Alex McKinnon possibly Quadriplegic - Mclean guilty of dangerous throw - 7 weeks

[DiegoNT]

Slaughter/slander whats the difference? The point is that the Australian captain is copping all of this backlash because of McKinnon's harsh comments and reaction on 60 minutes the other night. I would like to say that I think 60 minutes is to blame as well. Like I said in one of my posts earlier, they turned what could have been a very upbeat story about a man who has done a terrific job in overcoming one of the most terrible hardships anyone could face into a furore!

Also just for people seem to think that Cameron Smith is heartless and completely in the wrong, how do you guys view the actions of Beau Scott and Willie Mason who were clowning around at the time? People say that McKinnon was screaming out and that Cameron Smith should have known that it was injury of the up most severity. Surely if Cameron Smith 'knew' this, then surely the likes of Willie Mason and Beau Scott should have known as well?

McKinnon was not Harsh at all. He was quite reasonable in what he had to say about smith. He said he didn't hate the guy, but it shows you what kind of guy (smith) really is. Not Harsh at all given the circumstances.

And I've got no problem with Mason and Scott mucking around in the initial moments, I don't even have a problem with Cam Smith approaching the refs at the start, obviously in the first moments not everyone at the scene knew how serious it was. But as the game was stopped, and the minutes ticked by, as doctors from both teams tried to stabilize him I think you'd have to be pretty stupid ( the kind of guy who doesn't know the difference between slander and slaughter for example) to not realize that this was a pretty serious incident. To still try and worm your way out of a penalty after that is what a lot of people have a problem with

 

[souths_pride]

McKinnon was not Harsh at all. He was quite reasonable in what he had to say about smith. He said he didn't hate the guy, but it shows you what kind of guy (smith) really is. Not Harsh at all given the circumstances.

And I've got no problem with Mason and Scott mucking around in the initial moments, I don't even have a problem with Cam Smith approaching the refs at the start, obviously in the first moments not everyone at the scene knew how serious it was. But as the game was stopped, and the minutes ticked by, as doctors from both teams tried to stabilize him I think you'd have to be pretty stupid ( the kind of guy who doesn't know the difference between slander and slaughter for example) to not realize that this was a pretty serious incident. To still try and worm your way out of a penalty after that is what a lot of people have a problem with

I disagree, I think he was harsh in both his comments and his reaction. In saying that, I don't blame McKinnon entirely, he was set up by 60 minutes! They did not need to drag up the whole tackle again and revisit the issue. They ruined what was a wonderful story and turned into tabloid rubbish. Personally, I don't think it should have ever gone to air given that the whole issue with the tackle was revisited

Of course Smith knew it was a serious incident. I never said he didn't! Any time a player gets stretchered off the field, it is serious! All Smith was doing was correctly defending his team and his team mate. If you look at the video, it is clear to even the likes of Blind Freddy, that Cameron Smith is concerned.

Also, you mention that you have know problems with Cameron Smith approaching the refs at the start...does that mean it would have found it acceptable for Smith to say what he said right at the start as soon as the incident occurred? If so then surely you must, at the very least, empathize with Cameron Smith who tried to make his point as soon as the incident happened but was shooed away by the referee.

 

[Spot On]

I think the legitimacy of the tackle is irrelevant when it comes to Smiths actions. Personally, I've always said that the tackle was only boarder line "dangerous", and that McKinnon was just very, very, very unlucky. And I think that Jordon Mclean was harshly sentenced to 7 weeks for the tackle (even taking into account theseverity of the injury).

However that in no way, shape or form changes the fact that Cameron Smith is a grub who showed not a shred of class or compassion in the face of a tragedy, despite being the captain of his country, and despite it being obvious (whether he refuses to admit it or not) that a player was severely injured. He deserves every bit of negative press that he has received in the last few days, and the game would be better off without frauds like him who try and portray themselves as holier than thou, when in fact they are merkins of the highest order.

So good, it's worth repeating.

Very well said.

 

[Spot On]

I disagree, I think he was harsh in both his comments and his reaction. In saying that, I don't blame McKinnon entirely, he was set up by 60 minutes! They did not need to drag up the whole tackle again and revisit the issue. They ruined what was a wonderful story and turned into tabloid rubbish. Personally, I don't think it should have ever gone to air given that the whole issue with the tackle was revisited

Of course Smith knew it was a serious incident. I never said he didn't! Any time a player gets stretchered off the field, it is serious! All Smith was doing was correctly defending his team and his team mate. If you look at the video, it is clear to even the likes of Blind Freddy, that Cameron Smith is concerned.

Also, you mention that you have know problems with Cameron Smith approaching the refs at the start...does that mean it would have found it acceptable for Smith to say what he said right at the start as soon as the incident occurred? If so then surely you must, at the very least, empathize with Cameron Smith who tried to make his point as soon as the incident happened but was shooed away by the referee.

Did 60 Minutes hire a script writer and employ a voice over to act as Cameron Smith in the footage of the tackle that McKinnon watched and listened to???

