Talk:List of Australian rules football incidents

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Flag
Portal
 List of Australian rules football incidents is within the scope of WikiProject Australia, which aims to improve Wikipedia's coverage of Australia and Australia-related topics. If you would like to participate, visit the project page.
List This page is a list and does not require a rating on the quality scale.
NA This page is not an article and does not require a rating on the importance scale.
This article is supported by WikiProject AFL.


  • Changed description to refer to "criminal incidences" ie allegations, charges, findings, sentencing relating to criminality.
  • Added more incidents from 2004, 2005 and 2006. I left out a number of stories relating to ex-players, whose offenses were committed after they left footy.
  • Included "external links" section.
  • Where possible, I have included references to the original news stories (newspapers and television). However, some from the Murdoch press (eg Melbourne Herald-Sun, Adelaide Advertiser) have been archived already, so I've included a reference to my blog articles where I have kept relevant quotes.

Thetan 03:59, 12 April 2006 (UTC)

You'd think us Aussie rules would be angry to see this topic created, but really, I think it's great! --Sliat 1981 10:08, 16 July 2006 (UTC)

  • I removed the word 'criminal' as a) some of these incidents are clearly not criminal - eg, Wayne Carey - I'm not aware of him breaking any laws; and b) we need to be very careful about making claims of criminal behaviour when often charges have been dropped. To describe a person as a criminal in those circumstances would be unwise. —Moondyne 00:50, 22 February 2007 (UTC)

Can I make two suggestions:

  • Please use the word "allegedly" (or similar) when describing criminal behaviour still before the courts. It will save grief.
  • Please cite Fairfax Media sources eg The Age, SMH since they keep their stuff online longer than News Corp (eg Herald-Sun, Daily Telegraph, The Australian)—Preceding unsigned comment added by 220.253.34.48 (talk • contribs)
Very good suggestions. I agree with both. —Moondyne 14:25, 24 July 2007 (UTC)

This page is being ruined by idiots.

First of all, some legal matters.

You are liable for what you publish here. Even without a login, your IP address can be used very easily to trace you. No one is anonymous.

  • The names of the three players who tested positive twice in 2006 remain under a Victorian Supreme Court injunction prohibiting their publication. You risk legal penalties (including contempt of court) if you publish them.
  • The names of the players and the club involved in the Channel 7 medical records issue are similarly bound by an injunction.
  • If you make defamatory remarks about an individual, you are exposing yourself to civil court action (libel). Victoria enjoys some of the most stringent defamation laws in the world. Truth is not a defence and footballers are already rich enough. Stop it.
  • Do not make assertions about theft and receiving stolen goods while the matter is before the courts. These matters will be tested in good time. You do not have to name an individual to expose yourself to a defamation suit (see above).

Secondly, writing for a purpose.

  • This is meant to be an encyclopedia entry, not a blog post. Comments about "bozos" and "bogans" etc are poor writing, regardless of their veracity. This article references a blog where such comments are welcomed, go and post there.
  • All assertions must be backed up with a citation to a published newspaper, court transcript or similar verifiable resource. Stating things from memory or just making it up is unacceptable.
  • Please try to use correct spelling and grammar. If you can't manage this freehand, type your contribution up in a word processor first and then paste it in. Try to fit the "tone" of the article - no personal opinion, just the facts.

Thetan 14:33, 29 August 2007 (UTC)

Richmond forward Nathan Brown breaks his leg in horrific circumstances, ending his season. He has suffered leg-related injuries since.[44]

Does this really belong on this page? Yes, it was horriffic to watch. But it was an injury sustained, not really fitting with the alleged crimes, crimes and other controversial incidents listed here. Kiwichris1709 18:08, 8 November 2007 (UTC)

Seems to me this page really needs to be split between football-related and non-football-related incidents. This would make this far more readable, and better allow the former to be expanded; it is missing many key happenings (eg. the allegedly thrown game at the end of the 1924 season -- yes, footy existed before the 1980s!) and is in no way encyclopaedic in nature.

David J Richardson 12:25, 2 December 2007 (UTC)