Well, maybe that is why they don’t expend so much energy during their games
1 Like
Makes sense in a normal setting, these are footy players, told everyday by everyone that they’re better and more important than the rest. No doubt they and their team mates would arrogantly move on and just look down on the potential victims as barriers they had to overcome on their all important footy journey.
What’s the connection between ex-Premier Jacinta Allen and the alleged sexual assaults on several young women by certain Sydney Swans footballers ? I presume that the fact that she is an Essendon member means less to you than her unwillingness to answer leading questions from representatives of the crypto-fascist Murfuck Media.
I know Jacinta Allen. She is not a close friend, but I know her well enough to be able to vouch for her honesty and her integrity. I wish I could say as much for her successor, the parrot, Ben Carroll, or for you, indeed. Show me an accountant who isn’t dodgy as hell…
7 Likes
Two things
Zero chance any of those players play finals. That was as strongly worded statement from the club that I have seen for a long time
And whoever coined the term “this masthead” should be kicked square in the sack!
10 Likes
Oh it will be years before we get them in Melbs again, the good ol days
Yep the answer was right there too, the guy has to do the AML/CTF checks, shouldn’t we just let the money laundering rolllll
The only winners out of this disgrace is Geelong.
1 Like
Joke “city”, joke club.
2 Likes
I’d say the players have a fair idea. The club would as well. If it was a storm in a teacup I doubt Sydney would have reacted the way they have.
1 Like
And both the Dorks and Fark Carlton most probably
That’s how Trump gets elected 
1 Like
So 4/5 players and 3 women in the one hotel room?
How big are the rooms at the Pullman?
they all got a corner of the bed playing UNO?
The rooms aren’t huge unless they had a suite or penthouse.
This masthead disagrees
1 Like
They’ve correctly drawn a line between the criminal question and whether the conduct breaches the club’s own workplace standards. On the criminal side, I won’t offer any judgment. The facts, including what’s actually alleged, aren’t clear yet. But it’s entirely possible the criminal investigation goes nowhere and they’re sanctioned for breaching workplace standards only. Either way, the workplace judgment shown was poor by all involved. The responsible and better approach was to go back to the hotel when Cox left.
On the criminal side, all of them are entitled to the presumption of innocence until proven otherwise. Media coverage so far has been heavily one sided against them, and so has some of the commentary from people within the industry. It’s edging into prejudicial territory. If I was any of the individuals, including their representatives, I’d be furious at Dillon’s statement today.
He calls the allegations against the Swans players “deeply concerning” while the matter is still with police, with no charges laid and no findings made. His words carry real weight, and “deeply concerning” is not a neutral choice. The criminal investigation might end up leading to charges and a subsequent conviction, but we aren’t even close to that point. They haven’t even been formally interviewed.
He then says the police process should be allowed to run its course. That’s the right approach, but it sits contrary next to a statement that’s already passing judgment on the nature of the alleged conduct itself.
I also think usage of “deeply concerning,” in a statement issued before the facts are public and before any charges exist, is prejudicial to the individuals involved. This is the most senior leader of the competition putting his own characterisation of unproven allegations on the public record, before the individuals have had any chance to respond to specific allegations, and before any of it has been tested. Add reporting and industry commentary that’s already been fairly one sided, and the prejudice gets worse.
Presumption of innocence doesn’t mean nothing bad can ever be said about someone under investigation. But it does mean the sport’s most senior figure should be more careful with his words than this, not less.
On the other hand, the Swans statement is what Dillon should have said. The Swans state plainly that any club sanction relates solely to breaches of expected club standards, and that this is independent of the ongoing police investigation. That’s the exact line Dillon should have drawn which is a clean separation between workplace conduct and criminal process. He blurred it by loading his statement with “deeply concerning” before that separation was even made.
The Swans also say any further sanctions tied to the outcome of the police investigation will only follow once that process has concluded (ie termination of contract). That’s the sequencing due process actually requires.
Notice what the Swans statement doesn’t do. It doesn’t characterise the unproven allegations themselves. It talks about expectations, standards, and support, for the complainant, for AFLW players and staff, and for the players’ families, without rendering a public verdict on facts nobody outside the investigation actually has.
AFL statement should have just acknowledged the seriousness of the process, confirm the AFL will act on any breach of standards independent of police findings, and stop there. Instead he added his own editorial weight, “deeply concerning”, to allegations that are, by his own admission, still unclear. The Swans found the right balance. The AFL didn’t and was prejudicial as always.
10 Likes
BlockquoteAnd whoever coined the term “this masthead” should be kicked square in the sack!
It was Americans.
The masthead was used in sailing ships to describe the top of the mast. This was where the crows nest was located or a flag was flown. This use dates from the 1400s.
In the 1700s, the term “Head” meant the top of the newspaper or journal (thus Headline).
The first Oxford citation for the usage is from the Dec. 22, 1838, issue of the Hennepin (Illinois) Journal. This short lived publication, based in Minneapolis on the Mississippi river, featured a sailing ship with flags flying on the head of the newspaper. An editorial, writen by publisher W. Everett, described how the Whig party was insisting that the flags on the [ship’s] masthead be printed in the official Whig party colours.
This use of the term masthead took and reached peak usage in 1841, before slowly declining to being a rare word in the 1900s.
In the 1930s, for no discernible reason, the term transformed into a new journalistic definition. According to the OED, it meant the “section in a newspaper or journal (usually on the editorial page or next to the table of contents) giving information relating to the publication, such as the owner’s name, a list of the editors, etc.”
Interestingly, the earliest use in this sense was a 1934 update in the definition in Webster’s New International Dictionary of the English Language, Second Edition.
“Masthead, the matter printed in every issue of a newspaper or journal, stating the title, ownership, and management, subscription and advertising rates, etc.”. It has become a synonym for the publisher, the collective people at publication or the editorial board.
There is no prior published use of the word in any other publication held by the Library of Congress nor the British Library nor the archives of major UK newspapers.
In other words - someone at Websters just made this ■■■■ up.
You are welcome.
4 Likes
This masthead appreciates that information
1 Like
I disagree with most of what you said, but I can see where you are coming from.
With respect to the swans initial 40 second spoken statement it was very ordinary.
For Cox to come out and say something like ‘disappointed the players have found themselves in this position’. Was totally downplaying their involvement in the incident.
We all’find ourselves’ in positions where we decide how we interact with other people, many times through the day. If someone’s decision is to allegedly sexually assault someone, they haven’t been passive in that interaction and that they weren’t there if their own free will. They’ve made that decision, and need to be held accountable.
Edit: also it should be no surprised with Dillonnin this. He blocked Wayne Carey from entering the NSW football hall of fame due to his past indiscretions. And has been a leader in establishing a themed round that raises awareness around domestic violence toward women.
I don’t rate the guy, but on this topic I think he’■■■■■ the right tone. Just a day late to release the statement, when they probably have these things on a Word template.
6 Likes
To be fair there really is nothing they could say that wouldn’t upset someone.
2 Likes
Probably why teams draft good guys with leadership potential.