Do you think its fair whats happening with Didak and Shaw compared to the infamous Ben Cousin Incident?

Question

My Opinion: Its completely unfair!

Firstly the Eagles took action and sacked Ben Cousins he went to rehab is Rebuilding his life and >>WASN'T<< convicted.

Now everyone is calling all eagles players druggies and bagging the eagles because of 1 fault.

On the other side of the country Shaw and Didak were convited and are still allowed to play. And I'm almost positive that this is not the first incident like this at collingwood. And guess what Didak and Shaw >> WERE << convicted.

Does Collingwood get c**p about it? I'm pretty sure they don't but if they do its not as bad as us.

Note: I'm not saying that what Ben Cousins did was right or supporting him in any way.

I am and Eagles fan so I may be coming off as Biased but I think its wrong that the victorian teams are almost 80% protected.

Answer 1

I dont know, I am tired of all of it really. I dont get why they have to go on about it so much. Look at the hooligan behavior of most players at grass roots level. Yes AFL players are bestowed with more responsibility given their paypacket and the fact that they are elite sportspeople but i wish the media would shut up and let the club get on with whatever they want to dish out.

You have made a very valid point comparing their behavior to that of Cousins though. I hope it makes the powers that be think!

Answer 2

maybe because ben cousins was a superstar of the game, while those 2 jokers down at collingwood are c**p.

but yes i still agree with you anyway. i came to this question, because i initially thought you were gonna say that shaw and didak have gotten it worse than cousins. lol i was gonna give you a serve.  

Answer 3

You wont see me not agreeing with you not once did he test positive and he is the one that owned up to his club and fans and paid the price and not once did he lie to save his ***.  

Answer 4

The only reason the didak incident is so bad, is because he lied to the Collingwood football club and the AFL.

Answer 5

Ben Cousins was seen to bring the game into disrepute. He wasn&#039;t convicted and he thank God that he wasnt!

He was seen to be drug dependent. He also went to the US claiming to go to rehab which was an out and out lie. He was found off his face while over there.

This came on the back of previous accusations, the running from the breathalyser is one that comes to mind.

The AFL acted and so be it.

Didak and Shaw were penalised by their club almost immeditately after the event happened and the AFL viewed this as a good response from the club and accepted the ruling. They wont play for the rest of the season. That&#039;s huge in the scheme of things. Didak&#039;s future with the club hangs in the balance.

Here&#039;s the difference. Didak is not cocaine dependent like Cousins is/was. He&#039;s just a wild child I believe who gets into trouble. ..often. Cousins would fail any drug test that the AFL impose if they hadnt acted on it like they had. It wouldn&#039;t surprise me if he already had 2 strikes.

You should be thankful that the AFL acted like it did for the sake of his health. Hopefully he can come back from this and continue his career clean.  

Answer 6

I can see where you are coming from Catriona - but despite both acts being wrong - they are different. The Collingwood boys (or should I say Heath Shaw)  broke the law and therefore he will be dealt with by the legal system. As Collingwood appear to have a, shall we say, different, code of conduct for their players it was dealt with internally - albeit a little pathetically. When it was revealed that the three involved had lied to the club, then they were dealt the blow of being suspended for the remainder of the year (Still gobsmacked that lying is considered worse than driving while completely smashed, but anyway...)

The Eagles problems are primarily because of Ben, but ultimately, the club has paid for its inaction over a number of years and incidences involving WCE players. The sanctions imposed are not soley because of Ben, but he was the final straw if you like. There were (allegedly) a number of Eagles players involved in the drug scene.

So, I guess we can only hope that if Collingwood continue to let players get away with stuff, the AFL will come down hard on them also.

There has also allegedly been incidents involving Hawthorn players but what happened there?????

And Lozz: i totally agree with your comment re Walker from Carlton. I had not heard anything in the media re him even getting picked up for driving while suspended. And while that is not in the same league as driving under the influence and smashing up cars, it is still never-the-less illegal? Smacks of double standards somewhere!!

EDIT:Oh super - you&#039;re back to haunt me again with your interesting insights into the world. Why not mention others by name who share my opinion also?

So when a &quot;boys being boys&quot; skittles one of your loved ones, will that be ok?

Answer 7

DUDE they were suspened for the year.

too tell u the truth it wasnt as bad as wat he did and cousins was a bit higher talent and highly regarded  then those two so if cousins did that at collingwood he would be in much more trouble

Answer 8

It may be because Ben Cousins was such a superstar and is a brownlow medalist and when he plays in the AFL he is un arguabley the best man in the midfield. It may be because of his good playing and stuff like that.

And i agree on the victorian teams thing - honestly there are other states in Australia that play AFL and they are not as specially recoginised as the victorian clubs, did they forget that around 20 or so years ago it changed from VFL to AFL, which means it involves the whole of australia? I think that the afl board should sit down and remind themselves that the afl involves all clubs and all clubs should be protected and have equal rights - not just the victorian ones.

Answer 9

Yes i totally agree ! I think it&#039;s wrong and all that but also Cousins wasn&#039;t even sorry! Have you read the original apology letter he wrote to the eagles because they forced him to I&#039;ll give you a few hints he didn&#039;t give d**n about it and wasn&#039;t sorry.

