The media’s vilification of Jack Ginnivan, leading to the AFL’s scapegoating of him, has been shameful.
But both organisations are great at this: the media at determining a narrative, and the AFL at kneejerk responses that are stopgap attempts to quiet the uproar, rather than legitimately explore whether an issue exists, and then find a resolution.
Ginnivan drawing high free kicks began as something commentators – and particularly Anthony Hudson – highlighted gleefully, despite replays regularly forcing them to concede free kicks were often justified.
Joel Selwood has repeatedly drawn head-high contact over a glorious three-hundred-plus-game career but has never drawn the media’s ire.
Did we ever hear Hudson – who has a sideline hosting Geelong functions – target Selwood? Nope. But Ginnivan, a second-year player who came into 2022 with five games under his belt, was immediately posed as a problem to be solved.
Why? Is it because Ginnivan is seen as a troublemaker?
When an opponent pushed Ginnivan to the ground during a lull in Collingwood’s clash against North Melbourne, David King was indignant, questioning why Ginnivan deserved to be treated like that.
Cameron Mooney on the boundary scoffed incredulously and asked King if he was kidding. King backtracked. Okay. So we’re victim-blaming now, are we? Good one, Cam and David.
(Photo by Quinn Rooney/Getty Images)
Make no mistake: this is the subtext – Ginnivan deserves whatever comes his way. And if a line’s been drawn, it’s the one Ginnivan, rather than his opposition, have crossed, and thus he must be punished.
On FOOTY CLASSIFIED, Ross Lyon made the point that opposition are actually tackling him with closed fists.
Treatment has gotten so ridiculous that even former critics, such as Kane Cornes, have openly queried the lack of protection Ginnivan is receiving.
Cornes joked that Ginnivan could be “decapitated” and he still wouldn’t draw a free. Wayne Carey remarked that opposition attack Ginnivan with carte blanche because they know they won’t be penalised.
Nothing defines what a farce this has become more than an incident in the first quarter of Collingwood’s clash against Essendon.
Mason Cox gathers the ball, is tackled, and handballs it off to a passing Ginnivan. Let’s give Mason Redman the benefit of the doubt that it’s just a clumsy high tackle, rather than a willful malevolent act.
Still, it’s a free kick – everybody remarks on it.
Uh uh.
Not paid.
In the same motion as the tackle, Redman now slings Ginnivan (in a headlock) to the ground. Even legitimate tackles that are held too long are penalised for “holding the man”.
Not so here.
While both players are lying on the ground, Redman then makes a separate motion to dangerously twist Ginnivan’s head.
I’m unsure what’s the bigger issue here: that the umpires lack the integrity and character to buck their programming and rightfully determine that Ginnivan has been wronged here – not just once, but three times, with the third indiscretion borderline reportable.
Jack Ginnivan. (Photo by Mark Brake/Getty Images)
Or that the AFL will either offer their token disapproval and yet nothing will change, or they’ll tick it off as fine because they simply don’t want to admit they’ve gotten it so far wrong that they’ve enflamed the situation.
The AFL are big on “duty of care”. The head is meant to be sacrosanct. We keep hearing this.
Last week, we saw Melbourne’s Kysaiah Pickett draw a high free and it was fine. We saw commentators laud Fremantle’s Michael Walters for his “skill” in drawing a high free.
But duty of care only exists selectively, it seems.
Jack Ginnivan’s character is irrelevant – he can be mischievous, he can be disrespectful (as he was deemed earlier in the season), he can be an outright villain, but once he’s on that football field, he and every other player are meant to be equal.
Should he be injured during play because umpires failed to protect him, it’d be interesting to see if he could pursue an OHNS claim because the AFL are creating an unsafe workplace.
To the media who’ve pushed this barrow and championed this cause, are you proud? Why did you choose now to plant this flag? You’re sacrificing a 19-year-old kid, and for what? Out of bias? For clicks? Because you have nothing of genuine value to say?
And to the AFL, what do you stand for? What do you truly stand for?
Because it certainly isn’t what’s right.
andyfnq
Roar Rookie
After reading this, I am convinced that you are too biased to see this issue clearly Zig
BillyW
Roar Rookie
It's human nature Richie every revolution is history was met with an over correction before balance was found. I thought the same as most on this particular incident in that the initial high contact was drawn but a free should have been awarded for the way the tackle continued. Jack is not a victim of the media, afl or anyone else but himself for being so outward with his ploy....in fact his admissions suggest it was the umpires that were falling victim to his deception and it's really no wonder they let a few go....I would have....damn human failings..... But I do feel for the kid, he is just a kid, and has hopefully learnt some valuable lessons....he isn't the only one (and I cringe when port players do it...and don't care if they don't get frees for it!...or diving forward).....and it has been happening for too long...... There was another article on Roar something about Joel and what's the ducking difference (I can't properly remember as it wasn't great) but the answer is, there is no difference...... As fans of the game we should be lamenting "Why now?" for what ever the reasons we should be celebrating "About time!"
