Sherman banned for vilification
http://mm.afl.com.au/Portals/0/image...erman_246s.jpg
WESTERN Bulldogs forward Justin Sherman will spend four weeks in the VFL after he admitted he had racially vilified an unnamed opposition player during Saturday's clash with Gold Coast.
AFL football operations manager Adrian Anderson said the two parties had been part of a conciliation meeting and it was determined that:
A matter between Western Bulldogs player Justin Sherman and a Gold Coast Suns player was conciliated and settled. Player Sherman admitted he had racially vilified an opposition player and he apologised to the Suns' player;
Justin Sherman will attend an education program under the guidelines of the player rules under rule 30 covering racial and religious vilification;
Justin Sherman has agreed that he will serve a four-match suspension to cover rounds 15-18 of the 2011 Toyota AFL Premiership Season. He may play at VFL level during that period;
Justin Sherman will make a donation of $5000 to the charity nominated by the Gold Coast Suns:
The Gold Coast Suns player accepted Sherman’s apology and said the other outcomes of the conciliation, as outlined above, were acceptable to him to conclude this matter;
No person involved in the conciliation agreement, the AFL, the Western Bulldogs FC or the Gold Coast Suns FC may publicly identify the Gold Coast player involved
http://www.afl.com.au/news/newsartic...0/default.aspx
Re: Sherman banned for vilification
Whoops, could someone move this to the appropriate board. :o
Re: Sherman banned for vilification
Re: Sherman banned for vilification
Quote:
Originally Posted by
bornadog
Very dissapointing:mad:
Yeah it is but am I alone in thinking 4 weeks is just a tad OTT. Someone who is found to take drugs gets a 3 strike policy and is hidden away so know one will find out but yet if you call someone a name it warrants a harsher penalty that deliberately knocking someone out on the field or shooting up cocaine.
I'm against racially vilifying someone but thinks it's far to much of a penalty.
Re: Sherman banned for vilification
Quote:
Originally Posted by
G-Mo77
Yeah it is but am I alone in thinking 4 weeks is just a tad OTT. Someone who is found to take drugs gets a 3 strike policy and is hidden away so know one will find out but yet if you call someone a name it warrants a harsher penalty that deliberately knocking someone out on the field or shooting up cocaine.
I'm against racially vilifying someone but thinks it's far to much of a penalty.
Agree.
This penalty is a bloody disgrace.
Re: Sherman banned for vilification
Quote:
Originally Posted by
G-Mo77
Yeah it is but am I alone in thinking 4 weeks is just a tad OTT. Someone who is found to take drugs gets a 3 strike policy and is hidden away so know one will find out but yet if you call someone a name it warrants a harsher penalty that deliberately knocking someone out on the field or shooting up cocaine.
I'm against racially vilifying someone but thinks it's far to much of a penalty.
Yup, or even giving someone an elbow behind play & you only get 2 weeks!
Re: Sherman banned for vilification
I'm glad I'm not alone. He'll be vilified for the rest of his career now. IMO that is penalty enough.
Re: Sherman banned for vilification
Quote:
Originally Posted by
G-Mo77
Yeah it is but am I alone in thinking 4 weeks is just a tad OTT. Someone who is found to take drugs gets a 3 strike policy and is hidden away so know one will find out but yet if you call someone a name it warrants a harsher penalty that deliberately knocking someone out on the field or shooting up cocaine.
I'm against racially vilifying someone but thinks it's far to much of a penalty.
Plus he is paying $5,000 to a charity of Suns choice.
Re: Sherman banned for vilification
Pretty poor behaviour from Sherman, it's not as if he's a kid. A player who's played over 100 games should know better.
Re: Sherman banned for vilification
I'm so disappointed, but at least he seems to have taken it on the chin and apologised at the first opportunity - you're right G-Mo77, living with being known to have done that is going to be very tough.
I'm also with you guys in thinking that 4 weeks seems a little out of whack. Penalties for a range of indiscretions in the league seem a little out of whack though.
Re: Sherman banned for vilification
Quote:
Originally Posted by
The Pie Man
I'm so disappointed, but at least he seems to have taken it on the chin and apologised at the first opportunity - you're right G-Mo77, living with being known to have done that is going to be very tough.
I'm also with you guys in thinking that 4 weeks seems a little out of whack. Penalties for a range of indiscretions in the league seem a little out of whack though.
If everyone seems to forget about Reiwoldt's naked bod all over the internet, I reckon they are gonna forget about this soon enough....
Re: Sherman banned for vilification
According to Anderson, all parties agreed to suspension.
If person vilified does not agree, it goes to the tribunal
Re: Sherman banned for vilification
Well you can't defend the indefensivable behaviour/comments.
It's really disappointing. And nobody will be more disappointed in him, than himself.
The agreed punishment between the parties reflects how serious an issue it is.