Sherman banned for vilification

[Sedat]

If so, other Dogs players must have been aware of it, and possibly the coaching staff.

Why didn't the onfield leadership group (and coaching staff if they were aware of it) stop it?

Not the best day for our club, nor the best day for Hill, DJ, Stack or Jones.

More than once might be twice, it might be 100 times. Damian Barrett has given no more information than it happened more than once, and he is doing what any journo would and is allowing ill-informed viewers/readers draw their own conclusions and make their own assumptions about what happened (which you have been too happy to make ill-informed assumptions in your above post), which of course is intended to keep the story bubbling along.

What is certain is that one of our on-field leaders offered support to young Joel as soon as the siren sounded - that is about as swift a response to the issue as is humanly possible. Did you want our leaders to renounce Sherman and stage a sit down protest while the game was still on? How you can possibly draw conclusions that our club was slow to move and lacked leadership in relation to this issue defies logic. It has already been resolved to the satisfaction of the aggrieved party less than 2 days after the match, with our club having been in constant contact with GC, the player and the AFL in the interim to ensure that the player and his club were given a satisfactory resolution to the issue. Sometimes no matter what our club's actions, some people will find fault.

It is a shocking situation handled as sympathetically and as quickly as could possibly be handled by our on-field and off-field leaders.

[Dry Rot]

If it was all day and if they were aware (and it seems some knew by full-time) then they could have stopped it earlier, couldn't they?

[Sedat]

If it was all day and if they were aware (and it seems some knew by full-time) then they could have stopped it earlier, couldn't they?

You wanted our players to 'do something about it' while the match was still in progress? Are you serious?

[Dry Rot]

You wanted our players to 'do something about it' while the match was still in progress? Are you serious?

If it was "going on all day" a quiet word at the end of a quarter isn't that hard, is it?

[Sedat]

If it was "going on all day" a quiet word at the end of a quarter isn't that hard, is it?

Who's to say that didn't happen? And you are assuming that the vilification was going on all day when it might have only happened twice.

[LostDoggy]

I think it's dangerous to listen to one journalist & ASSUME it was happening all day. We all know how journalists speculate and sometimes just outright make stuff up. They are not held accountable for what they say or print, even when it's rubbish.

Re. Sherman. I'm disappointed in what he did and for tarnishing our club. I think it has been dealt with and now we need to focus on beating Melbourne on Friday night.

[Curly5]

I think it's dangerous to listen to one journalist & ASSUME it was happening all day. We all know how journalists speculate and sometimes just outright make stuff up. They are not held accountable for what they say or print, even when it's rubbish.

Re. Sherman. I'm disappointed in what he did and for tarnishing our club. I think it has been dealt with and now we need to focus on beating Melbourne on Friday night.

I agree. How would Barrett know? Unless he's being fed information by a player (which would be forbidden), or a runner, or was on the ground himself, he's making assumptions.

I would like to know if the leaders did say anything to Justin during the game, or if the age-old male reticence to criticise a mate, eg driving too fast or while drunk, occurred.

The photo of Gia speaking with Wilkinson at the end of the game indicates to me that he was trying to soothe him, and Sherman was apologising then as well. But of course it was too late then.