and win

The AFL stopped being a sporting field 30 years ago.
It became a work place the minute AFL players became full time footballers.
Like it or not, people need to come to accept that reality.

Certain "sledges" that attack race, religion, sexuality, gender are not acceptable in a workplace. All carry consequenses.

Agreed, the talk of criminality and all that in this thread is off the mark, the real comparison is a work place. I work in an office and a lot of my dealing are with people who either want to negotiate with me or are not happy with decisions being made. If one day I decide, I am just going to call the people on the other end of the phone or over the desk from me various slurs about sexual preference because I want to rattle them, how long do you think I will last?

[Brunswicksainter]

A word is just a word.

Throw that word around a sporting field and it's purely a sledge.

Why are the AFL being so stupid about a word?
Stupid as in ramping up the penalty.
Finlayson got 3, which was manifestly excessive.

In law, no court in the damned world would give a harsher penalty to a crim for the same offence purely to send a message.
Doesn't happen. If it ever did, the crim would appeal and win

The AFL stopped being a sporting field 30 years ago.
It became a work place the minute AFL players became full time footballers.
Like it or not, people need to come to accept that reality.

Certain "sledges" that attack race, religion, sexuality, gender are not acceptable in a workplace. All carry consequenses.

Agreed, the talk of criminality and all that in this thread is off the mark, the real comparison is a work place. I work in an office and a lot of my dealing are with people who either want to negotiate with me or are not happy with decisions being made. If one day I decide, I am just going to call the people on the other end of the phone or over the desk from me various slurs about sexual preference because I want to rattle them, how long do you think I will last?

Tbh I’m not sure this logic holds. If you were to throw around any insult at people (homophobic or not) in most work places you’re getting fired no?

[Darth Vader]

When I'm drinking at the pub with mates I swear and use racist, sexist and homophobic terminology. When I'm at work, or with kids or family friends I choose not to do this. It's not that hard to be sensible even if it doesn't come naturally. My oldest son is 19. I expect all my kids to be similarly sensible. Being 19 is no excuse.