mal wrote:Wedgie
Can we agree on one thing ?
That there needs to be a concerted effort by whomever or by whatever means to have players protected at all times?
Nah I don't agree, I think security is overstated and things are a lot better at SANFL games than they used to, just my opinion though, others swayed by the media will probably think otherwise.
Mind you if I had my way you'd have 2 cops at each ground instead of a dozen Weslo security and IMHO the 2 cops would probably do a better job.
mal wrote:Irrespective of the pros and cons the rules opinions etc etc etc
If at 3/4 time in the SANFL we have ropes and an abundance of security then surely there has to be a '''''solution''''' as to what happened on Sunday.
Security is there for hours protecting players, crowd supporters etc etc and for the sake of a handful of minutes after a game there is no protection for some players ???
Forget about the issues/facts/common sense we have yo yoed back at each other
The most important thing is something must be done.
Prevention is better than cure .
Definately agreed and I applaud your proactive stance on an issue, but using your last philosophy we'd have games behind closed fences to ensure nothing happens and we'd change the game to non contact.
Once again mal I applaud you on your proactiveness but as per a lot of your posts I think you're making a mountain out of a molehill and there's bigger issues with the SANFL to worry about but I respect your opinion and concern of the players welfare which even they themselves don't share. Keep up the good work though mate. I look forward to your next crusade! I always imagine you and bayman in the SANFL grandstands being like Waldorf and Staedler from the muppets!
