Spot on Titus. Fair play for not taking the piss out of a serious situation.

Mate..you nailed it on every point.
Bottom line is that footy is a business, and- if the player can support the club to make $$$'s (by playing = more through the gate, public appearances, etc), this will be brushed under the carpet.

“The guy was smashed and can’t even remember it happening”
I like this one. I guess drunk drivers should also be let off the hook then."Yes your honour I did kill that family in an accident while I was drunk driving, but in my defence I was smashed and can't even remember it."

Excellent comment on the Martin incident.
As you note, if Martin's footballing career continues uninterrupted, then the AFL's PR material about promoting respect for women will be a debased currency.
Nevertheless, objectionable as Martin's behavior was, if he's not being charged under law for his actions, then why should he be held to a different standard than others?
For example, a factory employee, a tradesperson, a company executive, a public servant, etc., who behaved similarly would probably keep their job if they were not charged for their actions, and if their contract did not specify that they were obliged while employed to maintain a certain standard of behavior.
And if Martin is penalised in some way, or even sacked, a lawyer possibly might be able to argue on Martin's behalf that he had not breached his employment contract and was entitled either to have his employment restored, or be compensated in some way.
In other words, let the law deal with him. If no legal action is taken, then maybe AFL clubs that want their players to behave normally in public should specify that in their contracts.
I have no brief for Martin. I have seen him playing football, and admired his skills on the field.
I have seen him also in media interviews, where he seems to me to be an objectionable guy. But my opinion of him would not interest him, and his career and behavior is his own business.
But if the AFL wants to maintain that people in its game behave professionally, politely and maturely, and in particular that it is noted for its enlightened respect for women, then they should enforce it under their contracts.
Pity Martin didn't threaten a guy in the restaurant, and that the guy struck back physically. Then we could have had a stronger case for legal action, as well as possibly the entertaining spectacle of Martin being cowed by someone who hits back.

Hi Titus,
I usually like your stuff but SURELY Martin is
entitled to a fair investigation of the facts of what happened before
hanging him out to dry. 
Not defending Dustin's actions but trial
by media has been alive and well this week without most people actually
having a genuine clue about what occurred. There are 2 sides to every
story.

However some would have him hung, drawn and quartered
this week without even understanding what actually took place. I'll wait
and see what Richmond do once they are armed with all the relevant
information rather than condemn blindly. I'd suggest others do the same.

The surprising thing about this is that Dusty will probably get a gong from our Victorian Government (who tend to have an affection for illegal activity by mates and all that stuff) for putting the fear of hell in any prospective terrorist thinking of attacking our state lest we let Dusty loose with a slab of beer and a fresh set of chop sticks.  The police will do nothing even our Swat team would be fearful and the Police recently charged a female victim of domestic assault and kicked her and her two babies out of the family home onto the street with no clothes for three days when they stuffed up their one hour investigation, so do not expect females to get any help from our Keystone Cops just because they get a wack from a male. 

I should give them some credit after a few months they eventually realised  they had screwed up and charges were discontinued but a case of threatening to kill someone is a lot more serious than a woman accidentally scratching her partner as he threw her to the floor hurting her hand, but because her bruising took several hours to appear versus his tiny half inch long scratch immediately visible to the naked eye she was considered a serious threat to her partners safety and ordered to get out of the home immediately.  No clothes, no baby bottles no anything just take your babies and go.  That's our illustrious police force in action and the officer was would you believe a female.  On the basis of relativity, in this case  the police will probably charge the woman for being in Dusty's face and enticing him to threaten her by being in the same restaurant at the same time.  Had she not been there the incident would not have happened so its not Dusty's fault its her fault.  He should be rewarded and she banned for 25 years from entering any restaurant in case Dusty wants a meal in the future.

The courts will do nothing they have an aversion for doing anything like what the public expectations would demand and we need not even ask what the AFL will do they only ever give lip service to bad behaviour because even bad advertising is good for them or they wouldn't keep bringing the game into disrepute as they do on virtually every decision in the game that hasn't been preceded by a whistle sound.

No Dan the Man will make Dusty our symbol of Terror and together with Bronwyn Bishop they will be the face of Australia's Terror Response Team.