 

[chigurh]

What negative press has Smith received in the last few days?

Every article/commentator/interview has supported him.

And rightfully so.

 

[DiegoNT]

I disagree, I think he was harsh in both his comments and his reaction. In saying that, I don't blame McKinnon entirely, he was set up by 60 minutes! They did not need to drag up the whole tackle again and revisit the issue. They ruined what was a wonderful story and turned into tabloid rubbish. Personally, I don't think it should have ever gone to air given that the whole issue with the tackle was revisited

Of course Smith knew it was a serious incident. I never said he didn't! Any time a player gets stretchered off the field, it is serious! All Smith was doing was correctly defending his team and his team mate. If you look at the video, it is clear to even the likes of Blind Freddy, that Cameron Smith is concerned.

Also, you mention that you have know problems with Cameron Smith approaching the refs at the start...does that mean it would have found it acceptable for Smith to say what he said right at the start as soon as the incident occurred? If so then surely you must, at the very least, empathize with Cameron Smith who tried to make his point as soon as the incident happened but was shooed away by the referee.

Yes I can understand his view point, but that was not the right time to say it.
I used to have an uncle, he was a real prick of a human being, but I wasn't going to get up and say it at his funeral, its not the right time. Whether alex ducked or hadn't ducked, whether knights had been lifting earlier in the game or not has no bearing on why I have a problem with smiths actions. It's purely down to the fact it was a bad time to try and worm your way out of a penalty

 

[souths_pride]

Did 60 Minutes hire a script writer and employ a voice over to act as Cameron Smith in the footage of the tackle that McKinnon watched and listened to???

No but they did employ a reporter who delved into an issue which we had moved on and which didn't need to be revisited. The dumb bitch who did that interview could have done the entire piece without bringing up the tackle again and the story would have been fantastic.

 

[souths_pride]

Yes I can understand his view point, but that was not the right time to say it.
I used to have an uncle, he was a real prick of a human being, but I wasn't going to get up and say it at his funeral, its not the right time. Whether alex ducked or hadn't ducked, whether knights had been lifting earlier in the game or not has no bearing on why I have a problem with smiths actions. It's purely down to the fact it was a bad time to try and worm your way out of a penalty

I agree with what your saying to an extent. However, like I mentioned before, Smith was in an untenable situation. As captain of his team, he has to look after the interests of his team while also show sympathy for a fellow professional who suffered a serious injury. We need to look at what Smith said in its context - it was in the middle of a game! If it had been anywhere else or happened in general public then of course Smith attention and emotions would have been 100% diverted to the person injured. However, as captain of the team he had to stick up for his team mate; he could not have left him out to dry! I stand by my belief that any other captain in the NRL would have done the same.

 

[Penrose Warrior]

Just look at the support pages on Facebook, Smith is the best bloke in rugby league

Just like the McKinnon interview would've been better without dredging up the Smith shit, this thread might've gone better without your gormless input. Seriously, you meant that? Because your fellow Storm fans know how to use facebook he's a dead-set legend? I spose you think Paul Gallen is one of the ones supporting him on there.

Anyway, what I will say is good on Cam Smith for boycotting Nien. I still think he's a bag of shit but to present the pus that 9 did on Sunday, and apparently offer Smith no right of reply 'out of respect to Alex and his family (what the actual f**k?). Pathetic, yet unsurprising journalism.

 

[Nice Beaver]

No but they did employ a reporter who delved into an issue which we had moved on and which didn't need to be revisited. The dumb bitch who did that interview could have done the entire piece without bringing up the tackle again and the story would have been fantastic.

Ahhh I see. The tackle has no relevance to the Alex McKinnon story?

Got ya.

:crazy:

 

[souths_pride]

Ahhh I see. The tackle has no relevance to the Alex McKinnon story?

Got ya.

:crazy:

Of course the tackle had relevance but it had already been dealt with. Everyone knew about the tackle and what had happened. In the context of the story, the tackle didn't need to be brought up. The aim of the story was to portray and inform the view of how well Alex was doing, he well his rehab was going, the great support he had from his family and friends and those around him, how he was looking forward to marrying his girlfriend etc. We did not need to go back to the tackle!

 

[Storm13]

When play resumed everyone continued to play footy so does that make them all incentive cuties?

 

[DiegoNT]

I agree with what your saying to an extent. However, like I mentioned before, Smith was in an untenable situation. As captain of his team, he has to look after the interests of his team while also show sympathy for a fellow professional who suffered a serious injury. We need to look at what Smith said in its context - it was in the middle of a game! If it had been anywhere else or happened in general public then of course Smith attention and emotions would have been 100% diverted to the person injured. However, as captain of the team he had to stick up for his team mate; he could not have left him out to dry! I stand by my belief that any other captain in the NRL would have done the same.

