When Fox Sports went to footage of an incident that occurred during the Geelong-Collingwood clash on Friday night, the feeling was we were about to witness something atrocious.
Such were the solemn, almost haunted, expressions of panellists Gerard Whateley and Mark Robinson, and their guests Rodney Eade and Mark Thompson.
Expecting to see one of the real cowardly dog acts of the game we witness Josh Hunt sort of pull out of (or was it half mess up?) a mark. Shrunken in his chair with his hands clasped against his stomach, the maudlin Whateley states how Hunt has been “pilloried by senior members of the football community”.
Those “senior members”, namely Matthew Lloyd and Shane Crawford, were scathing in their criticism. Lloyd probably expressed the sentiments of most ex players when he stated “That’s one thing you don’t want to be labelled with. That you pull out of a contest.”.
Worse though was the insinuation that Hunt should be branded a coward: “That should be a moment that lives with him from now on because that hasn’t been the first time for Josh Hunt.”
It really is extraordinary considering the game’s lengthy catalogue of hideous scenes – some people include Lloyd’s infamous clean up of Brad Sewell in 2009 in that list – that this episode has attracted such scorn.
Of course, it’s a physical game and teammates expect each other to show courage but surely Hunt, who has played 170 AFL games and won two premierships, doesn’t lack courage.
As his former coach Mark Thompson remarked: “He’s done a lot of brave things in his time too that other players can’t do”.
Lloyd’s reference to Hunt’s history (apparently he pulled out of a contest in 2006) may suggest he does have a genuine fear of being hit which may be a result of previous collisions. Only the club, who have been very supportive of him, will know if he has a problem.
It is also ironic that the players’ code of physical courage does not match that of their union. In response to this slightly absurd saga ,the AFLPA’s Matt Finnis ridiculed the “pugilistic and irresponsible disregard for your safety in pursuit of the contest”.
What I find more intriguing are the attitudes to the cowardly acts of aggression. If older players have their way Hunt’s career will be tainted while others, famous for dangerous cheap shots, are enshrined in the game’s annals as “characters” and “hard men”.
One who lives in my memory, thanks to a spear tackle I still feel the effects of, is Denis Banks.
It’s often forgotten that the greatest player of the last century, Leigh Matthews, broke Neville Bruns’ jaw behind the play.
To his credit, he says he still feels guilty. Also, he took his punishment – a teammate of Bruns immediately broke his nose – without complaint.
zacbrygel
Roar Guru
Josh Hunt is coragoues 99 times out of 100. Get off the man's back. We all make mistakes once in a while.
the flattery
Guest
there isn't a lot to choose from at quarter to twelve on a friday.
the flattery
Guest
indeed... here's hoping josh kennedy tears the aints a new one (though their wouldn't be much room left).
SurlyPie
Guest
Just try to enjoy the footy this weekend, flattery, including the undeniable courage of all involved....
the flattery
Guest
ps surly pie, i just had A GOOD HARD LOOK AT MYSELF and i'm wondering what i should do now?
the flattery
Guest
i wouldn't say he's gutless; i'd just say he was a scardy cat.
SurlyPie
Guest
They're all friggin' courageous if you ask me and anyone trying to suggest that Josh Hunt or any other player in the AFL is gutless needs to have A GOOD HARD LOOK AT THEMSELVES. End of story. I agree with cliffy. I'm much more interested in whether the Doggies can knock the Cats off tonight!
stabpass
Guest
I agree with both points of view. You can use both arguements in the old AF catchphrase of keeping your eye on the ball, keeping your eye on the ball can be both stupid and courageous, sometimes at the same time, but generally keeping your eye on the ball, and being blind to everything else is stupid. Notice that the great players seem to have a instinctive awarenesss around them that allows them to perform courageous acts, and usually come away unscathed, notice, that some players don't seem to have that awareness turn blind and get cleaned up, who is the more courageous, and who is the more stupid in these situations ??. Its a conundrum.
cliffy
Guest
This is all getting a bit deep for me. Stuff this, I am going to the footy!!