Given a choice I would still prefer to be in a room with a pissed Dusty branding chop sticks than have to look and listen to BB tell us how she wants to fight terror for the next three years.

Hey Titus, usually I I've your work but you like other media are way off the mark with this. Perhaps wait until the investigation is complete before assuming the worst.

Unfortunately Tigers of Old when Dusty gives his side of the story as "I can't remember anything I was too pissed" it doesn't take a Rhode scholar to understand we are not likely to get a balanced view of what really happened from Dusty.  Titus was giving a mock of the various defence strategy that may or may not be put forward and what various people in the community are suggesting, he's not being judgemental just yet (stay tuned).

Like any footy teams true believers they will read whatever they want into the situation and from my experience in the stands with most teams their diehards will unreservedly throw their support behind their players (unlike Richmond to coaches in past times). Half of these diehards would fail an IQ test and the other half would have trouble spelling it.  That's what makes the true believers who and what they are.

AndrewDeakin I would suggest he'd be charged with bringing the game into disrepute as a minimum. 
I don't agree with your defence that if the offence isn't punishable by law, a different standard should apply. Testing positive for illicit drugs, ie: marijuana- in your own home- may not be breaking the law, but is still contravenes the AFL's 'three strikes and maybe we'll think about telling your coach' rule.
I work for a publicly listed company & have to wear a company uniform every day. If I got maggoted down the pub after work in uniform and started threatening and abusing someone- I can guarantee I would be held to account. Sure- maybe I didnt break the law (although this is debatable), but- I would be bringing my employer's reputation into question- as has Dustin Martin (allegedly).

No one is arguing the bare facts of the incident though. It occurred in public with multiple witnesses. No one has offerred any mitigating evidence other than he was completely hammered.
I'm not surewhat other information you are waiting for.
Richmond, the AFL, and the AFLPA, have all started down the same old well worn path of under-playing, white-washing and taking bo meaningful action. Good on Titus for calling them out.

What a shame this is actually true and not hilarious like most of Titus O'Reily stuff.

Well said Titus.

Here, here Titus

Funny how people defend him on one hand and throw abuse at Goodes on the other. Unbelievable double standards

I guess the 'but he's a really good bloke" defence is not going to work with Dusty...

If they really want to make a statement, send him to Carlton for 6 months!

Everything I know I learnt in season 2015. Players we don't like get booed. Dusty will therefore get booed ........ won't he?

Jesus that's spot on. Help an indigenous kid, get boo'd. Threaten to kill a woman, get defended.

Spot on again Titus

why you going on about violence against women? he didn't physically harm her.

Justin this is spot on.

Thank you Titus it is so comforting to know there are men out there who truly object to violence against women.

What can possibly make this ok with you?

Can't like this enough, time for the AFL to step in and take a stand if they're serious.

Chris Bell no mate that's assault haha

I never said it was ok, just challenging the accuracy of the article. The world would be boring if we all had the same mindset, adding perspective to a situation creates a more accurate portrayal of the event. someone has to play devil's advocate

So what you're saying is he wasn't violent towards her??

whatever the penalty, it would be obvious but still good for him to be required to work in something like a womens refuge. Not a token 40 hours mind you. 10 hours a week for 3 years, or something like that. It's great that you are advocating for something harsh. Whilst we know ther AFL won't take it that far, stretching the debate out to a severe penalty can drag the AFL towards a harsher penalty. Gale & Richardsons comments are absolutely disgraceful. Imagine the hard ball these type of people will play with the defendant, both openly & covertly, when rape is involved. (Not talking about martin now, & yes when not if)

He threatened violence Timothy-what don't you understand??

If only this article could pierce the minds of many as well as a sharp chopstick.

You're gunna need a bigger shield Timothy...

I hope you're being ironic there Tim...

Best thing I've read about this!! With those defences there's really no wonder we have serious issues with violence against women. I'm astounded by the amount of people saying things like "she should zip her lip", "she should've just shut her mouth".......yep, we're really coming along in leaps and bounds in making the culprit accountable and not blaming the victim.

threatening violence, isn't violence. He may have added to an image of violence, but the violence himself he didn't contribute to

'The public condemnation has been weaker than American coffee' U0001f602

He threatened to stab her in the face with chopsticks then stood over her and hit the wall above her head-that's violence.