How is just keeping quite, and showing a bit of respect and compassion for a bloke obviously in serious trouble 'leaving a teammate out to try'?
Watch a game of rugby league and you'll see heaps of times a captain doesn't argue with the ref, including many times a player is put on report. Are these captains hanging out there mates to dry? It's not actually in the rules books that a captain has to argue every penalty, its a conscious decision of every captain whether to argue or not argue with the ref and I think none of the other 15 captains would argue in that situation (even Hodges probably wouldn't)

 

[Nice Beaver]

Of course the tackle had relevance but it had already been dealt with. Everyone knew about the tackle and what had happened. In the context of the story, the tackle didn't need to be brought up. The aim of the story was to portray and inform the view of how well Alex was doing, he well his rehab was going, the great support he had from his family and friends and those around him, how he was looking forward to marrying his girlfriend etc. We did not need to go back to the tackle!

Given what I saw there is a lot of anger and frustration from Alex and his family.

Maybe they wanted to be heard and have their feelings expressed?

I know, it's a crazy concept.

 

[souths_pride]

How is just keeping quite, and showing a bit of respect and compassion for a bloke obviously in serious trouble 'leaving a teammate out to try'?
Watch a game of rugby league and you'll see heaps of times a captain doesn't argue with the ref, including many times a player is put on report. Are these captains hanging out there mates to dry? It's not actually in the rules books that a captain has to argue every penalty, its a conscious decision of every captain whether to argue or not argue with the ref and I think none of the other 15 captains would argue in that situation (even Hodges probably wouldn't)

Are you telling me Michael Ennis wouldn't have done the same thing? Hodges would definitely have, as would Paul Gallen! In fact, I'd like you to point out which captain's don't argue with the ref? Tim Mannah is the only one I can think of and if you go into the Parra thread you'll find plenty of people who have a problem with that!

I've watched thousands of games of rugby league and a captain has to defend his players! Given the incident and what has happened, it was the captain's duty and right to question the call and stick up for his players. Obviously, I can't confirm this but I always got the impression that Smith was more annoyed at why his player was put on report than the fact a penalty was awarded - that is just speculation though. Of course its not going to be in the rules, but that is part of what being a leader is about - defending your team mates and sticking by them.

 

[typicalfan]

Given what I saw there is a lot of anger and frustration from Alex and his family.

Maybe they wanted to be heard and have their feelings expressed?

I know, it's a crazy concept.

Maybe they could have questioned the Knights officials as to why they denied access for months? Or the channel 9 commentary at the time that expressed similar sentiment to C Smith at the time.

What I saw was Alex and his incredible story exploited for ratings. Just like their offer for a reply. Maybe Channel 9 could have spoken to Cameron Smith to organise some on screen opportunity to talk to Alex and clear the air. But having Smith as the bad guy means 60 minutes can exploit the story all over again.

If I were Smith I would sell my story to a rival network and organise for the money to be donated to Alex. Just to show Ch 9 for what they are.

 

[souths_pride]

Given what I saw there is a lot of anger and frustration from Alex and his family.

Maybe they wanted to be heard and have their feelings expressed?

I know, it's a crazy concept.

Fair call! I think they have a right to be angry and frustrated. I think any of us would be as well if our loved ones were denied the right to walk again. But we need to accept that sometimes in life fate can be cruel and these things happen. However, taking your anger out on an innocent person and a legend of the game is just wrong.

 

[Nice Beaver]

Maybe they could have questioned the Knights officials as to why they denied access for months? Or the channel 9 commentary at the time that expressed similar sentiment to C Smith at the time.

What I saw was Alex and his incredible story exploited for ratings. Just like their offer for a reply. Maybe Channel 9 could have spoken to Cameron Smith to organise some on screen opportunity to talk to Alex and clear the air. But having Smith as the bad guy means 60 minutes can exploit the story all over again.

If I were Smith I would sell my story to a rival network and organise for the money to be donated to Alex. Just to show Ch 9 for what they are.

Last I'm going to comment on this whole issue.

The denial of visitation would have been 100% at the request of the family. As if the Knights have any say as to who does or does not visit their son in hospital.

Cameron Smith has had over 12 months to get in contact with Alex McKinnon. McLean was denied the opportunity to speak or communicate with Alex, yet still managed to find a way. Smith could not be arsed.

Anyway, I just hope McKinnon gets all the money and support he needs.

And f*ck Cameron Smith.

 

[Hutty1986]

What negative press has Smith received in the last few days?

Every article/commentator/interview has supported him.

And rightfully so.

The media supporting golden boy Smith?? Well I never!! :lol:

 

[souths_pride]

Maybe they could have questioned the Knights officials as to why they denied access for months? Or the channel 9 commentary at the time that expressed similar sentiment to C Smith at the time.

What I saw was Alex and his incredible story exploited for ratings. Just like their offer for a reply. Maybe Channel 9 could have spoken to Cameron Smith to organise some on screen opportunity to talk to Alex and clear the air. But having Smith as the bad guy means 60 minutes can exploit the story all over again.

If I were Smith I would sell my story to a rival network and organise for the money to be donated to Alex. Just to show Ch 9 for what they are.

Brilliant post! I definitely think Cameron Smith should have been allowed to present his side of the story in all this.