Advanced  

Latest Result

Grand Final MCG
Sat, 29 Sep 2018 • 12:00 WST
West Coast Collingwood
11.13 (79) 11.8 (74)
Game Focus



WCE v PA Optus Stadium Sat. 5/5/18 @2.35pm

Discussion of all things Eagles
(the "EaglesFlyingHigh" board)

Moderators: Mead, Streaker, Mr Q

Re: WCE v PA Optus Stadium Sat. 5/5/18 @2.35pm

Postby Fat Side on Tue May 15, 2018 7:17 am

http://www.afl.com.au/news/2018-05-14/c ... -criticism

I think one of the great innovations under (AFL football boss) Steve Hocking has been that I'm able to stand here now and explain some of the decisions for the broader football public.


This guy does not have a clue. He is inept and appointing him as the MRO is descending into a farce.

He is now defending himself for the comments he made last Tuesday night about the Naitanui assessment. He clearly doesn't understand standard legal protocols. He believes it is okay to explain his decisions (which is reasonable), but he fails to make the distinction between explaining his decisions and the role of the Tribunal. He fails to understand that, once a club chooses to challenge his decision to the Tribunal, it is time to shut up. It is appropriate to be silent and allow the Tribunal to make their own assessment of the incident and arrive at their own decision without this dickhead chanting in the background about how correct (or easy) his decision was.

Had the Tribunal thrown that Naitanui decision out, Christian would be pressured to resign. This is diabolical. At some stage throughout this season that is going to happen. If he is pressured to resign, Hocking should be right behind him with resignation in hand.

I know I have been harping on about this, but until this guy is somehow educated to a reasonable level of understanding of legal matters, the MRO process is doomed.
Make the switch now
User avatar
Fat Side
EFH Hall of Fame
 
Joined: Wed Nov 04, 2015 7:52 pm

Re: WCE v PA Optus Stadium Sat. 5/5/18 @2.35pm

Postby WCE Booka 89 on Tue May 15, 2018 10:20 am

Fat Side wrote:http://www.afl.com.au/news/2018-05-14/christian-hits-back-at-simpsons-criticism

I think one of the great innovations under (AFL football boss) Steve Hocking has been that I'm able to stand here now and explain some of the decisions for the broader football public.


This guy does not have a clue. He is inept and appointing him as the MRO is descending into a farce.

He is now defending himself for the comments he made last Tuesday night about the Naitanui assessment. He clearly doesn't understand standard legal protocols. He believes it is okay to explain his decisions (which is reasonable), but he fails to make the distinction between explaining his decisions and the role of the Tribunal. He fails to understand that, once a club chooses to challenge his decision to the Tribunal, it is time to shut up. It is appropriate to be silent and allow the Tribunal to make their own assessment of the incident and arrive at their own decision without this dickhead chanting in the background about how correct (or easy) his decision was.

Had the Tribunal thrown that Naitanui decision out, Christian would be pressured to resign. This is diabolical. At some stage throughout this season that is going to happen. If he is pressured to resign, Hocking should be right behind him with resignation in hand.

I know I have been harping on about this, but until this guy is somehow educated to a reasonable level of understanding of legal matters, the MRO process is doomed.


Looking up on him, he has been a semi successful footballer and a semi successful commentator, there seems to be no qualifications outside of playing and commentating that makes him an ideal fit for the role in which he holds. I understand we want footy guys making these decisions, but these footy guys also need to be educated in what they are doing too and I just don't see it ( I mean he could low-key have degrees in all different areas and it just isn't mentioned anywhere, but well I doubt it.)

Listening to him speak about the decisions, something just sounds off too. It very much sounds like he knows he is above reproach and can make any decisions he likes so long as he fronts up and says a few words about why.
WCE Booka 89
EFH Legend
 
Joined: Wed Sep 27, 2006 9:19 pm
Location: Mandurah WA

Re: WCE v PA Optus Stadium Sat. 5/5/18 @2.35pm

Postby Fat Side on Tue May 15, 2018 1:15 pm

WCE Booka 89 wrote:
Fat Side wrote:http://www.afl.com.au/news/2018-05-14/christian-hits-back-at-simpsons-criticism

I think one of the great innovations under (AFL football boss) Steve Hocking has been that I'm able to stand here now and explain some of the decisions for the broader football public.


