Skip to main content
Topic: Katie Brennan (Read 6535 times) previous topic - next topic
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Re: Katie Brennan

Reply #15
The AFL are minimising head injuries in the mens game too.

The AFL are simply scaling everything from the mens game to the shorter season of the womens game.

Normally its 3 strikes over a 22 game season.
Its 2 for the women over a 7 game season.

That magpie chick who kicking one of the hosking girls in the vagina got 2 (3?) weeks, in the mens game it would've been 4 or 5.

Its unfortunate for Katie, but its got nothing to do with what sex she is.

So the smaller footy used in AFLW is because the game is shorter and not because women have smaller hands?   ;D

The whole point of the appeal against the penalty is that it is more severe than would be applied to a male AFL player.  In other words, AFLW tribunal penalties are intended to reduce incidents that could result in concussions suffered by AFLW players because women are more susceptible to concussion and will suffer from the consequences.
“Why don’t you knock it off with them negative waves? Why don’t you dig how beautiful it is out here? Why don’t you say something righteous and hopeful for a change?”  Oddball

Re: Katie Brennan

Reply #16
So the smaller footy used in AFLW is because the game is shorter and not because women have smaller hands?   ;D

Actually, I heard it was put into use to increase the kicking distances.
The Force Awakens!

Re: Katie Brennan

Reply #17
Actually, I heard it was put into use to increase the kicking distances.

Physics would seem to argue against that LP.

I’m sure that there was a discussion back at the start of the season about the optimum size of the footy for AFLW.

Women’s basketball uses a smaller ball to facilitate better ball handling and I would be very surprised if AFLW is any different.  But what’s logic got to do with it?  :)
“Why don’t you knock it off with them negative waves? Why don’t you dig how beautiful it is out here? Why don’t you say something righteous and hopeful for a change?”  Oddball

Re: Katie Brennan

Reply #18
Physics would seem to argue against that LP.

It's not a simple ballistic solution.

AFL Size 5 = 72cm x 54cm.

AFLW Size 4.5 = 71cm x 52cm.

Junior Male / New AFLW Size 4 = 70cm x 52cm.

The 54 / 52cm circumference reduction only makes a diameter change of 5mm, unless you had the two balls side by side you would barely notice it.

The size difference is trivial, the main effect is caused by reduced footy weight which increases the attainable velocity from the girls less powerful kick.
The Force Awakens!

Re: Katie Brennan

Reply #19
So the smaller footy used in AFLW is because the game is shorter and not because women have smaller hands?   ;D

The whole point of the appeal against the penalty is that it is more severe than would be applied to a male AFL player.  In other words, AFLW tribunal penalties are intended to reduce incidents that could result in concussions suffered by AFLW players because women are more susceptible to concussion and will suffer from the consequences.

If you ask the girls, they prefer the normal footballs too.

Katie Brennan was not suspended for her tackle. The severity of the tackle was not graded differently to the mens.
She got a reprimand for the tackle.
She had a previous reprimand.

In the girls game, 2 reprimands = suspension.
In the mens, 3 reprimands = suspension.

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.

Re: Katie Brennan

Reply #20
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!
The Force Awakens!

Re: Katie Brennan

Reply #21
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.

Re: Katie Brennan

Reply #22
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.
The Force Awakens!

Re: Katie Brennan

Reply #23
The tackle wouldn't even be a free kick in the men's game.
2012 HAPPENED!!!!!!!

Re: Katie Brennan

Reply #24
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.
The Force Awakens!

Re: Katie Brennan

Reply #25
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.
"everything you know is wrong"

Paul Hewson

Re: Katie Brennan

Reply #26
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

Re: Katie Brennan

Reply #27
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.
"everything you know is wrong"

Paul Hewson

Re: Katie Brennan

Reply #28
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?
The Force Awakens!

Re: Katie Brennan

Reply #29
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?
2017-16th
2018-Wooden Spoon
2019-16th
2020-dare to dream? 11th is better than last I suppose
2021-Pi$$ or get off the pot
2022- Real Deal or more of the same? 0.6%
2023- "Raise the Standard" - M. Voss Another year wasted Bar Set
2024-Back to the drawing boardNo excuses, its time