#2 Jordan De Goey

[White Black n Blood]

Good Jordan blog post. Harsh but fair is the tag line.

The last bit is what worries me. We can't make him a leper at the club.

https://themongrelpunt.com/afl/2018/2/2 ... -goey-saga

[RudeBoy]

The more I think about this the more I'm pissed off at our club. They have demonised and pilloried this kid beyond a joke. Sure, he needed mentoring, to see a psychologist, to get a job for a few weeks, and to spend some time doing charitable work with those far less fortunate than himself. He probably needed to acknowledge he needed to stop mixing with his boozy mates. But to fine him $20,000 and ban him indefinitely, for something non football related, which has already been dealt with by the police, is a disgrace. The AFL-PA is pathetic for allowing a young player to be bullied and marginalised this way.

Seriously, I'm now convinced that our club is led by a bunch of imbeciles who are so weak and insecure, that they are more interested in sucking up to pisshead journos than really caring about the welfare of Jordan. They pretend its all about his welfare, but the punishments handed out are all about protecting their 'brand'.

Sadly, I reckon our club has completely lost the damn plot. There are too many 'suits' running our club, whose main concern seems to be to look after their own careers and financial interests. This episode has just about made me lose interest in the season ahead. Side by side used to mean something.

[swoop42]

[Streak]

That's probably only 4 or 5 beers, not the smartest thing to drive but, just because someone can kick a leather ball doesn't make them super intelligent does it?! In reality I could drive better than half the clowns on the road with a BAC of 0.1... it's a stupid limit anyway.

A minor indiscretion, he's training the house down isn't he?

1. If every player on our list was done for drunk driving this weekend, we would get the impression that their heads are not where we'd expect them to be, on the eve of a crunch season. Priorities are screwy.

2. The Club has had more than a few issues with players drink-driving in recent years. E-bloody-nough already.

3. It's de Goey. We needed him early last season, and he wasn't available because he did a few stupid things (and I back the club 100%; you can't reward stupidity and expect a club culture to survive). Now he's ruled himself out indefinitely because he did something stupid. Great player, but maybe he's just too damn stupid to take up locker space.

[E]

That's probably only 4 or 5 beers, not the smartest thing to drive but, just because someone can kick a leather ball doesn't make them super intelligent does it?! In reality I could drive better than half the clowns on the road with a BAC of 0.1... it's a stupid limit anyway.

A minor indiscretion, he's training the house down isn't he?

1. If every player on our list was done for drunk driving this weekend, we would get the impression that their heads are not where we'd expect them to be, on the eve of a crunch season. Priorities are screwy.

2. The Club has had more than a few issues with players drink-driving in recent years. E-bloody-nough already.

3. It's de Goey. We needed him early last season, and he wasn't available because he did a few stupid things (and I back the club 100%; you can't reward stupidity and expect a club culture to survive). Now he's ruled himself out indefinitely because he did something stupid. Great player, but maybe he's just too damn stupid to take up locker space.

He is the classic example of a guy who is built only to play footy (and not much else). Unfortunately for those who want to pontificate, he is bloody good at it, so despite what you all say he will get many many chances to rectify mistakes. His upside is too great to give up on. The good news is that we only need him to play footy. He doesn't have to be a hero to our children. That would be nice, but we have Pendles, Adams and Blair for that.

And if you disagree with that, consider this: even some of those who are super critical of him conclude, "don't suspend him - its not fair that the team should suffer". What is implied by this statement is that we'd rather win a game of footy than live up to the principal of the thing. I am ok with that by the way. I think we just have to be careful to acknowledge that even though we pretend to care. We dont care enough to sacrifice winning games of footy. And we should just acknowledge that so that we are being honest.

[Streak]

He is the classic example of a guy who is built only to play footy (and not much else). Unfortunately for those who want to pontificate, he is bloody good at it, so despite what you all say he will get many many chances to rectify mistakes. His upside is too great to give up on. The good news is that we only need him to play footy. He doesn't have to be a hero to our children. That would be nice, but we have Pendles, Adams and Blair for that.

And if you disagree with that, consider this: even some of those who are super critical of him conclude, "don't suspend him - its not fair that the team should suffer". What is implied by this statement is that we'd rather win a game of footy than live up to the principal of the thing. I am ok with that by the way. I think we just have to be careful to acknowledge that even though we pretend to care. We dont care enough to sacrifice winning games of footy. And we should just acknowledge that so that we are being honest.

His behavior may not sink to the level of dismissable offence, and you make some very valid points. There is a fair amount of hypocrisy when it comes to off-field "indiscretions", because the on-field is implicitly weighed in those considerations (if De Goey were a poor footballer, he may already be gone).

But these events offer us an opportunity to be clear about who we are, and what we stand for. And I don't think the quality of the player should be an absolvable influence - because then we're a Club who'd allow a Tiprat on the squad, because he plays a valuable role.

I agree that the argument of some is "Don't suspend him, because the team will suffer." But I contend that that takes a very narrow view of team welfare. I believe that not suspending him, at the very least, would cause the team to suffer. It sends the message that off-field idiocy is tolerated, and that all that matters is on-field success. It isn't, and it shouldn't be.

We need to be - we can be, and at our best, have been - a Club who both wins games of footy and builds young men into good men. For a Collingwood supporter, the former may be most important. For society, it's the latter. A truly great institution extends its positive influence even to those for whom Ws on the board mean nothing. Our young men go to visit sick kids at the Children's Hospital not because it makes them better players, but because it makes for better young men and a better society.

Taking it to extremes, perhaps. Again, I don't necessarily think De Goey should be sacked. But I do reject the idea that all we have a right to expect of young men we pay hundreds of thousands of dollars is that they kick a ball. For that, there's always soccer.

[K]

...
Taking it to extremes, perhaps. Again, I don't necessarily think De Goey should be sacked. But I do reject the idea that all we have a right to expect of young men we pay hundreds of thousands of dollars is that they kick a ball. For that, there's always soccer.

The link given on the bottom of p.15 suggests that EPL players have far more restrictions and expectations placed upon them than AFL players.

[mudlark]

actually i like what the club as done here - in times where he might have got the nod if it was 50/50, he now wont, and in light of goldsack saying hes not as fit as he should be, i reckon hes really going to have to wake up to himself. well done pies

Good for you.but I believe you dislike the club enough to actually like this garbage. The chief of traffic police said he is almost dumbstruck at the treatment he is getting in the media and that his punishment by the law would be as harsh as it gets.

what the absolute **** is that! seriously, grow up!

You're telling me to WHAT? grow up.I was watching hard men play footy before you were even thought of girlie.You click and cluck with glee at our own when they stuff top,as mere mortals do and then try and tell us you're a loyal supporter. I think I saw through you a long while ago.

[Damien]

[Woods]

[K]

^ Simpkin is also aided by the apparent absence of info on what exactly his blood alcohol level was and how much it contributed to the accident.

[mudlark]

[Skids]

I tell you what should happen!!

He should lose his licence and get a $2500 fine... like anybody else would!

[Woods]

[K]

...
The drunken pedestrian will only be charged with disorderly conduct in public and probably get a fine.

Simpkin will also be charged with jaywalking (Jywalking?), or walking against the red light, or whatever they call it. (And, yes, most people do not regard JUI to be as serious as DUI.)