This guy does not have a clue. He is inept and appointing him as the MRO is descending into a farce.

He is now defending himself for the comments he made last Tuesday night about the Naitanui assessment. He clearly doesn't understand standard legal protocols. He believes it is okay to explain his decisions (which is reasonable), but he fails to make the distinction between explaining his decisions and the role of the Tribunal. He fails to understand that, once a club chooses to challenge his decision to the Tribunal, it is time to shut up. It is appropriate to be silent and allow the Tribunal to make their own assessment of the incident and arrive at their own decision without this dickhead chanting in the background about how correct (or easy) his decision was.

Had the Tribunal thrown that Naitanui decision out, Christian would be pressured to resign. This is diabolical. At some stage throughout this season that is going to happen. If he is pressured to resign, Hocking should be right behind him with resignation in hand.

I know I have been harping on about this, but until this guy is somehow educated to a reasonable level of understanding of legal matters, the MRO process is doomed.


Looking up on him, he has been a semi successful footballer and a semi successful commentator, there seems to be no qualifications outside of playing and commentating that makes him an ideal fit for the role in which he holds. I understand we want footy guys making these decisions, but these footy guys also need to be educated in what they are doing too and I just don't see it ( I mean he could low-key have degrees in all different areas and it just isn't mentioned anywhere, but well I doubt it.)

Listening to him speak about the decisions, something just sounds off too. It very much sounds like he knows he is above reproach and can make any decisions he likes so long as he fronts up and says a few words about why.


It seems the three KPIs for the MRO are: 1) Former Reasonable Player, 2) Former Reasonable Commentator, 3) Does as he's told.
Make the switch now
User avatar
Fat Side
EFH Hall of Fame
 
Joined: Wed Nov 04, 2015 7:52 pm

Re: WCE v PA Optus Stadium Sat. 5/5/18 @2.35pm

Postby HH on Tue May 15, 2018 7:30 pm

Fat Side wrote:He is now defending himself for the comments he made last Tuesday night about the Naitanui assessment. He clearly doesn't understand standard legal protocols. He believes it is okay to explain his decisions (which is reasonable), but he fails to make the distinction between explaining his decisions and the role of the Tribunal. He fails to understand that, once a club chooses to challenge his decision to the Tribunal, it is time to shut up. It is appropriate to be silent and allow the Tribunal to make their own assessment of the incident and arrive at their own decision without this dickhead chanting in the background about how correct (or easy) his decision was.


Spot on Fat Side. Whilst transparency in decision making is laudable in general, as a decision maker, you should only explain/justify your decision in public after the matter you ruled on has been heard on appeal by the reviewing tribunal.

Christian prejudiced the Tribunal hearing with his comments. Full stop. Trying to justify them now in the interests of transparency is laughable.

But do we really expect proper and consistent enforcement of rules from the cozy self-interested VFL boys' club??!!??
User avatar
HH
EFH Hall of Fame
 
Joined: Sun Jul 24, 2005 2:39 pm
Location: Captain’s Club

Re: WCE v PA Optus Stadium Sat. 5/5/18 @2.35pm

Postby Fat Side on Wed May 16, 2018 7:14 am

HH wrote:
Fat Side wrote:He is now defending himself for the comments he made last Tuesday night about the Naitanui assessment. He clearly doesn't understand standard legal protocols. He believes it is okay to explain his decisions (which is reasonable), but he fails to make the distinction between explaining his decisions and the role of the Tribunal. He fails to understand that, once a club chooses to challenge his decision to the Tribunal, it is time to shut up. It is appropriate to be silent and allow the Tribunal to make their own assessment of the incident and arrive at their own decision without this dickhead chanting in the background about how correct (or easy) his decision was.


Spot on Fat Side. Whilst transparency in decision making is laudable in general, as a decision maker, you should only explain/justify your decision in public after the matter you ruled on has been heard on appeal by the reviewing tribunal.

Christian prejudiced the Tribunal hearing with his comments. Full stop. Trying to justify them now in the interests of transparency is laughable.

But do we really expect proper and consistent enforcement of rules from the cozy self-interested VFL boys' club??!!??


He was essentially in contempt of the tribunal.
Make the switch now
User avatar
Fat Side
EFH Hall of Fame
 
Joined: Wed Nov 04, 2015 7:52 pm

Previous

Return to West Coast Eagles

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest