Chris Judd of Carlton leaves the field after a loss in the AFL 2nd Elimination Final between the Brisbane Lions and the Carlton Blues at the Gabba. Slattery Images
Chris Judd, the model AFL player, has been in the headlines this week for all the wrong reasons after a self-confessed ‘dumb’ act, which has subsequently spiralled out of control. The saga has dragged Judd’s reputation through the mud, so one wonders will it taint him forever or can he bounce back like a true champion?
It all began on Saturday evening when Channel 10’s cameras spotted an incident where Judd appeared to be trying to eye-gouge Brisbane’s Michael Rischitelli.
The following day, Judd casually admitted he wasn’t trying to gouge Rischitelli, but instead only attempting to find the pressure point behind his ear, which naturally landed him in trouble with the match review panel before a long and drawn-out tribunal and appeal process over the next few days.
The end result was a three-week suspension for Judd plus a public tarnishing of his reputation, which fundamentally equated to a regrettable couple of days for the previously squeaky-clean 2004 Brownlow medallist.
And now you can picture it in Round 4 of the 2010 season, when Judd makes his ‘long-awaited AFL comeback’, there will be witty newspaper headlines in the lead-up to the game combined with comedic heckles and jeers from the crowd on matchday, all directed towards the Carlton skipper.
Opposition fans will be sure to find endless hilarious ways to verbalise their thoughts towards Judd everywhere he goes, especially considering the unusual circumstances of the Carlton man’s ‘pressure point’ charge. I’m sure many of us have already heard a few office jokes on the topic this week as a precursor (Mr Miyagi anyone?)
But how long will it all last? Can Judd, who was in hot water for a similar offence in 2007, shake off this new dirty-underhand-gouger/pressure-pointer/amateur-martial-arts tag or will it follow him for the rest of his career?
After all, this is the model professional who it seemed every footy journalist used as a yardstick to compare and measure other players by. Basically, prior to all this, Judd had been the AFL’s most revered player, looked up to by almost everyone.
Now it seems Judd employs dirty tactics, which aren’t in the fairness or spirit of the game.
A sure sign of Judd’s fall from grace were the comments made by AFL legend Ron Barassi this week when he described the Blues star’s actions as ‘shocking’.
Barassi added, “It’s disappointing because this guy is a hero for many, many people, including myself. He’ll regret this day a long while.”
But backtracking for just a moment, isn’t all this just a bit of an overreaction for an offence which, while obviously not being in the spirit of the game, wasn’t overly significant (despite claims from ‘martial arts experts’ Judd could have killed Rischitelli).
Indeed, the three-match ban handed down by the match review panel was ridiculously harsh and makes little sense when you consider Judd’s remorse (albeit belated) in all of this.
But what’s done is done. The question is can Judd bounce back to win over the footy public?
It’s a difficult question to answer, but you sense Judd’s regret about this incident means he’ll never do it again.
And also, what makes Judd such a revered and likeable figure is the way he goes about his footy. Obviously this whole issue challenges that concept, but if Judd gets back to producing tough match-winning performances for the Blues and kicking some glorious goals on the run, there’s no doubt all will be forgiven, although perhaps not forgotten.
But these sorts of career glitches happen to champions in all sports worldwide (remember Tiger Woods’ surprising final-round slip-up in the PGA Championship last month). The test of a true champion is how they react to these situations.
There’s no doubt Judd is at the top of the Australian Rules game, but while we shouldn’t overreact, it’s clear his recent indiscretion has harmed his reputation.
Judd simply needs to ignore all the hype and overreaction and do what he does best (playing good, clean, contested footy). If he does so, perhaps that halo will re-appear.
BigAl
Guest
I can imagine some embaressing live moments if he does well in the Brownlow.