On the other hand it isn&#039;t fair to call the whole team druggies just cause of one fault ( like you said ). The guy was a bloody legend that&#039;s why everyone was shocked and all that, where as Didak and Shaw are just well c**p. The eagles didn&#039;t want to be known as druggies and they thought by sacking Cousins no one would call them that BUT look whats happening all the other afl fans are making fun of them saying they are druggies! They need to use their common sense...why did they sack cousins? Cause he was on drugs. So why would they want more drug addicts? I reckon people should just get alife and look at the others who took drugs cause its completely unfair that Didak and Shaw still get to play !

x

Answer 10

Ben Cousins wasn&#039;t convicted of any drug offence. He had X amount of AFL drug tests &amp; all were negative.

There is no doubt about it - he hit drugs heavy at one stage &amp; the club suspended him after other players approached the club &amp; brought his drug use to their notice. Maybe the WCE knew earlier - who knows?

Didak has a history of trouble &amp; always gets protected by the club. Collingwood were sponsored by a road safety group who withdrew their sponsorship after a number of Pies players were convicted of pissy driving. Shaw was protected by the club after this last incident &amp; was not going to be suspended from playing. He &amp; Didak were only suspended when it was found that they had lied to Eddie, Mick, the captain &amp; team-mates.

Eddie would have looked more a fool if he hadn&#039;t suspended the pair after the lying incident.

Answer 11

Sue T - get over it. Go and have a Bex, a cup of tea and a lie down to cool off. There you go with sensationalist outbursts again to demonstrate a point(?) - &quot;lying is considered worse than driving while completely  A little bit strong? 0.15 I believe is what he blew. Hardly smashed. That adjective belongs to the woman driving at 0.462, three times that inside Heath Shaw. Let&#039;s keep it real.

I don&#039;t understand what is fair or unfair about these two separate incidents. Drug dependancy versus binge(?) drinking, and really it is only one or two too many. 0.15 is not exceptionally heavy, and is only one ingredient in behaviour that leads to erratic driving, and accidents, including big egos, celebration of mateship, etc. To be fair Sue T, something you may know little about..

The penalties dished out by the clubs is balanced with their inside knowledge of the events and the participants. They owe the players, their employees, a duty of care. We just have to accept misdemeanours and move past it. What are you expecting, an appeal system. Let&#039;s keep the lawyers out of what is nothing more than boys being boys.

Experience is the best teacher. He that never made a mistake never made anything. These guys are in the business of putting their bodies on the line for the fans each weekend. And you all love the biff and bash, and the hero imagery. They are not playing tiddley winks. Give them a break. Drug dependancy -  a completely different matter.

Answer 12

The afl had no right to do what they did to ben cousins. in this country we are innocent until proven guilty except if you play in the afl

Answer 13

They all are idiots.  

Answer 14

Agree it is Fair. Break the rules then pay the cost. No one is above the law, be it our legal system or a club enforced rule.

Answer 15

He can&#039;t be convicted of taking drugs well he can it wouldn&#039;t of harmed anyone else it could of but there action effected more people and they lied to the club in person and completely broke their trust. and u are a collingwood supporter aren&#039;t u?

Answer 16

What was Didak convicted of, he legally did nothing wrong!

I am not defending what they did, but these two players were punished. They are not playing for the rest of the season.

While the punishment was for the fact that the players lied, they still have had consequences to their actions. The Cousins incident cannot be compared to this one.

What about the fact that Carlton&#039;s Andrew Walker was convicted of driving without a licence yesterday? Did anyone hear about that? Or is the Shaw case different because it&#039;s Collingwood?

And when you say Collingwood don&#039;t get c**p about it - Are you kidding? Collingwood supporters have always got the most c**p from everyone! I hear about it every day, don&#039;t you worry!

Answer 17

What Ben did was considered to be &#039;bringing the game into disrepute&#039; he knew his problem, even went to the other side of the world to get over his addition, admitted it on national television, to his fans and his football club, and faced media all over the country &gt;&gt; god, he was even willing to have a interview on the footy show &lt;&lt;.  He did not in any way, shape or form effect the public!! He only disipiointed thousands of fans across the country, included myself! Also recking his footy career in the mean time!

He did not pee on a public building - fevola, bash his wife - farmer, drive with a muderer - didak, drive over 3 times the legal blood acohol level, causing a car crash - didak and shaw, king hit a player (doctors say could have caused death) - hall, god he didn&#039;t even once lie to his footy club!!

So the answer to your question: absolulty incredibley unfair!!

BRING BACK BENNY BOY!!!!!!

sign this petition:

http://www.gopetition.com.au/petitions/r...

P.S i did NOT make the petition!

Answer 18

I barrack for the Bombers so I have no favor for either club.

Or indeed, for Carlton, one of whose players was done for driving unlicensed - what are you going to do about that, Blues?

Both incidents, that of Cousins admitting he was on drugs, and Shaw confessing to driving while off his face - .15 is the equivalent of nine standard drinks in an hour! - show the people as guys who are not providing the kids of Australia a good example of manhood.

Regarding the priors quoted: it was general knowledge over here at least that more than one WA player was on drugs, it was actually specified on one Footy Show.And yes, Didak especially has a long charge sheet, so even if he didn&#039;t do anything illegal this time, he was warned to behave himself, and he&#039;s doing the time for lying to his club. And they did get HEAPS from the media over here, newspapers and TV especially.

I think both clubs EVENTUALLY woke up to themselves and removed the boys from the playing lists as punishment.

Your turn, Carlton.

Yeah, right.