Macca
Guest
Not going to source your quote there tritina so we can judge it's worth? And the difference in your statement is the word and ie "immediate and long term health". It is not sacrifing now for a better tomorrow or sacirifing tomorrow for a better now you are wanting them to do both which isn't courage it's stupidity. Any idiot can rush head long to their death, it doesn't mean they are courageous. To be courageous you have to have the intelligence to know the risks, measure them and act. Sometimes the most courageous thing you can do is nothing. And the really stupid part of your statement was ". in gerneral, nothing of note would be achieved if one always had an eye to the future."
tristina
Guest
you're calling me stupid because you don't have the comprehension skills to understand what i said : " courage is admirable precisely because it may well come at the expense of both your immediate and long term health". to which you reply : "There are plenty of example of courage that involved people sacificing the now for a better future." so, macca, what is the immediate if not the now? discretion is the better part of valour is a tired old cliche that people (like you) use as an excuse for cowardice. "Almost invariably quoted today as "Discretion is the better part of valor," Falstaff's phrase elegantly redeems a cowardly act. The bragging, bulbous knight has just risen from his feigned death; he had played the corpse in order to escape real death at the hands of a Scotsman hostile to Henry IV. Claiming that abstractions like "honor" and "valor" will get you nothing once you're dead, Falstaff excuses his counterfeiting as the kind of "discretion" that keeps a man from foolishly running into swords in order to cultivate a reputation for heroism. If counterfeiting keeps you alive, well then, it's not counterfeiting, but an authentic "image of life." Falstaff confuses "image" with "reality," but we forgive him; as far as he's concerned, "valor" is an image too, and you've got to stay alive in order to find more opportunities to cultivate that image."
Macca
Guest
That has to be the stupidest statement made on this thread. There are plenty of example of courage that involved people sacificing the now for a better future. And what is the old saying disrection is the better part of valour.
tristina
Guest
its about the moment not your quality of life in retirement. courage is admirable precisely because it may well come at the expense of both your immediate and long term health. in gerneral, nothing of note would be achieved if one always had an eye to the future.
tristina
Guest
lake has nothing to mouth off about. he's as soft as they come.
David Heidelberg
Guest
He simply would not have played that many games in the AFL if he was a coward. A stupid assertion.
amazonfan
Roar Guru
It's interesting you mention that as I worry about Brown's health in 20, 30 years time. We applaud the courage of players like Brown (and Archer not so long ago), but I really hope that they are able to enjoy life whilst in their 50's and that they don't end up like some of the former NFL players. Courage is admirable, but not at the expense of your long-term health.
The Cattery
Roar Guru
Murphy didn't do anything reckless, he did what you'd expect every single player to do in identical circumstances, go in low and hard at the loose footy with his hip and shoulder against his opponent, he came out 2nd best in a 50/50 contest, but he can' t just let Dangerfield pick it up with no opposition.
The Cattery
Roar Guru
Sorry - I had intended this post as a response to UK Steve's post above, not sure what I did wrong there.
Swampy
Guest
I don't understand the whole courage thing. I'd rather play week in week out for 15 seasons and earn xxx$ over getting regularly concussed or broken up and play 16 games a year for only 10 seasons. What would be more valuable to the team - Marc Murphy playing 22 games for 15 years or Marc Murphy playing 16 games a year for ten years and the last 3-4 years being banged up and unable to perform as he once could? Look at J. Brown as an example. -- Comment left via The Roar's iPhone app. Download The Roar's iPhone App in the App Store here.
BigAl
Guest
All this out of the play bravado is pathetic childish embaressing crap ( eg. at centre bounces and after scoring) and really must be dealt with. I know it has been brought up and the Umps. are doing their best in calling blantant interference of late - and I have to admit I'm not sure how it can be resolved ? Remember that disgraceful episode a few years ago where Chris Johnstone of Brisbane kept attacking/bumping Nick Riewoldt's injured shoulder ? how can that sort of activity be deemed to be fair under any sporting rules ? There was also the episode in a recent final where a St. Kilda player kept attacking Steve Johnson's injured hand. Both of these actions would have been initiated by coaching staff !