Andrew Walker Has No Shame

In four years of covering the seamy underbelly of Aussie Rules misbehaviour, Carlton's Andrew Walker has set a new bar for shameless arrogance and contempt of wider society. His crime - driving whilst unlicensed - is relatively minor by AFL standards, but his flagrant disregard for the law is truly breathtaking.

On February 22nd, 2008, Andrew Walker had his licence suspended (presumably for traffic offences). He was given a paltry $500 fine (equivalent to one morning's "work") and, naturally, no conviction was recorded. A mere eight days later, on March 1st, he was picked up by police for driving, obviously now unlicensed. He complained he was left "confused" by the Magistrates Court (AFL Division) about whether or not he was allowed to drive. (We can be quite sure there's absolutely no chance that he would be confused about the sentence from the AFL tribunal, but then, that's a legal force that actually matters to Mr Walker.)

Why on earth would he think he could get away with being "confused"? We've heard that he does a very convincing "playing dumb" act, but surely it would be hard to mount a case that, for instance, he wasn't sure who the magistrate was referring to when he was standing in the dock at the time. "Oh right, you were talking about me." or perhaps "Oh I see ... I'm suspended from driving any car. Yep, got it now." Surely any lingering confusion would have been dispelled by his own lawyer?

But let's look at some recent history. His colleague, David Teague, rendered an elderly woman a paraplegic when a borrowed hotted-up hoon wagon spun out of control early one Sunday morning. Teague successfully persuaded a magistrate that it wasn't because he cornered too quickly; no, a design fault meant that the floor mat got wedged on the accelerator.

What about Collingwood's Brody Holland - also caught driving unlicensed and on the tram tracks on Swanston St, no less - who claimed that he believed his Western Australian licence was sufficient even some five years after he allowed it to expire. What an absolute crock.

And then there's Hawthorn's Mark Williams, pinged for driving while disqualified (after earlier speeding offences). His excuse? Didn't realise his licence had been suspended. Oh, and Corey McKernan? Driving while disqualified and using a mobile phone. (He lost his licence for drink driving too, the selfish bastard.)

So, not surprisingly, Andrew Walker tried to bullshit his way out of the charge. And why not? The historical odds are good. But Magistrate Jennifer Tregent suggested that this "beggared belief". In plain English, she wasn't buying that Walker didn't realise the February suspension a) applied to him b) immediately and c) for any car. His lawyer described him as "bemused" and conceded that there was a compulsory jail sentence for disregarding the earlier suspension.

And the fallout for this egregious display of lawless contempt?

Told that Walker was a "professional athlete", [Magistrate] Ms Tregent asked what type and was informed by [Walker's solicitor] Mr Kemp he was a footballer with Carlton.

Ms Tregent suspended a one-month jail term for 12 months, suspended Walker's licence for two months, fined him $500 without conviction, and told him she did not anticipate he would drive during the suspension period. (The Age, 19/8/2008)

And here's the kicker: Andrew Walker drove his car to court to answer charges of driving unlicensed. Setting a new bar for chutzpah, he then had to have a mate give him a lift home, leaving his car behind (apparently opting out of the free priority taxi service for AFL footballers). What the hell was he thinking? Well, we know the answer to that ...

There's a distinct pattern going on here: over-privileged footballers realise that road rules and licensing requirements are for other people. They willfully break the law. They lie or act dumb or just plain old try to bluff it out. The legal sanctions have no effect. The clubs leave them be while they're kicking goals. There's no serious negative public comment. And so things get worse.

Sure, driving unlicensed is a relatively minor crime. But it speaks volumes of the general contempt and feeling of being special that can have much more sinister consequences. Let's not forget that during Essendon's Andrew Lovett's trial he allegedly said he was a "special person" who "could probably get away with murder". Outlandish? Well, Victoria's most senior detective is on record expressing doubt about his detectives' abilities to fully investigate footballers during the Heath Culpitt missing rape evidence scandal. And in one of Daniel Kerr's assault trial earlier this year, a witness gave testimony that immediately after the vicious assault Kerr told the victim "I am too good for the Eagles. They wouldn't delist me." Given the frequency with which he calls upon their services, we assume his brazenness extends to police and courts too.

This attitude must be very disheartening for police trying to do the right thing and downright scary for victims and witnesses trying to seek redress. At The Speccy, we argue that this culture of impunity and being special and above the law starts with minor traffic offences and, unchecked, culminates in serious cases of assault and rape.

Citations: The Age, 19/8/2008

Word Count: 853

Tags: footy, court, traffic

Didak Misbehaviour a Shaw Thing

Just a few weeks after coming off his "special provisions" contract, troubled Magpie Alan Didak has been unmasked as the secret passenger yet again. No, not in a "hell-ride" involving a drug-dealing murderous Hell's Angel, but in Collingwood's growing Heath Shaw bingle scandal.

But let's back things up. Alan Didak has been a frequent subject on this blog, notably for his 2006 public blue with then-girlfriend, glamazon model Cassie Lane and his confrontation with a taxi driver that saw him charged. (Incidentally, this event caused Collingwood to win the betting pool in the Aussie Rules Misbehaviour Market.)

But what really gained Didak notoriety was his friendship with Hell's Angel Christopher Wayne Hudson. His resulting lift home from the Spearmint Rhino strip club - with shots fired out the window, including at police - and visit to the Hell's Angel's headquarters came to light a few days after Hudson later horribly beat a stripper (Autumn Daly-Holt), shot another one (Kara Douglas) and shot two men who came to their assistance (solicitor Brendan Keilar and Dutch backpacker Paul de Waard). Sadly, Mr Keilar passed away.

Didak attracted criticism for his friendship and association with Hudson, his reluctance to come forwards and his somewhat hazy recollection of events when questioned. That weekend Didak was booed by the crowd in what was possibly the Collingwood cheer squad's finest hour.

As a result of his repeated and accelerating poor judgement, he had special clauses put on his contract with Collingwood, ensuring that he stayed off the booze and kept to a curfew. This for a 25-year-old grown man with a six-figure income! Sadly, these juvenile measures seem to have been necessary. Just a couple of weeks ago, the clauses were lifted as part of Didak's new $800,000 contract. Now we have this.

(You can see why Carlton's Brendan Fevola - himself no stranger to a bingle scandal! - is resisting efforts to have similar "behavioural restrictions" attached to his contract. They actually work.)

Heath Shaw - a relative clean-skin - got pissed on Sunday at a suburban pub, Hawthorn's Geebung Polo Club. He then drove home (at 0.15 BAC or three times the legal limit). Remember, this is a man with a large income and his own free, priority taxi service. Predictably, he ploughed into two parked cars, causing damage and waking the neighbours.

While Didak was spotted at the scene, the pair denied he was in the car. Club president, Eddie McGuire, took that at face value and defended Alan Didak with the memorable line that he "will be accused of the Kennedy shooting next". Of course, the truth emerged within hours and with it the reality: these men had tried to lie their way out of a bad situation.

After humiliating the club and casting a pall over the credibility and competence of Eddie McGuire, they're gone. Alan Didak has been fined $5000 and Heath Shaw has been fined $10,000. Shaw's brother, Rhyce Shaw, has been fined $5000 and suspended for two matches for drinking late on Sunday. Most importantly, Didak and Heath Shaw have been suspended for the rest of the year. Here at The Speccy, we commend the club for taking a decent, sensible and forward-looking stance.

While criticised by some commentators as "a ridiculous overreaction", this indeed sends a powerful signal to players. No, not the bit about getting hammered and driving your car. Hey - many, many players have done that and escaped sanction. It wasn't even the lying about it bit - after all, Scott Thompson's incident also involved a few hours of the who-was-where-doing-what game before the truth came out. No, it was lying to the club and making Eddie looked like a fool that did them in. Headlines like "Magpie lies humiliate McGuire" (Macarthur Advertiser) are just not acceptable given McGuire's, um, tenuous and difficult position at Nine, as failed CEO and TV presenter-sans-show. He can't afford to look like a patsy at this crucial stage of his career.

But just in case we were in any doubt about what exactly the sins were, former club captain Nathan Buckley spelled it out:

Buckley told Radio 3AW this morning that Shaw and Didak's lies were "unforgivable".
"For those players to be out from a football perspective six days before a game, when they have had an eight-day break is just unacceptable and then to top it off by being dishonest to the people in an environment where you rely on honesty and you rely on trust is unforgivable,'' Buckley said. (The Age, 5,8/2008)

Drinking on a school night. Check. Telling lies. Check. Oh, and the drink-driving/jeopardising others' safety part? Well, unless they ran over another listed Collingwood player, I'm not getting a strong sense that Buckley has thought about that too much. Gotta admire his focus, if not his morals.

Another former club great (and uncle of Heath and Rhyce), Tony Shaw, put his oar in by pointing out the effects of a footy club's ingrained tribal rules and over-arching commercial imperative. He also has a sense of where the problems lie:

Tony Shaw earlier told Radio 3AW that by covering for Didak, his nephew had "picked the wrong person".

"I think Heath deserves everything he cops in all ways from the club but the one thing about it, the lying part, there's no doubt there's an unwritten law within footy clubs that you look after your mates and unless they do something that physically harms someone or something against the law ... maybe Heath did the right thing in one way in helping out a mate but he probably picked the wrong person to do it for,'' he said.

...

"I'd be pretty dirty if I was Heath.''

The club legend said the administration had not handled things properly.

"I the (club's) just trying to make an example and they haven't set the scene prior to this - Eddie (McGuire) will tell you I've rung him a number of times about different players doing different things off the field for nearly four to five years and I think that the protectionism that Eddie's trying to give the club to save their image in fact is detrimental to the very thing that you try to build and that's the culture," Tony Shaw said. (The Age, 5,8/2008)

It's certainly food for though and while it doesn't diminish the culpability of Heath Shaw and Alan Didak, it does go some way to explaining how this cultural problem can be tackled. Hint: Eddie McGuire (and his ilk), with their spin and cover-ups and master media manipulation, are part of the problem.

Let's not forget that it was just two years ago that we saw the terrible Chris Tarrant-Ben Johnson car park assault that left a young man in hospital with severe head injuries. Let's recall how Eddie responded to criticism that the two players would be allowed to represent the club the following weekend, rather than face suspension:

"We're playing for the finals and they owe us. They're not getting the night off, you don't get a day off when you're playing the top side in a big game. They owe their supporters and they owe their teammates and they'd better get a kick." (The Age, 3/8/06)

And let's also recall the so-called Malthouse Doctrine, whereby the really good players become beyond reproach:

"The fact that Chris and Ben are crucial to the on-field success of Collingwood has influenced my decision. Had they been youngsters on the fringe of selection, I might have thought a playing ban was in order.", [said Collingwood coach, Mick Malthouse]. (The Age, 4/8/2006)

Perhaps this is the kind of behaviour Tony Shaw had in mind when he made his comments? In any case, public sentiment has shifted a lot in two years and I doubt that even McGuire would try this "they owe us" line again.

So we've had two players fined and suspended for the rest of the year. The Collingwood Football Club has taken steps to ensure that these two players will behave better in future. More to the point, by taking on the pain of absenting two promising young players, they've signalled that the club is prepared to take a long-term investment view when it comes to player discipline. For all this, they are to be congratulated. It's just a shame that it took lies and deceit to trigger this response, rather than the selfish, criminal, stupid and dangerous act of drink-driving.

Citations: The Age, 5,8/2008; The Age, 3/8/06; The Age, 4/8/2006

Word Count: 1466

Tags: footy, booze, court, traffic

Scott Thompson Dodges Jail

Convicted hoon and Adelaide Crows midfielder, Scott Thompson, has been found guilty of driving offences after hospitalising a mate. However, the resulting $50 good behaviour bond meted out by the justice system offers scant deterrence to future lapses by other footballers. What sort of a message does this send?

The incident was on November 2, 2007. Thompson - who was allegedly sober - offered to drive three mates home in a car belonging to Adam Samson, one of the group. Sadly and predictably, he engaged in what the court described as "burn-outs". Even more sadly (and slightly less predictably), he crashed the car into a pole, injuring Adam Samson. Samson required surgery.

At this point Thompson "panicked" and a passenger claimed to be driving in his stead. This lie was supported by the fourth person in the car.

To his credit, Thompson did come forward to police shortly after and confessed he was driving. It would be interesting to know the motives for his change of heart, but we can only speculate. Did he speak to a lawyer? A club official? A PR adviser? Who knows?

Thompson, 25, pleaded guilty to one count of causing serious harm by dangerous driving, and one count of leaving an accident scene after causing serious harm.

In sentencing, [Port Adelaide Magistrate Paul] Foley said the crash occurred on Coral Sea Rd, Fulham, on November 2.

...

He said he would have jailed Thompson for six months, but reduced that to four months because of his guilty plea.

He suspended the sentence on condition Thompson enter into a $50 good behaviour bond and be disqualified from driving for 12 months. (AdelaideNow, 9/7/2008)

Just to emphasise the lameness and futility in putting a professional footballer (average income: $250K+) on a $50 bond into perspective, a well-ranked player and Brownlow contender like Thompson could be earning $50 every hour of every day of the year. I mean, why bother? Either make it substantial or it's just an insult to other motorists.

The press release issued by the Adelaide Crows is equally offensive. In it, Thompson expresses the insensitive notion that "this exercise has been a great learning curve for me" and he's looking forwards to "passing on his experience with others".

Somewhat bizarrely, he's been given a role coordinating the "Learn to Drive Safely" program for younger players. I believe the standard text in this subject is by Darren Millane. Perhaps David Teague can step in for a guest lecture on blaming the floor mat when you render someone a quadriplegic. And I'm sure Michael Gardiner can offer a few tips on safe driving while we're at it.

Meanwhile the club has stepped into remedy the lack of punishment by issuing a more credible $5,000 fine (around half a week's pay). Oh, but they suspended the fine. So (as I understand it) he's not actually paying it. And they put him on volunteer duties for his sins (what message does that send the kids?) and the spin doctors are keen to emphasise this started before the court case. Back in April. You know, six months after the crime. But it's not just to look good in front of the beak, honest!

Bah. Criminally stupid and reckless behaviour. A culture of lies and cover-ups. Token slap on the wrist by the courts. Spin and bullshit from club officials. And another young player shrugs off the consequences and is cheered onto the field.

Citations: AdelaideNow, 9/7/2008

Word Count: 595

Tags: footy, court, traffic

Drink-Driving Pie Blows Sponsorship

Drink-driving Collingwood rookie footballer Sharrod Wellingham blew a big number on the weekend - $500,000. That's how much his recklessness has cost the Collingwood Football Club in lost sponsorship from the TAC. While this raises questions about the club's culture, it also throws into sharp relief the bizarre practice of our State Government insurer giving free money to wealthy footy clubs.

The facts of the case are very straightforward: Last Saturday night in Lorne, on Victoria's Surf Coast, 19 year-old Wellingham blew 0.13% while driving. He has lost his licence for 12 months and his club fined him 10% of his salary.

Of wider import is that Collingwood has now lost its seven year sponsorship deal with the TAC (Transport Accident Commission), a State Government-owned insurance business. It is most well-known for running advertising campaigns to reduce traffic accidents and paying for rehabilitation for injured parties.

After an earlier incident involving Collingwood's Chad Morrison's drink-driving offence in April 2006, the TAC had Collingwood on notice: one more traffic-related incident and it would be finished. The TAC had good reason to worry as a year earlier they tore up their sponsorship deal with Richmond over Jay Shulz drink-driving and speeding. It was always a risky play, with Collingwood having a long history of unsound attitudes to driving. Speedster Cameron Cloke, for example. Or, more tragically, the feted Darren Millane, who killed himself in a alcohol-fuelled traffic accident.

Eddie Presents Yet Another Really, Really Sorry Footballer
Source: The Age, 10/1/2008


Naturally, the miscreant in question is full of remorse for his stupid and selfish act. And he's got club president and game-show host Eddie McGuire working the media on his behalf:

Fronting a media conference with Wellingham yesterday, McGuire said: "We have to make a stand and not make excuses.

"That we have transgressed means we've forfeited the right and the privilege of being associated with the Transport Accident Commission."

...

"There's no excuse for driving a car under the influence of alcohol, whether you're driving it 10 miles or 10 metres," McGuire said.

...

After apologising to his team mates and the club, Wellingham fronted the media yesterday to make a public apology.

...

"I've made a silly error in judgement and I just want to be able to move on and make this a turning point.

"I did the stupid act of getting in the car thinking 'I'm only moving it 150 metres, it's not going to make a difference, I'm fine, already made my way home after the night out'," Wellingham said. (The Age, 10/1/2008)

Notice how Eddie simultaneously stresses that there are "no excuses" and then manages to work in an excuse ("hey - he's only moving it a few metres to avoid a parking fine")? Kind of like the American politician who publicly refused to use "attack ads" - but then showed the ads to some journos. It really is a pleasure to watch McGuire operate. Here he is at it again:

McGuire said his club and the AFL were taking steps to ensure players acted responsibly – especially when it came to alcohol.

“Sharrod himself has given up drinking,” he said, before pointing out that he had “good people around him”. (AFL Bigpond, 10/1/2008)

Yep, some of those steps towards responsibility include ... buying a pub. (Read former Age diarist Jonathan Green's account of this odd move.) And some of the "good people" around Wellingham presumably include Lance "Buddy" Franklin of Hawthorn, who was in the car with him at the time. With the Sunday Age reporting in December that Buddy declared himself "off his chops" in a nightclub (they generously interpreted this as meaning he was going vegetarian), more time spent in Buddy's company should make Wellingham's no-alcohol pledge fairly easy ...

In any case, the impact of losing the $500K will be modest, given that the club is extremely wealthy even by AFL standards, reporting a profit in excess of $2M last year. Eddie will talk up the damage, but, in reality, it amounts to less than the salary of one top player.

Which brings up the question of why the TAC is sponsoring a group of people who regularly feature in the press for breaking our road rules: drink-driving (Shulz, Morrison, Ottens), fleeing booze-buses (Cousins), losing control of hoon-wagon (Gardiner, Teague). Remember, this is a group of people with their own free priority taxi service (with secret direct number). And, occasionally, police chauffeurs (with lights and sirens too, if you don't mind).

The TAC collects money compulsorily from Victorian motorists and then fritters away up to a million bucks a year in ensuring that AFL players are given the maximum exposure when they inevitably break the law. It's disturbing that despite two similar sponsorship agreements failing in the same way within a couple of years, the TAC plans to push ahead with a third attempt. Is it a case of third time lucky, or do the TAC staff just enjoy the corporate hospitality that comes with the deal?

Perhaps the most charitable spin that can be put on it is that, absent a plausible stick, the threat of taking away the million-dollar carrot motivates players (via their employer) to take the traffic laws seriously. While that works for one club at a time, the other fifteen have the certain knowledge that the million-dollar carrot will be shopped around every couple of years, so they keep their players in check too. If this is the case, then it's a sad indictment of footy culture that the Government has to bribe them to obey the law.

*** UPDATE ***
Showing that this Collingwood drink-driving incident is hardly a one-off, Port Adelaide has also demonstrated the fundamental inability of footballers to accept that road rules apply to them too:

A Port Power AFL footballer has been banned from driving by an Adelaide magistrate.

Forward Nathan Krakouer, 19, was caught driving unregistered and uninsured at Pennington in Adelaide's north-western suburbs on September 6 last year, and again four days later.

The teenager represented himself in court, telling the Magistrate he was unaware the registration had lapsed when he was first caught speeding.

Krakouer was fined $100 and ordered not to drive for the next two days. (ABC, 14/1/2008)

So, no rego, no insurance, speeding and then getting caught again a couple of days later? A $100 fine and a two-day ban? It seems that Krakouer's belief that road rules are for others is well-founded.

While Port Adelaide was never in contention for the TAC's bundle of our free cash (presumably they'd only sponsor a Victorian club), it highlights the stupidity of such funding arrangements.

*** UPDATE ***
It just doesn't stop. More selfish recklessness from footy players on the road, making it three in a week. Premiership player Steve Johnson has been picked up for the most gross speeding you could imagine: 128 km/h in a residential 50 km/h zone:

Police have impounded Johnson's car and he faces the loss of his licence for 12 months after he was clocked Wednesday night at 128km/h in a 50km/h zone.

As they did a year ago, Geelong's players will again play a major role in deciding a club penalty for the star forward. But unlike last summer, his career with the Cats is unlikely to be in jeopardy.

Teammate Shannon Byrnes was also in the car at the time of the incident, with the pair on the way to Eastern Gardens golf club in Geelong.

“We are extremely disappointed that Steve was found to have exceeded the speed limit in this manner and we are thankful that Steve, his passenger Shannon Byrnes or any other people were not injured,” Geelong chief executive Brian Cook said in a statement.

“We know the risks associated with speeding and speed is a major cause of road crashes in Victoria.

...

The players will meet within a week to discuss what penalty they want for Johnson this time.

“The club will consider the possibility of further sanctions over the next week which will include discussion with the player leadership group,” the statement read. (FoxSports, 17/1/2008)

Yes, this is the same Steve Johnson who was involved in a drunken incident in Wangaratta around 12 months ago, resulting in his arrest (which he tried to keep secret). Coming on top of earlier police attention for his drunkenness, the last major incident saw him voluntarily suspended by his club for five matches.


Steve Johnson, what a winner. 80 km/h over the speed limit.
Source: Herald-Sun

Let's just remind ourselves of what the club said about this troubled character at the time:

“Steve has been given numerous chances and it is fair to say that he is now down to his last opportunity to prove that he wants to stay with the club. (Geelong FC Statement, 8/1/2007)

Given his performance in the Grand Final, does anyone doubt he'll be getting yet another "last opportunity"? (This will nearly tie him with Ben Cousins when it comes to most "last chances".)

We're watching you, Geelong. If you don't stick to your word on this, your club will be shown up as weak, desperate and dishonourable.

*** UPDATE ***
In a predictable move, Geelong has seen fit to let repeat offender Steve Johnson off without sanction. This man - prone to bouts of drunken irresponsibility warranting police intervention - was busted hurtling along at almost 80 km/h over the legal limit. He was earlier publicly warned by his club, Geelong, about being on a last chance (see above).

Unfortunately, strict defamation laws prevent me from saying what I would like to. Instead, I draw your attention to the official media statement above, and compare and contrast with this excuse by Geelong Chief Executive Brian Cook:

But Cook hinted the outcome could have been different had the mercurial forward been a less talented player.

"There does come a point in time when you run out of chances. And talented people get more chances than the not so talented," he said

A repentant Johnson described his decision to speed as 'a bit of a brain fade'.

"There was no reason why I should have been travelling at that speed. To be honest, I've got no excuse for it. It was a silly thing to do. I can't put a finger on it," he said.

"There's no excuse for travelling at that sort of speed." (Sportal, 22/1/2008)

This idea of talent "buying" extra chances wasn't stated in the media release last year. I, for one, could not countenance dealing with people who could cynically manipulate the public like this.

Citations: The Age, 10/1/2008; AFL Bigpond, 10/1/2008; ABC, 14/1/2008; FoxSports, 17/1/2008; Geelong FC Statement, 8/1/2007; Sportal, 22/1/2008

Word Count: 1883

Tags: footy, booze, court, traffic, payola

Teague Gets Lucky Break

Carlton occasional David Teague must be counting his blessings after he avoided a conviction for rendering an elderly woman a quadriplegic in a traffic accident last year.

Teague was driving an unfamiliar hoon wagon borrowed from a friend on June 18, 2006 at around 10:30am. He had just picked up his girlfriend, Hannah McNamara, after an early morning fun run. He was attempting to turn into McCutcheon Way, Collingwood but was going too fast and skidded out of control and mounted the curb on the opposite side of the road.

David Teague: "I'm glad with the result"
Source: News Corp.

Tragically, he plowed into a parked Corolla, in which an elderly woman was asleep. As a result of her severe injuries, she is now a quadriplegic. Teague was charged with careless driving.


Ford Falcon XR6 Ute: Similar model to the one driven by Teague
Source: Carpoint

This week, he fronted up to the Melbourne Magistrates Court (AFL Division) to answer these charges. He pleaded not guilty, due to a supposed technical glitch: the floor mat "bridged" both the accelerator and the brake.

In a taped interview, Teague told police the car accelerated unexpectedly as he turned.

"As I've gone to take the turn, I've taken my foot off the brake and as I've taken my foot off the brake, the car has sort of accelerated as I've gone around the corner," he said. "I can remember trying to turn and I've thought to myself, "Can't turn'."

Ms McNamara told the hearing that as the car careered out of control she called out "David" and he replied "I can't" before colliding with the Corolla.

"It seemed like there was something wrong, he wasn't in control," Ms McNamara said.

Two mechanical experts gave contrasting evidence over the likelihood that the car's foot mat interfered with the accelerator and contributed to the crash. (Herald-Sun, 17/7/2007)

With this introduction of reasonable doubt by a paid expert witness, the court dismissed the charges:

Melbourne magistrate Gerard Bryant today found Teague not (not) guilty of careless driving.

"I find that there is a reasonable hypothesis consistent with innocence," he said.

"I can't exclude as a reasonable hypothesis that the floor-mat interfered with the proper operation of the brake and the accelerator pedals." (The Age, 18/7/2007)

What can I say? Very little, as it happens, thanks to our defamation and contempt of court laws. One's mind does wonder to the possibilities of other traffic accident cases where expensive expert witnesses could have created similar doubts in the minds of magistrates - except the defendant lacked the profile, connections and money of a professional footballer.

For the record, there was no evidence of alcohol playing a role. In all the reports we turned up, the question of drug use was not raised. For what it's worth, I hope the police have a standard protocol for testing drivers in serious traffic accidents - especially on Sunday mornings! - for prescription and illicit drugs. Let's all pray the police didn't rely on the hopelessly compromised ASADA drug testing regime for this aspect of the investigation.

Perhaps the best thing that can be said is that Magistrate Gerard Bryant has sent a powerful message that the presumption of innocence is in fact alive and well in Australia, despite recent events. (At least, as far as wealthy, male, famous and white footballers are concerned.)

The downside from this observation is that David Teague has now used up all the presumption of innocence for a 500km radius for at least three months. Please, fellow Victorians, don't lend your mobile SIM card to anyone until the end of the year, just to be safe!

Let's keep in mind the real tragedy: while Teague has walked away from this, his victim cannot.

Citations: Herald-Sun, 17/7/2007; The Age, 18/7/2007

Word Count: 650

Tags: footy, court, traffic,

Didak Crosses The Line

By now, you've no doubt heard: Alan Didak has lived up to expectations with a big win for Collingwood. No, I'm not talking about the Copeland Trophy - I'm talking about the next court appearance by our esteemed AFL players.

It's no secret that the Magpies have long been regarded as favourites for this dubious award. With ticking time-bombs like Chris Tarrant and Ben Johnson on board, it was just a matter of time. Didak - disgraced for his earlier public row with pin-up Cassie Lane - was always a major liability. But let's go through what happened.

The word is that Didak had consumed "five or six beers" over an hour or so with a friend at a nightclub in Hawthorn. He then jumped into a cab around 1am and asked to be taken home to Kew, about a $10 cab fare. The driver was reluctant to proceed. It's not clear whether this was due to the small fare, concern at Didak's ability to pay, his apparent drunkeness or his reputation for volcanic eruptions. Given the terrible spate of taxi-driver assaults recently, we should not presume that the driver was not just displaying commonsense and reasonable care for his own safety. Let's face it: alcohol-influenced footballers plus taxis are often a recipe for disaster.

More money was offered, with the driver bidding up to $25.

"The taxi driver said he would not take me," Didak said. "He wanted $25. Obviously, I didn't think it was a reasonable price, so I stayed in the cab but he ordered me to get out." (The Australian, 7/10/2006)

At this point, Didak was being a first-grade knob and law-breaker. Who would think it's acceptable to wage a Ghandi-like, one-man, sit-in protest in someone else's cab? Only a footballer. Fortunately, a police patrol happened by, witnessed the dispute and ordered Didak out of the taxi. What subsequently transpired is unknown, but Didak ended up at the City Watch-House to sober up, where:

The club's chief operating officer, prominent former Melbourne lawyer Eugene Arocca, picked Didak up from the police station when he was released. [Eddie] McGuire said Mr Arocca saw Didak was not drunk.

Speaking to Mr Arocca, who was with him during the telephone interview, Mr McGuire said he said: "Eugs, was he sober?"

"He was sober," was Mr Arocca's reply.

Mr McGuire said he asked Mr Arocca, "Will it be vigorously defended if he's charged for being drunk?, to which Mr Arocca replied "Yep". (SMH, 6/10/2006)

Was he really drunk? The police believe so, charging him with drunk and disorderly conduct. He admitted to drinking quite a few beers fairly quickly. I guess the upcoming case on November the 8th in Melbourne Magistrates Court (AFL Division) will settle it. While his lawyer will be appearing for him, this will still count as a court appearance for the purpose of the footy betting pool. (Some smart cookie is offering $75 for each Collingwood contract, believing it will pay out $100 in a month. This suggests they believe there's a less than 25% chance of another club pipping them at the post.)

With the benefit of a few days' breathing space, it's worth examining the spin at work. First is the reaction of the club's CEO Greg Swann. He was reported in The Age as stating "There was no suggestion he was drunk, there's no suggestion of a court appearance." Uh, really? He's answering a charge of drunkenness in court. Once again, reality and public statements from a football official slide past each other without as much as courteous nod.

This "brute force" approach to bending reality to their corporate interests belies Swann's lack of sophistication. Enter the man with a PhD in Spin, Eddie McGuire. His first salvo - which I sadly cannot cite online as I read it in mX - was to claim that Alan Didak was going home, not heading out to Spearmint Rhino. Apparently, that's a franchised strip club. Only Eddie would employ his intimate working knowledge of Melbourne's sex industry in defence of an embattled player. The logic is that a player can effectively trespass and become a drunken nuisance as long he's not going to a strip club. Interesting.

Eddie's next tack was to argue that the five or six beers sunk in an hour or so did not make Didak drunk. He only seemed drunk:

"Some of the information we get is that the officer who was there thought he was a little wobbly on his feet and you tend to be that way when you've just had a knee reconstruction," Mr McGuire told Southern Cross Broadcasting today. (SMH, 6/10/2006)

Wow. Credit where it's due, he is brilliant. PBL have done well to secure his services - well-worth boning a hundred journos to help pay for genius like that.

The last piece was an appeal to the public that he must have been acting reasonably, because Collingwood learnt their lesson after the Chad Morrison TAC sponsorship affair:

For player welfare, and in line with the club's lucrative Transport Accident Commission sponsorship, Mr McGuire said players were taught to act responsibly when drinking.

He said Didak was following the guidelines. (SMH, 6/10/2006)

The underlying morality - we follow the law because we're paid to - is just glossed over. Should they lose TAC sponsorship, would they stop acting responsibly when drinking? Seen in this light, Eddie's remarks seem more like a threat to me. In any case, Didak patently wasn't "acting responsibly when drinking" or else he wouldn't have engaged in civil disobedience campaign and found himself locked up in the City Watch House.

The real wonder here is what prompted a drunken footballer to cause a ruckus in that cab. Sure, Didak is an angry young man, full of frustrations. Perhaps he was still reeling from the almost-universal condemnation of his glamazon girlfriend Cassie Lane as worst-dressed at the Brownlows? Perhaps it was frustration at missing next season due to knee surgery? Perhaps it was just plain-old interaction effects between his post-op pain-killers and the booze? We'll likely never know.

But one thing we can be sure of: as long as someone taking home hundreds of thousand of dollars a year will argue the toss on a $25 cab fare, there'll always be "dickhead footballer in court" stories.

Citations: The Australian, 7/10/2006; SMH, 6/10/2006; SMH, 6/10/2006; SMH, 6/10/2006

Word Count: 1089

Tags: footy, court, traffic, booze

Cat In Drink-Driving Disgrace

More arrogant recklessness and poor judgement from an AFL player. This time, Geelong's Brad Ottens got picked up for driving drunk late on the Friday night (following "Mad Monday") in the leafy-green - or is that shady? - suburb of Doncaster. It's seems the capacity of footballers for getting behind the wheel while pissed knows no bounds.

The ABC kept to the facts:

Forward Brad Ottens faces disciplinary action from Geelong after failing a random breath test in Doncaster in the early hours of this morning (AEST).

Ottens was stopped by police and found to have a blood alcohol content of 0.116, more than twice the legal limit. (ABC News, 9/9/2006)

The Murdoch press was running something far more detail-packed and salubrious:

He could also lose his licence for 11 months and be fined $450.

Mr Cook said the incident was Ottens' "first strike" since joining the Cats two years ago.

He did not know Ottens had been suspended for a match over drunkenness while at the Tigers in 2000.

"I wasn't aware of that," he said.

"He's been among the more mature players at the club. We expect more of him."

Mr Cook, who was relieved no one was injured by Ottens' mistake, said the player's career was not under threat.

"He's still contracted with us. In my opinion, that's not in jeopardy," he said.

Mr Cook said Ottens had dinner and a few drinks at a hotel in Templestowe with his brother before being stopped for a random breath test on Manningham Rd.

He said Ottens had been taken to the Doncaster police station for further testing and a reading of 0.116 had been recorded.

Mr Cook said Ottens was extremely remorseful. (The Sunday Herald Sun, 10/9/2006)

The high reading - 0.116% BAC - indicates that Brad Ottens must have been noticeably pissed. Luckily for us, random breath testing pulled him over before he could do any actual damage. Luckily for Ottens, the delayed reading at the cop shop ensured he didn't blow 0.15, the point at which you can expect to answer a charge in court.

Will he end up at the AFL Division of the Magistrates Court? This, of course, is the $100,000 dollar question. Based on my discussions with court staff, it seems that someone in his situation would generally be issued an infringement notice that indicates they've lost their licence for a year without appearing before the beak. However, the police may take the case to court anyway (depending on seriousness), or the accused could elect to challenge the police's notice in court. This uncertainty is reflected in the betting market, which is all over the place at the moment, with prices on Geelong jumping markedly before falling back to $1.00 after what (bafflingly) appears to be short-selling of the stock. Meanwhile, interstate teams Brisbane Lions and Port Adelaide are going from strength to strength, seeing big price increments. What's happening over the border?

Let's hope that Brad Ottens learns his lesson about drink-driving and that the rest of the AFL clubs look at promoting the free priority taxi service a little more widely in future. Remember guys, you can't always rely on Chris Tarrant to chase up a lift for you.

Citations: ABC News, 9/9/2006; The Sunday Herald Sun, 10/9/2006

Word Count: 563

Tags: footy, court, booze, traffic, payola

Footy Stars Plus Traffic Equals ...

What is it with footballers that they refuse to accept that road rules apply to them too? Is it because they are arrogant, contemptuous, spoilt brats? Maybe it's their hard-wired need for thrill-seeking and risk-taking behaviour? Or is it simply that magistrates keep doling out laughable sentences, making a mockery of social expectations? We examine these questions in light of the latest round of traffic offences from AFL footballers.

Working in reverse chronological order, we have Mark Williams (of Hawthorn) sentenced today in the Melbourne Magistrates Courts (AFL Division):

[The Court] heard that police found Williams was driving whilst unlicensed after a cyclist rode into the back of his car in Burnley on October 25 last year.

A prosecutor said police checks found Williams' licence had been suspended for 12 months four months earlier, after he was issued with a traffic infringement notice for speeding.

Senior Constable Jo Leechman said Williams later admitted driving while licence suspended but denied knowing that his licence had been suspended.

She said that on April 11 this year, Williams sped away from police in Newport at a speed estimated to at 94kmh in a 50kmh zone. (The Age, 19/7/2006)

His defence team ran the "pillar of the community" line. Williams donated $3000 (less than a week's wages) to some underprivileged kids somewhere. He also did some "voluntary work" (signing footballs for an hour I bet). Oh, did I mention that he did all this good works after the incident and on the advice of the spin-doctors at his club? Speaks volumes about his character ...

So he's a reckless law-breaking idiot who gets caught, has his licence cancelled, then gets into another incident while driving unlicensed (and, presumably, uninsured), denies wrong-doing, covers it up with some spin-induced "good works", feigns ignorance of his own prior sentence ... what a disgrace. Still, you'd think the judiciary would react sternly after their prior orders were just flagrantly ignored - hey, they might love their footy but they have to protect their own authority, right?

Wrong. Quoth the article:

Williams was put on a 12-month undertaking with conditions that he undergo a road trauma awareness, pay $1500 to that course and not reoffend.

His licence was suspended for the minimum mandatory period of six months. (ibid)

So, he got the minimum penalty - only because it was mandatory - and a fine amounting to what he'll earn before the first quarter siren on Saturday. Oh, and he was told to not reoffend. I've wondered aloud before at magistrates using "now you have to obey the law" as a penalty. It's truly bizarre. What else? Perhaps the magistrate should have ordered Williams to "keep on breathing", "maintain your kidneys on or about your person at all times" and "comply with Newton's Third Law of Motion". Telling people who have already broken the law - including a restrictions imposed on them for breaking an earlier law! - to stop breaking the law (or we'll tell you again) is an exercise in futility. Magistrates aren't stupid, so why do they keep on doing it? I'm genuinely baffled.

"Softly, softly" was also the order of the day for another (former) AFL "hero" sentenced for blatantly ignoring traffic laws that are only for the rest of us - including ignoring an earlier court order to stop driving:

Corey McKernan was today fined $1000 for driving while disqualified and for using his mobile phone at the same time.

McKernan, 32, had lost his licence for six months for exceeding the prescribed alcohol limit last November, Melbourne Magistrates Court was told today.

Then on May 2 this year, police observed him in his car using his mobile phone while stopped at traffic lights in South Melbourne. (ibid)

That's right. Laws are for other people, not footballers. Presumably, the magical aura of legal exemption extends even after the playing career is over. To reinforce this new-found piece of jurisprudence, the magistrate suspended his sentence for just 14 days. That's right, a whole fortnight. (Wanna bet he'll still drive anyway? Hell, he's done it before!)

These cases of driving anyway after being told to stop (due to earlier infringements) sound familiar ... that's right! Brodie Holland did the same thing back in January! He even tried the old "I didn't know I was unlicensed" trick. Since then, we've seen Michael Gardiner's spectacular drunken self-destruction at the wheel of a hotted-up bogan-wagon, Chad Morrison hung out to dry by Collingwood for drink-driving and Ben Cousins doing a runner when confronted with a booze-bus. Let's not forget Jay Shulz and his very expensive drink-driving incident last year.

It's not enough that footballers get free priority taxis (only mugs queue and pay for cabs) - Sav Rocca had the right idea in getting chauffeur-driven by his own personal police car (with lights and sirens too, if you don't mind).

Yep, anyway you look at it, the normal rules of the road don't apply to these superstars. They can drink and drive. They can speed. They can drive unlicensed. They can get ferried around at others' expense. All safe in the knowledge that an over-awed judiciary will never, ever impose a penalty of any consequence.

Hell, I'm surprised that Melbourne's Commonwealth Games "exclusive Games lanes" weren't kept in place for the sole use of football players. Now there's an idea that the AFL Players' Association would get behind!

Citations: The Age, 19/7/2006

Word Count: 925

Tags: footy, court, spoilt_rotten, traffic

Out-Of-Control Footballer Hits Skids

Perennial pest Michael Gardiner (of the troubled West Coast Eagles) has finally done what we've all been waiting for and thrown away his footy career. Again. This time, it was a breathlessly stupid and destructive car accident that - miraculously - avoided injury.

Michael Gardiner has long been featured on The Speccy, with his involvement with known underworld figures and drug-dealers, or bringing his club into disrepute with mysterious references to "off-field behaviour". While he's only mustered 18 games in the past three seasons, the Weagles are now seriously reviewing their half million dollar spend on him.

Reality Sets in for Michael Gardiner, Facing The Dole Queue Next Year
Source: The Age

But first, the gory details of what happened. As usual, The Age had the skinny:

West Coast AFL ruckman Michael Gardiner may have been speeding when his car struck a street sign and careered into two parked cars in Perth overnight, police say.

Gardiner was taken to hospital with minor injuries after the crash in the beach-side suburb of Scarborough shortly after 11:30pm (WST) on Monday.

Gardiner's black Holden Commodore and one of the parked cars, a Holden Statesman, were extensively damaged and may have been written-off, police say.

The other vehicle was also damaged substantially.

"Speed may have been a factor in the crash because of the damage to all of the vehicles," a police spokeswoman told AAP.

"That is forming part of the investigation.

"He is very lucky he wasn't more seriously injured." (The Age, 18/7/2006)

Now, it's not immediately obvious to me whether the police officer quoted here talking about "speed" is referring to velocity or methamphetamines. It's plausible that either physics or chemistry was involved in this one. The Age also reports that drug sniffer dogs were going over the car, and a Cicatrin bottle (an antiobiotic) was found. I imagine they'll be looking at the contents closely. Gardiner admitted to blowing over 0.05 BAC too, but at this point it's unclear if drug samples were taken.

You can see a nice slideshow of the damaged suburbia wrought by Gardiner's de trop black SS Commodore (what else would a cashed-up bogan drive?).

The reaction from his club was swift - a paltry $5000 fine (the maximum under the union agreement) and immediate - though not permanent - suspension:

[Eagles Chief Executive Terry] Nisbett said it was highly unlikely the club would renew his contract at the end of the year.

"Mike's let a lot of people down, more importantly himself because he was on track and things were going well for him," he said. (ABC Sport, 19/7/2006)

Other AFL clubs were also backing away, underlining Gardiner's prospects of signing on to the dole next year:

Yesterday, an overwhelming majority of AFL clubs suggested the 2003 All-Australian was unlikely to appear in their colours next season.

No club expressed even mild interest in the ruckman and what might be required to trade for his services. Most expressed reservations about his physical ability, apart from the off-field issues that have sabotaged what should have been a stellar career. (The Age, 18/7/2006)

However, we've seen this before. This is the Terry Nesbit who sent Gardiner packing to the B-Leagues earlier this year, only to let him back after a couple of months. Already club officials are preparing the ground for Gardiner's eventual reinstatement:

[Club Chairman Dalton] Gooding told 6PR's Liam Bartlett that the football club was unable to sack Gardiner, who had admitted drinking alcohol before crashing his car into two parked vehicles near his home in Scarborough on Monday night.

Mr Gooding said that under a collective bargaining agreement with the AFL Players' Association, Gardiner's contract could not be terminated.

...

"As a footballer, his career is not over,'' Mr Gooding said. "Whether he remains at the West Coast Eagles after the end of this season is remote, but certainly the door has not been firmly shut.

...

"But obviously we'd need a considerable improvement in Michael's attitude, which is disappointing in view of the fact that when he got sent back to Claremont (for two months earlier this season) he'd done everything right. (Perth Now, 19/7/2006)

So, I guess it's the standard modus operandi: they'll ride out the current storm and put him back in the side in about, oh, I dunno, a month? Let him get a few matches in during the finals and come back next year.

Really, the club needs to put their foot down and take a stand on this. If they don't, they're sending a signal that says "hey - being good at footy can make up for any number of sins." This will encourage worse and worse behaviour by the players, which - as role models - engenders deteriorating standards throughout society. We should not have to put up with feckless morons jeopardising our collective well-being so that a footy club can kick a few more goals.

West Coast Eagles, we urge you to be strong and keep this dickhead out of your team. For good.

*** UPDATE ***
Turns out Gardiner's been charged with drink-driving and will front up to the beak in Perth. Still, it's unlikely Gardiner will be out for good ... suitably cynical analysis from Murdoch's man Patrick Smith about how West Coast's ranking will over-ride all other considerations.

Is Michael Gardiner Depressed?

It's a little known fact that senior officials in AFL clubs are automatically conferred with medical qualifications, in recognition of their extraordinary capacities and responsibilities. For example, thanks to the miracle of modern medicine, the West Coast Eagles were able to diagnose Gardiner via press release:

Of greatest concern is Michael's depressed mental state and the club intends to further assist him to ensure that he gets the appropriate counselling and off-field direction required to get his life in order. (Footy Goss, 18/7/2006)

This was backed up by club CEO Trevor Nisbett ("I think it is [depression] ..."), who will be guest starring in an upcoming episode of TV's House, MD, alongside Hugh Lawrie. We're all looking forward to that. Chairman Dalton Gooding had a bob each way with "Well, something is not right . Whether it's depression or a lack of discipline, or what." Wise man. Best to not rush to any conclusions.

