Katie Brennan

[LP]

Forget about the force, the concussion etc. Its about the reprimands being 'sexist' as they only get 2 compared to 3. I argue thats for the shorter season length.

I'd agree with that hypothesis, but if it's true.............

Logically because of the shorter season you have to accept a suspension in the women's season is a harsher penalty than the men's.

What we are really arguing is the penalties as a percentage of the season, it reasonable logic, but I'm not sure you can scale penalties because of the effects of the offence. A sling tackle can do the same amount of damage in the short season as the long!

The lawyers are walking a razor's edge, because this result can go either way. The girls could find themselves getting the same penalties as the men and that would mean they be wiped out for a season for a high bump!

This process from Brennan's legal team could really bite the rest of the AFLW competition on the arse, it's a bit selfish!

[kruddler]

I'd agree with that hypothesis, but if it's true.............

Logically because of the shorter season you have to accept a suspension in the women's season is a harsher penalty than the men's.

What we are really arguing is the penalties as a percentage of the season, it reasonable logic, but I'm not sure you can scale penalties because of the effects of the offence. A sling tackle can do the same amount of damage in the short season as the long!

The lawyers are walking a razor's edge, because this result can go either way. The girls could find themselves getting the same penalties as the men and that would mean they be wiped out for a season for a high bump!

This process from Brennan's legal team could really bite the rest of the AFLW competition on the arse, it's a bit selfish!

I said the above example earlier. I also included the Sarah Darcy kick to one of the hosking twins vagina as precedence. She got 2 (or 3?) weeks for that, whereas in the mens game it would've been minimum 4 or 5.

The sliding scale of punishment has been talked about on a few footy shows before the Brennan suspension. I don't think its any official rule, per se, more of a common sense type of guideline.

[LP]

The sliding scale of punishment has been talked about on a few footy shows before the Brennan suspension. I don't think its any official rule, per se, more of a common sense type of guideline.

Agree, the fact that this legal action could take away that common sense and force equal penalties seems contradictory to the idea of equality.

[madbluboy]

The tackle wouldn't even be a free kick in the men's game.

[LP]

The tackle wouldn't even be a free kick in the men's game.

Yes, but as you rightly point out that is the mens game, and it's been made clear by the AFL they see it as a different sport played under different rules and conditions.

Personally, I have no problem with that, as much as the equality debate rages men and women are not the same.

[Thryleon]

The tackle wouldn't even be a free kick in the men's game.

It was for Jack Riewoldts first goal on thursday night.  Weitering barely touched him.

[kruddler]

The tackle wouldn't even be a free kick in the men's game.

I cannot recall who it was but there was a free kick given against St us for a 'dangerous tackle' which I complained about. My friend pointed out it was almost identical to the Brennan one.

It was on the wing in the first half, against us

[Thryleon]

I cannot recall who it was but there was a free kick given against St us for a 'dangerous tackle' which I complained about. My friend pointed out it was almost identical to the Brennan one.

It was on the wing in the first half, against us

Second quarter.

Umpire off the ball paid it.  Think it was against SPS.

[LP]

Katie has her wish and the AFL has promised to remove anomalous differences between the MRP decisions for the AFLW and AFL.

The result has probably subjected her fellow AFLW players to greater bans, bans that for men would be moderate but for the AFLW could be their season! Also fines that for the men might be a days wage but for the girls could be a weekly or season wage!

So I gather the next logical step is for the AFLW lawyers to argue for higher pay and more games! Will they risk killing this competition before it even gets off the ground, are they getting the rewards before they actually deliver the goods?

I note that some reports claim Katie will work collaboratively with the AFL to establish new conditions, does she speak for all AFLW players, and if those AFLW conditions are different from AFL how is that equality?

[Gointocarlton]

Stupidest rule I have ever heard off. Stupid decisions made by the very people running a billion dollar organisation. Fancy creating a rule discrepancy between the mens and womens comp and using their lower salary as the reason. That is, they suspend the women instead of fining them (like the men) because they dont get paid as much. Ever heard of pro rata AFL imbeciles?