A little crispy one Garry, a crispy chiko roll Hutchy and a crispy racist quip Eddie


#1145

I don’t know Doc. What do you think Doc?


#1146

My first reaction when I heard the “Whateley wankfest Nfl Promo” was that the woman that called in was either a relative or a paid actor…maybe even a staff member.

Reeks of being scripted by Hutchy himself.


#1147

Ha. Me too. I don’t know any women who listen to SEN, let alone a nice sounding mummy type.


#1148

J Kennett just went ape at G Whateley.


#1149

Yep. Just heard that. Took him to task & Whateley just backed down. Spineless response IMO, hiding behind the “only asking a question” line


#1150

What was it about?


#1151

I also expected a more robust response fr G Whateley.


#1152

W Cares?


#1153

I didn’t catch all of the conversation but from what I heard, the discussion was about serious injuries to women footballers and J Kennett said that men and women are physically different and training/recovery for both genders should reflect the differences between them. Whatley asked if J Kennett’s opinion was a bit old school and slightly misogynous? Kennett subsequently went ape.


#1154

Thanks. An audio clip will no doubt appear online somewhere later.


#1155

Well, you it seems.


#1156

The physiological difference between men and women is now opinion? Nice move, Gerard.


#1157

Not sure that is what he meant. Kennett over reacted in response to a reasonable question.


#1158

Whately used the old trick of framing a statement as a question. It was tantamount to accusing Kennett of being a misogynist. Kennet did not fall for it.


#1159

Kennett misheard the question and carried on unreasonably. Gerard asked along the lines ‘do you mind that some will label you misogynist and old fashioned’. JK starting calling him small minded and a ‘shock jock’. Whateley tried in vain once to correct him and then just took JK’s crap as he realised that continuing to trying to explain his question would have been rubbish radio. I disagree with a lot of the opinions on here re Whately, SEN and Hutchy and that’s fine, it makes the world go around and my opinion is that Whately interviewed and behaved admirably and JK (as he often does) isn’t happy unless he can turn a discussion into an argument. I’m sure it will be up at some stage so happy for those that thought otherwise to have a re-listen and comment.


#1160

Kennett clearly took it that way but aren’t we past this ‘men are physically superior to women’ argument? Kennett was saying that women should be treated differently because they’re women. I thought what Whateley asked was pretty reasonable.


#1161

If it was exactly as you describe it, I don’t think it was a reasonable question from Whateley.


#1162

Dr Peter Larkins yesterday stated that men and women have anatomical differences that make women more susceptible to ACLs, further he mentioned that hormonal cycles also involved a change in ligament properties making the knee joint more susceptible to injury. He also indicated that there is a lot of scientific evidence building up on which he based the statements.

So, I think we can say that while he might actually be misogynist, Kennett is not being misogynist in being concerned about the incidence of ACL injury in AFLW.

But, We do have to bear in mind that injuries can occur in “clusters” in space or time and more data is needed over an extended time and other factors need to be ruled out before we can conclude that AFLW needs to be changed.


#1163

It was a very reasonable question in my book. JK stated that the woman playing AFLW only played for 7 weeks and had other jobs outside of football and perhaps due to less match conditioning and awareness as well as physiology differences were more prone to knee injuries that would then impact their lives for 12 months. As some are calling JK out on this view, GW asked his thoughts on being labelled a misogynist. It was a discussion well worth having until JK turned it into a one sided argument because he misread or misheard the question.


#1164

I’m not sure it was reasonable to ask whether he was concerned at being called sexist and misogynistic. I think Kennett was within his rights to be offended by that. What relevance does that question have in relation to the topic of injury rates?

Kennett made some physiological facts about the differences between men and women’s bodies and the way they train and prepare for a short season. He was making points that had been researched by medical & conditioning people within his own club and other professional associates of theirs.

IMO Kennett’s points weren’t meant as derogatory or critical of AFLW, he was concerned about the high rates of injury per capita of players playing AFLW which are facts. Whateley tried to divert it to other examples such as netball & basketball where injury numbers were larger, which was a rather silly comparison to make given they’re the top two participation sports for girls/women and Kennett was within his rights to shoot that down as such. Of course there’ll be more injuries given there’s many more participants.