And what of the man himself? Gardiner is quoted as saying "I'm not depressed. I wasn't depressed last night, I'm not depressed now and I'm staggered the club is going down that path." Sadly, refusal to face up to depression is a well-known, classic sign of depression. It's also a highly-reliable indicator of not being depressed. This dilemma has confounded some of the best medical brains in the business - but not Nisbett. The clarity that can only come from not being a trained psychiatrist is his diagnostic strength. Good on ya, Trev.

But Gardiner - depressed or otherwise - does raise a pertinent point. Why would the club be going down that path? What kind of new development or find could they be preparing the public for with such claims?

Apropos of nothing at all, did you know that some people into "party drugs" take (legal) anti-depressants at the same time? It's an interesting little fact. You see, drugs like methamphetamines and ecstasy work by stimulating the release of a neurotransmitter (="natural brain chemical") called serotonin. This is what gives you the high. However, the body quickly re-absorbs it, meaning your pill will wear off after about four hours.

Many anti-depressants are from a class called SSRIs (="Selective Serotonin Re-uptake Inhibitors"). This class of drugs will - as you can guess from the name - stop your body from absorbing that serotonin that your pill just released. That means you have a bigger, longer-lasting high. Neat, hey? But of course, it's very dangerous and only for hard-core, drug-addled, extreme risk-takers.

Something to ponder, no?

Citations: The Age, 18/7/2006; ABC Sport, 19/7/2006; The Age, 18/7/2006; Perth Now, 19/7/2006; Footy Goss, 18/7/2006

Word Count: 1355

Tags: footy, court, underworld, drugs, traffic

Hanging Chad - Sponsorship and the AFL

It's been nearly two weeks since Chad Morrison of Collingwood copped his massive $20,000 fine. While I agree with money being stripped from AFL footballers - particularly when they're bloody, selfish, life-threatening idiots - I'll surprise my regular readers (thanks for the recent donation, by the way!) by saying I can't support the underlying logic of the Collingwood Football Club on this one.

But first, let's get the facts of the boozer's bust.

Collingwood footballer Chad Morrison has had his licence cancelled for six months due to a drink-driving offence.

The club released a statement saying Morrison was breath-tested in the Melbourne suburb of Richmond on Saturday night [22/4/2006] and allegedly returned a blood alcohol reading of 0.093.

Morrison also received an on-the-spot fine of $314.(ABC Sport, 24/4/2006)

It's also worth noting that Chad is old (28), not playing games this season and (seems to me) on the way out. Hardly a star player. And - here's the crux - the TAC is a Collingwood sponsor.

Since Richmond's infamous Sgt Jay "I know nothing" Shulz incident of one year ago, the footy clubs have been walking on egg shells over losing valuable TAC sponsorship money. You can almost feel the rage in the Collingwood boardroom at having hundreds of thousands of dollars a year jeopardised by a washed-out has-been that they probably didn't even want.

Their response was hanging Chad: cop a $20K fine or get dropped from the club. Sounds good, right? A club taking drink-driving seriously. Sending a signal. Role models. Spotlight. Et cetera.

The AFL Union, under Brendan Gale, issued a predictable "wah, wah not fair!" press release threatening to abandon the code of conduct:

However Gale added that in his view, for Collingwood to subsequently threaten termination of Morrison's employment or impose a fine of $20,000 was unfair, unreasonable and not commensurate with his offence.

"... if the rights of players cannot be protected under the code then we will review our commitment to it," concluded Gale. (AFLPA, 28/4/2006)

Before I explain why Comrade Gale is right, let me explain why he is wrong. Firstly, if the prospect of several hundred footballers running amok, bashing, marauding and raping their way up and down the countryside is a legitimate bargaining chip, then I guess I don't understand modern industrial relations. Secondly, he must concede that the $5,000 fine allowed under the Code of Conduct is manifestly inadequate. Fines are two-fold in purpose: disincentive and compensation. While it's not clear how much drink-driving has been deterred by the fines, at least some incidents are still occurring. It's hard to see how footballers - who earn an average of $10K per match - will be dissuaded by a piddling fine of that size. Five grand is a mere few days' (ahem) "work". How is that fair, reasonable and commensurate? And from the club's point of view, $5000 is hardly comparable to the ongoing sponsorship deals worth several million dollars over a number of years.

Which is precisely my objection, but the one Brendan Gale missed. Eddie and his buddies at the Lexus Nexus treated the matter as a standard commercial contractual matter. Chad put at-risk a certain amount of money. Collingwood moved to protect its valuable asset (relationship with TAC) at the expense of a near-worthless one (washed-up footballer) . End of story. It's nothing to do with this dickhead's reckless behaviour, poor judgement, selfishness, or even bringing himself, his club and the game into disrepute.

Certainly Collingwood would not have levied the fine were it not for the sponsorship deal. Collingwood - like all the clubs - seeks to maximise its value to sponsors. One way is through exclusivity arrangements. Collingwood, for example, would love to be sponsored by Red Rooster and would get more cash for such a deal if it could fine players for eating at KFC. But, for legal and practical reasons, it can't do this. Eating at KFC (stupid as it is) is not yet illegal and goes unmonitored by police. Ditto for shopping at rival outlets, using rival banks and so on. The backlash from supporters for such "owning the player" moves may also impact membership revenue.

By contrast, drink-driving is one area where the sponsor's wishes can be enforced by the law. But Collingwood is wrong to use this as a cover or excuse for downplaying the moral dimension to Chad's actions. The crime was not jeopardising Collingwood's cashflow. The crime was jeopardising the safety of road-users. For that, footballers must answer to the legal system, in most cases the specialist AFL Division of the Melbourne Magistrates Court. (Admittedly, the soft-serve justice dispensed to footy heroes in this town is patently inadequate, but it's absurd to suggest that clubs - motivated by sponsorship deals - will dole out a superior form of justice.)

The game of footy is not advanced by clubs fining players for stepping on sponsor's toes. Unless Collingwood announces a policy of $20,000 fines on players for all offences regardless of sponsorship deals, they come out looking like grubby, mercantile, desperate hypocrites.

*** UPDATE ***

It seems that Collingwood's rank strategy worked. The TAC announced that they will keep on sponsoring the team. Sigh. Remember when TAC was less about getting its senior executives into the corporate box at the 'G and more about reducing the road toll and looking after the injured? Think about that the next time you're paying your car rego.

*** UPDATE ***

Chad Morrison, formerly of the Magpies, copped his conviction today in the Melbourne Magistrates Court (AFL Division):

RECENTLY retired AFL footballer Chad Morrison has been fined $500 and had his licence suspended for drink-driving.

The former Collingwood utility blew 0.093 after being breath-tested while riding his motor scooter in Richmond in April ...

The 28-year-old, who was not in court, was also charged with breaching his motorcycle learners' permit conditions for riding with a passenger.

Magistrate Simon Garnett fined Morrison $500 and cancelled his licence for six months.(The Australian, 16/10/2006)

Chad retired at the end of this season. Was it in order to spare Eddie McGuire the shame of a record-smashing four court appearances in a month for his beloved Collingwood? Was it part of a contra-deal after his $20,000 "fine"? Or was he just clapped out, as a footballer?

In any case, without a licence he's going to be looking to Chris Tarrant to organsie his lifts from now on.

Citations: ABC Sport, 24/4/2006; AFLPA, 28/4/2006; The Australian, 16/10/2006

Word Count: 1113

Tags: footy, spoilt_rotten, court, payola, traffic

Shock! AFL Team Gets A Clue!