Peter the Scribe
Roar Guru
The kid might be annoying people but he is a 19 year old annoying people.
Lew
Guest
Brad Scott is all about ensuring his brother coaches Cats to a flag.
Lew
Guest
The thing that is lost in all of this is that evry decision is suppose to made on the merit of the incident. That is not happening in Ginnivan's case. And no BS excuse from the AFL is ever going to convince me that there is not bias in the non decisions that go against Jack. Hawkins still gets frees despite his blatant push in the backs, because the next free is paid on merit. If it is OK to drag someone to the ground by the neck, and then keep maintain that neck hold and then twist the neck of Jack and you think it is OK, then you're showing your bias.
Peter the Scribe
Roar Guru
Brad Scott. Appears his role is all about protecting his hefty pay packet.
Mybrotherbilo
Guest
The afl said JG caused the initial high contact and it was only the secondary rough conduct that should've been a free. Therefore if JG caused the initial contact by lowering his body as they have said, begs the question as to why it wasn't HTB as that was his prior. Brad Scott is a joke. Just admit that the ump got it wrong and move on.
Kevo
Roar Rookie
Good article Les. Hypocrisy of the AFL to say they want to protect the players head.
Rocca
Guest
I agree Birdman. The conversation should be about the tackle. When we played footy you tackled them around the waist. Now it’s about pinning the arms to stop them from hand balling away. So you see what happens players adapt like Selwood for years. I congratulate him for getting away with it as it put the onus on the tackler(second to the ball player). Now we want to reward the tackler even if they get the tackle so badly wrong. It’s not hard to adjudicate, reward the ball player and bad luck if you’re second.
Rocca
Guest
Hi Macca can’t wait until the umpires start targeting Cripps & Cerra for diving forward when getting tackled and then being paid in the back. Tables will turn. As l’ve said before, if the player is clever enough to avoid being tackled where’s the problem? Is it with the tackler or the person being tackled?
Rocca
Guest
Why hasn’t Michael Christian charged Redman with an unduly rough play now that the AFL has admitted they missed the free (again) and the rough conduct that followed?
Pumping Dougie
Roar Guru
I’ve always believed the solution is simple – the onus remains on the tackler to tackle correctly. Get down low. It’s not that hard. Some sides are legitimately better disciplined at executing a tackle below the shoulders. Ginnivan has been crucified for something many players do, and it’s all because some Collingwood fan uploaded a Youtube video of Ginnivan boasting about it and teaching teammates at training.
Pumping Dougie
Roar Guru
Poor Ginnivan – he got coat-hangered! :happy: That rule change is so hard for the umps to interpret consistently from player to player and match to match, because a lot of players now are incredibly quick at lowering their bodies, tilting their legs and shoulders. It’s hard to adjudicate. I feel sorry for the umps. But poor Jack was only about 100th of a second into his trademark move when he was collared. Pretty funny. But you're right Les - it was an irrational media frenzy followed by a knee-jerk reaction from the AFL, that has now created a massive headache. :happy: Bevo highlighted your point but didn't receive much support from his peers or the media (I think Bevo holds the media in disdain for some of the reasons you highlight in your email). A lot of media commentary was 'we have to protect players from themselves'. But the solution wasn't very well thought-through and the application from the umps is a complete raffle, where random selection of who is not given a free (like Ginnivin) is akin to random selection of certain profiles for luggage searches at airports.
Birdman
Roar Rookie
Ginnivan is hardly blameless here esp. bragging about conning the umps into paying frees early on but the second action in Redman's tackle yesterday was so plainly dangerous he should have been cited by the MRO even if no free kick was paid on the day.
Nick
Roar Guru
Judas gets a bit of a bad wrap tbh.
1dawg
Roar Rookie
"Most Ridiculous Comment awards" ? Hold my beer... :happy:
M. Rockatansky
Guest
Not only should he have not been paid the free as he clearly lowered his frame to receive the high contact, but he should have been done for holding the ball.
Knoxy
Roar Rookie
I'm sick of the mainstream AFL media. I deliberately avoid much of it these days because I found that it was actually draining my enjoyment of the sport. All of the constant negativity and sensationalist rubbish about Ginnivan and the 'state of the game', and what the AFL must do to fix it before the world ends! I remember a few years ago Ryan Buckland wrote an article on this site called 'State of the game? It's the state of the football media that's the problem'. It was one of the best articles on the topic that I have read. It summed up perfectly how I felt. Seriously screw the AFL media. All they care about is clicks and views. I know my rant might have gone a bit off topic as Les' article is specifically about the treatment of Ginnivan but I just needed to vent!
Jack Russell
Roar Guru
Not sure how you come to the conclusion that he would be frightened after being tackled high when he's admitted to training how to draw that contact. He literally practices getting tackled high. Selwood's deity like status amongst journos is both terrible and baffling, but that's not a reason to say the treaentbof Ginnivan is unjustified.
Pope Paul VII
Roar Rookie
The umps are playing the man here. To ignore the continued tackle proved that.