Redb
Roar Guru
No excuses for Judd. In fact his excuses have got him in more trouble. The act itself was unbeleivable in terms of his intent - just what the hell was he doing? definitely dropped a few points in most people's eyes so yes Juddster is now the duddster. Redb
sittingbison
Guest
sorry Ben but you seem to be missing the point. If it were anyone other than Judd (or maybe a Reiwoldt or Son of God), he WOULD have been charged with eye gouging. The AFL will jump at any chance to not besmirch the reputation of the chosen few, as we have seen with Chris Judd's previous contre temps. "I was not eye gouging, I was bla bla" so lets hit him with a quasi serious penalty of three weeks, phew everyone will forget that after a few laughs voila!. In fact he will probably spend it on the sidelines for the pre-season comp and not miss any real footy at all. If it was eye gouging it would have been eight weeks and he would never recover his reputation.
Ben Somerford
Roar Guru
Thanks for the feedback, readers. But it seems I really must defend myself! Look, we'll inevitably disagree on the length of Judd's suspension. I do however agree he needs to be punished. But the fact of the matter is Judd didn't get suspended for the despicable act of eye-gouging, however way you want to argue that point, so there's no need for discussion on that topic. And Hammer, the Tiger Woods analogy mate, I think you missed the point of it. I'm not saying it's the same thing, but it's a situation where the superstar of a particular sport has done something to put themselves under pressure and it's about how they respond to that. Their response speaks volumes for their credibility as someone great.
Pippinu
Roar Guru
I thought 3 weeks was bang on the money - we don't want that in the game full stop. Plenty of journos have got stuck into Judd the past week, don't worry about that.
Justin
Guest
Agree wholeheartedly with Matt, Luc and Hammer. Disgraceful sort of action but the media is full of ex-players and those that want to be mates with the stars rather than real journos who call a spade a shovel. The way he tried to defend it with the ridiculous pressure point crap and then tried to defend that statement by saying he had 1/2 an hours sleep was laughable. All this on top of his woeful answers to his VISY role smack of arrogance. Great footballer but perhaps thinks his sh.t doesnt stink... Put another way have you ever heard anyone say he is a ripping bloke? Not really.
drewster
Roar Pro
Yes the view is much better from up on my HIGH HORSE. He should learn to keep his mouth shut and his fingers to himself. Should have given him another week for making them review the decision twice and not copping it sweet, Then there wouldn't be all this carry on.
Luc
Guest
WA, it's fair enough that you hold that view. Obviously you have never been eye gouged. There are probably a few things you need to understand. Us folk who sit comfortably on our high horse (usually ensconsed in our Ivory Tower. You forgot to include that one) react so fervently to eye gouging for a few reasons. One, the act of gouging someone's eyes is designed to temporarily disable the recipient. It is the equivalent of fighting someone who has no arms. When your eyes are exposed and then violated you become disorientated and incapable of defending yourself. Your first instinct is to grab your face and, often, pul away and fall to the ground. Therefore, someone who chooses to engage an opponent in order to intimidate by this method is doing it in a way that leaves his opponent completely unable to defend himself. Think about it. If Chris Judd punched Michael Rischitelli in the face while Messrs Houlihan and o'Hailpin held his arms back you would rightfully be disgusted. That is essentially what an eye gouge is. The second reason people get incensed by the eye gouge is that it is generally seen as the embodiment of cowardice and infantilism. Have you ever seen children fight? What do the nasty ones do? They go for the eyes. If you ever have the misfortune of witnessing it, it is a truly sickening spectacle. If there is anything more awful than watching a tough AFL footballer reduced to the helplessness of a child, it is watching a child humilated and distraught from the damage this horrific act causes. The third reason we see fit to "get on our high horse" is something a little more intrinsic. The eyes are, you may have heard, the very essence of someone's identity. WIndows to the soul and all that. Attacking someone's eyes is like attacking their character. It shows a complete lack of respect for them as a person. That they have no value. It is like spitting on someone but with malicious intent. Perhaps it is a lot to expect someone who has obviously never been eye gouged to understand. But I think you need to expand you level of awareness of this kind of thing and try to understand why people feel so strongly about it. Trust me, I love the aggression and passion of AFL. It is what makes it such a great contest. But eye gouging is just disgusting and indicative of a man who has lost his way.
