Who's responsible for Barry Hall's current predicament - himself?..... or the media, AFL or fans?

Question

Barry Hall is in the bad books for thumping opposition players? Who's fault is it?

A couple of seasons ago the AFL let him off a blatant striking charge because they wanted him to play in a Grand Final - as a drawcard. The media always refers to him as , "Big Bad Barry" & never tires of talking about how good a boxer he is; how tough he is; blah blah blah.

Then there were the endless number of boofheads who came into this section & commented about how good it was to see Hall king-hit Eagles Saker. Some of the "females" were the worst in saying how good it was to see biff back in the game! This was also the view of several Collingwood supporters (whom, I might add, have never played the game at any level).

Why would "Big Bad Barry" not be surprised & disappointed at the hype surrounding his push on "Weakling" Waklin & his famous dive?

Answer 1

He is a drawcard and I reckon he's not bad for the game at all!

PS. Go Catters!

Answer 2

Hall himself is ultimately responsible for his actions.

But that does not disguise the fact that players are diving more & more as time goes on.

Answer 3

To answer your question, who's responsible, I'd say Hall himself, along with the swans who failed to sort this stuff out,  don't think there was much in the wakelin incident though, i think he could of popped him if he wanted to.

wakelin took a dive, no doubt, ya call it as you see it. he didn't need to fall over, makes our game look soft i reckon, league blokes wouldn't do that, that's for sure, i couldn't see blokes in my team i played for ever doing it either, you would told to #$@ off from the club.  

Funny though we have some saying he is a thug, some saying how the game is weak, the players are diving etc, just play footy i reckon, keep the acting for the wrestlers.

Answer 4

You are correct.  Half the problem is the mixed messages that the AFL have been sending.  Hall shouldn't have been in the 2005 final - which we then might have won - and in that instance the Tribunal bent over backwards to find the necessary loopholes to let him play.  Is is there any surprise that they think that they can get away with it?

I also think its somewhat ironic to now see SOME of the Pies fans who were applauding Barry for king-hitting Staker, changing their tune when its one of their boys who is the "victim".   Are any of you out there willing to put your hands up to that?

Answer 5

If Sydney had won the game Paul Roos would have said oh well thats Barry's style of play I follow the Maggies and Wakelin was having a good day on Hall and apparently knew exactly what to say to Barry to suck him in, but the bottom line is too many eyes watching onfield behavior hope he learns a lesson from it all

Answer 6

A very interesting question.

I agree with you - some of the Collingwood supporters (especially the female who thinks she runs this section & whatever she says is "gospel"!!) were laughing their heads off & congratulating Hall for the kinghit on Brent Staker & saying how good it was to see the "biff" back in the game.

As soon as it involves a Collingwood player & the club is seen in  a bad light - they change their tune. They are embarrassed by the behaviour of Shane Wakelin & his pathetic diving. To get the attention away from him & the club, they bag Hall.

The media love it when Hall does something silly - plus the AFL also should accept some of the blame.

Answer 7

His dukes are responsible

The left duke and the right duke

.

Answer 8

I agree with you on that one. While it is still Hall's fault for even trying to strike someone again, the AFL has let him get away with it too many times before. If they had a tougher approach to Barry's previous misdemeanors, he may have taken a little more time to get his temper under control. Sydney players always get away with everything though....

I was glad to see the AFL suspend him for so long after the Staker incident, and I'm glad that Sydney has taken the stance that it has at the moment. Hopefully this will straighten him out, and he'll realise that he cannot get away with king-hitting opposition players anymore!

And just for the record, I am one of the Pies fans who thought the King hit on Staker was a dog act. I thought what Hall did was ridiculous, and I didn't applaud it at all.

Answer 9

**You're spot on with what you've said.  The media love to build people up and then watch them fall which is what Barry is doing at the moment.

On Saturday night after he attempted to strike Wakelin the media continously were saying 'Let's look at what Hall did ... he won't go for this but let's just watch it again'.  They were the ones who built it up to the point where the AFL had to take notice and Sydney obviously felt like they had to do something about it.

I feel sorry for Hall and hope that his career doesn't end like this, he needs to go out on a high because like him or hate him he is a good player, just needs to learn to control his anger.**

Answer 10

It is definatly halls fault he did what he did, now he has to learn from it (once again). the afl havent help much, but over all it is hall let his fist hit staker!!

saklaing i agree with you, i came across so many collingwood fans who were praising hall.

Also he should have been rubbed out for the 2005 grand final, the tribunal let us down then and then again when they let halls "dog act" happen again.

shame on the tribunal!!

Answer 11

He is responsible for his own actions, but hey , that's how he is and he has to suffer the consequences

Answer 12

You left out the umpires!

They also play a big part of the responsibility by continually being conned by diving players. None of the umpires have played the game & the players pull the wool over their eyes time & time again.

It's a pity more ex-footballers didn't take up umpiring - they would not be conned like this current crop of umpires.

Answer 13

Yeah I get your point but there's only one forearm attached to Baz's fist and one shoulder ... atached very tenuously to a "brain" of sorts ...

If the guy wants to box, then "off ya go son".  No place for Barry in AFL anymore if he'd rather be boxing.

Like the rest of the Sydney Swans and every new team in the comp for the first few years of 'Goodeness', he's been a protected species.  If he played for any other team he'd be getting 10 weeks at a time.  Goodes would have been lucky to string together 50 games except for this unwritten code of AFL expansionism.