In a breathtaking sign of cluefulness, West Coast Eagles management takes a principled, reasoned and sensible line on its players' off-field behaviour. Recent comments from senior club figures have been backed up with meaningful action following the weekend's outbreak of scandals in WA's top team. Whether this heralds a seachange in AFL attitudes or simply an isolated case of thoughtfulness remains to be seen. I'm sceptically optimistic.

The major disgrace belongs to West Coast's Ben Cousins. This man is meant to embody "the best and fairest" that the AFL competition has to offer; his Brownlow Medal is a testament to that. He's also the captain of last year's Premiership runners-up and is one of the League's highest-paid stars, reportedly worth over half a million bucks a year.

By now, the story is familiar: on the 12th of February, Cousins was driving home from a friend's wedding reception when he spotted a booze bus. He abandoned his gold Mercedes-Benz 4WD (with passengers inside) some 50m up the road and did a runner. (Ironically, a photo of him in full flight adorns this year's AFL Record!) The pacey mid-fielder outstripped police, who caught one of his slower mates. He then appeared at one of Perth's leading eateries:

"There was a knock at the door and we were around the back having some wine and cheese," a Bluewater Grill staff member said yesterday. "One of the managers went to answer it, but we obviously can't open the door to strangers.

"There was a guy at the door with a pair of pants on and no shirt on and she asked him what he wanted through the door."

...

They went to the front door, and that was when the bar manager said, 'You're Ben Cousins', and he said, 'No I'm not'.

"But the bar manager insisted and eventually Ben said, 'I am Ben Cousins'.

...

"I've got no doubts whatsoever it was Ben, but it wasn't until we'd read the media reports that we were able to put it together. He was panting and the bar manager said he looked a bit drunk and was asking for water. He stayed at the restaurant for about 15 to 20 minutes, but he didn't come in. It seemed really odd at the time." (The Age, 20/02/06)

This fool later realised he had no choice but to turn himself over to police. He may face minor charges including obstructing traffic by leaving his $140,000 car on a highway. He denies he was drunk. (Hey Ben! When a man with your connections and rumours flees police and appears sweaty, addled and shirtless in public ... best to say you're drunk, n'est pas?) He's still not co-operating fully with police. Cousins also failed to co-operate with police on an earlier matter involving playing gangsters with underworld figures involved in a shooting and stabbing at a Perth nightclub.



Ben Cousins Kisses His Luck Goodbye
Source: ABC Online


The only ray of light in what could have been just another spoilt footballer story has been some comments by the club leadership, including chief executive Trevor Nisbett:

"If he has done that and he has run from a booze bus, well obviously it's a ridiculous thing to do," he said.

"Because he like any other citizen should have gone through the booze bus like everyone else has to."

Mr Nisbett said Cousins had to learn to be answerable for his off-field behaviour. (ABC Online, 18/02/06)

Hallelujah! I think this man actually gets it! Footballers are bound by the same laws as regular citizens; what's more, as role models they must be ever vigilant to the impact of their actions. (For example, WA's Attorney-General has expressed alarm that Cousins' behaviour may spark copy-cat incidents.) This was followed up with direct and decisive action. I detect something of Trevor Nisbett's hand in Ben Cousins' announcement that he'll surrender the West Coast captaincy. Was he pushed or did he jump? In my view, overpaid prima donnas with a history of selfishness, blame and immaturity don't accept responsibility for their mistakes. I'm betting he was told he was gone either way.

The second West Coast scandal was the relegation of troubled star Michael Gardiner to the B-leagues. This man has been warned time and again for his mysterious "off-field behaviour". This has only ever been alluded to in the media, though it's worth noting he has been linked previously to the same underworld figures with drug connections as his mate Ben Cousins.

There have been persistent rumours over the past two seasons that Gardiner's off-field excesses had led to a fallout with coach John Worsfold.

Worsfold did not mince his words when asked about the fallen star at a press conference following Friday's intraclub match. West Coast was a highly disciplined club, Worsfold said. One player had not met the club's standards. That player was Gardiner and he was being banished to the WAFL. (The Age, 21/02/06)

Seen in light of Cousins' forced stand-down, this suggests that the West Coast Eagles are sick and tired of the shame brought upon their club by a couple of renegade players and are getting serious about cleaning it up. The club's management should be roundly applauded for their efforts in this.

But, with dark mutterings in the media about further drug scandals breaking this year as the new anti-doping protocol comes into effect, it may be that the Weagles are just getting ahead of the pack for what could be a big shake-out in our footballers' more salubrious lifestyle choices.

*** Update ***

Twelve months after the above incident, Ben Cousins has been dropped by his club for his drug-related issues. He has headed to the US for rehabilitation. Everyone claimed to see it coming, except his club. If only they saw the signs ...

Citations: The Age, 20/02/06; ABC Online, 18/02/06; The Age, 21/02/06

Word Count: 1009

Tags: footy, court, underworld, drugs, traffic

Police Deliver Player Away From Delivery

It's a familiar scene: a pregnant women in labour, an anxious dad-to-be, a police car speeding along with lights and sirens. But wait - the police car is heading away from the hospital! What's going on? Welcome to the wacky world of footy finals in Melbourne.

Kangaroos forward Saverio Rocca made it on time to the delivery ward for the Fathers' Day birth of his second child. But the delivery was taking longer than hoped and, not wanting to miss playing in a football match, he scooted out of there 50 minutes before the bounce. Happily, the birth proceeded without his presence and he was informed during the quarter time huddle that he had a new son. Before we rush to judgement about his priorities, it's worth remember that Sav is a professional AFL footballer.

However, police rushed him to Telstra Dome from Heidelberg at 135 km/h with lights and sirens, a journey of some 15 km through heavily-built up areas of the city, including the CBD.

Police initially denied reports that Rocca had been taken to Telstra Dome in a police car.

But in a radio interview, Anthony Rocca thanked the police for getting the pair to the game on time. He said he had been happy to take the ride with sirens sounding. (The Hun, 5/9/05)

This is a disgraceful use of police resources for the private benefit of a famous and wealthy individual. Suppose that the speeding police car had knocked down a pedestrian or been involved in a collision? It's one thing to subject the public to such risks when chasing down criminals, but helping out a footy team? Even this footy-mad town would not tolerate dead or injured citizens in the name of Sav getting a kick.

Let's not forget that primary mission of the police is public safety. The next time you need police assistance and are told to wait because police are tied up with more important work, it may well be because they are ferrying AFL players around. Or picking up their dry cleaning. Maybe washing their cars. Who knows to what extent the police are willing to do favours for the glamour boys of the AFL?

This special treatment takes on sinister overtones when we think back to remarks by one of our most senior police, Simon Overland, about his lack of confidence in police investigations into AFL players. We've also seen the "light touch" approach to policing AFL players in Geelong. Reports like this about cosy arrangements are further flamed by incompetent official denials by the police themselves. Not only will they break the law to help out their sporting stars, they're prepared to it cover up too! Disgusting.

We can't really blame the Roccas for this. As superstar AFL players feted day-in, day-out, it's only natural that they expect (and accept) such privileges. Victoria Police who need to take responsibility for this, but it's only now that they've been caught out that any serious examination is going on. Superintendent Tim Cartwright admitted that "We've done similar things before" and that the police officer in question could face "counselling" or a "penalty notice". Hardly adequate for endangering public safety, wasting police time and resources and adding to a perception of police "looking out for" AFL players. Shame, VicPol, shame.

Citations: The Hun, 5/9/05

Word Count: 562

Tags: footy, spoilt_rotten, traffic