WA
Guest
Harsh penalty for an awkward & ultimately harmless action. The Lions guy didn't even feel it! Far out, some ppl have good eyesight spotting an eye gouge from waaaay up on their high horse.
Hammer
Guest
Well said Luc and Matthew - this piece is just more wind to puff into the Judd sails ... why don’t you give Judd a squeezer while you’re at Ben … to try and brush off attempted eye gouging as being somehow similar to "Tiger Woods’ surprising final-round slip-up in the PGA Championship last month" is just bizarre …. If the AFL had any balls they’d hit him 6-8 weeks to send a message that the face is out of bounds – fullstop … the line he was trying to find a pressure point is an excuse made up on the run ...sure to claim he could have killed Rischitelli is rubbish – but if his fingers found the target he could have dealt him some very severe eye damage … but that’s ok – lets just sweep it under the carpet because he’s shown some “remorse (albeit belated)”
Luc
Guest
Thank God you said that Matthew. Ben Somerford's appraisal of Judd's 3-match ban as "harsh" in the above article left me absolutely gobsmacked. I had to re-read it to make sure I had not misinterpreted it. I think 3 weeks is extremely light. Eye gouging is just about the lowest act anyone can do. Forget about it being on a footy field. It is downright malicious and indicates someone of extremely dubious character. I'm sorry, but I never bought into the whole facade of Judd being beyond reproach,like most AFL commentators seem to. Am I the only one who remembers him doing this before? What we are seeing hear is a pattern. His attempts to make light of the situation were absoluitely disgusting. If he is unable to see what is inherently wrong with sticking his fingers in a defenceless persons eyes then I'm afraid he is beyond hope. The AFL does have a history of sweeping acts of horrific behaviour under the carpet. A short list of "dog acts" which have elicited less outrage than charges of "rough conduct". 1. Mal Michael shoulder charging and obviously troubled and injured Nick Riewoldt. Sickening to watch. 2. Brett Montgomery telling heroic cancer survivor Adam Ramanauskas that his chemo treatment was, to paraphrase, "f#*king with his head". 3. Michael Long being forced to shut up by the AFL after Damian Monkhurst directed a series of racial epithets his way. 4. Nathan Buckley wiping his blood on another player to have them removed under the "blood rule". Just downright bizarre and essentially quite perverse. Should I go on? All the above offenders received penalties not commensurate with the moral and ethical transgression they engaged in. This Judd incident adds to the list. The AFL has become obsessed with cleaning up the game ON the field. This has reduced the code to something closely resembling netball. No more bumps or short fronts for fear of injury. But yet they will sit by and allow sickening acts like Judd's go virtually unpunished. Anyone defending what he did should seriously get his/her head read. Either that, or ask someone to poke their fingers in your eyes and see how it feels. It ain't pleasant.
StickyBuns
Guest
Judds reputation has been tarnished ever since he left the eagles. I can't believe someone suggested 'He could have killed rischitelli', that's hilarious.
Matthew Maguire
Roar Pro
Sadly, I get the impression most of the football public have already written the incident off. The flow of media personalities involved in the game who have brushed it aside as nothing significant and even questioned the 'severity' of the punishment means Judd has come out of this almost looking like a victim. If it was anyone but the AFL's love child attempting to eye gouge, there would have been genuine outrage and his explanation the following day, which Judd himself has now apologised for (sort of), would have been scoffed at as a bandly handled joke that cast Judd in an even poorer light. Instead, the likes of Garry Lyon and Co jump to his defence. Three weeks for a recidivist act of such potential danger (and plain unneccessary) is light in my book. I doubt it will even be remembered beyond his return match in round 4 next year. A sad indictment of the double standards within the AFL.