You have missed the point I'm afraid.

My point is that, martin's actions weren't violent by definition. And it's not as if Titus linked the image of violence with how that can have a negative effect on society. He directly coupled what Martin did with violence against women, which isn't strictly accurate.

Have I? Didn't like what Goodes did so got booed. I don't like what Dusty did, I'm going to boo him. That's the point.

Bert Pauloncello actually a good read

A 'threat to kill' is pretty serious mate. Like jail term serious.

"behaviour involving physical force intended to hurt, damage, or kill someone"
please the only "physical force" involved, was a hit against a wall... which I'm fairly certain, is not a woman.

But if we don't stand up against intimidatory words and actions that threaten violence what happens? You just don't get it.

Brad i realize that, but the issue titus raised of violence against women, while somewhat correlated, is not synonymous with threatening to kill. And besides how serious the threatening was, chopsticks aren't a realistic murder weapon

Jenny Winter a bit more serious than his usual comments

Turn off your phone Timothy. There's a cyclone happening and your in the eye of it.

hahaha i cant wait Geoff

Can I get you a bigger spade for that hole you're digging Timothy?

Yep. What a brilliant ending to this article. Well said Titus

There's always one....

Well said Titus.

You're going to disappoint a lot of bogans with this post, Titus.
Just wish I was there to witness it first hand.

Agree. Here is the chance for the AFL to put their money where their mouth is. His club should sack him.

ill make it worse.
what makes adam goodes pretending to throw a spear at a crowd any less violent than martin threatening someone with chopsticks?

That's assault brother.... do you double dare me

To me it seems they're both promoting an image of violence, yet only one was applauded by the media. Now this could be a racial preference to indigenous Australians (thus portrayed as a hero representing his ancient culture with a traditional dance) over Caucasians (portrayed as a drunk bogan and woman basher) by the media, however the culture Goodes represented with the spear throwing and such, has always been very violent, the same violence most of you are condemning against. In an attempt to side with the majority of their audience, most of the media tend to intensely criticize stereotypical acts of racism (those tend to be against non-white races) and in the process have become overly defensive of any potential victims of racism aside from caucasians. This is easy to see in their support of Goodes' actions while simultaneously condemning Dustin Martin. Another factor which may have caused this blatant racism may be due to a well accepted obligation to feel guilty for violence demonstrated by the English to Indigenous Australian's many centuries ago, and therefore there exists a special consideration for aboriginals (you can see this in the extra financial aid we give them) and it would seem unfair to criticize Adam Goodes by the majority of close minded people in this thread. This despite the fact that Goodes isn't a victim of violence performed centuries ago.

Clayton Gubbels Jack Sharlassian James Durkin Dylan Cleven wowee this is getting people really riled up

Its called an empty threat
not a big deal in the slightest

Paula Muir i agree with you exactly, and it would be nice if the writer of the article brought up that issue as well, rather than incorrectly inferring that Martin is a woman beater

Actual real talk Nathan Douch Matt Fenwick

congratulations, Titus, very well put. Now, Richmond, lets see your true colours

Well said, titus.

Spot on Titus!

(i notice you deleted your comment but oh well) Shaun you may have perceived it as a dance, but the act of throwing a spear at someone still promotes a culture of violence. in fact you could argue it does more so than Martin as a spear is specifically designed to kill people, whereas chopsticks would be much less effective in that situation, and were designed for eating

Love your work, Titus.

We could put Dusty in charge of Man Utd, maybe then they may attack someone

Wow. The article doesn't infer anything. It simply states the facts. I'm not sure what you think viloent behaviour is, but I'm pretty sure threatening someone with a weapon in your hand and then punching a wall near their person is considered "violent behaviour". Maybe you think it's "pleasant behaviour". Regardless of the author's position on whether or not it was "violent behaviour", why comment? Unless of course your intention was to just get everyone riled up, but then why defend your point? Dustin Martin can and should be charged by this woman, because as a previous person posted, it's a criminal offence to threaten to kill someone. Not sure if you need to have a weapon on you when doing it, but Dustin's got that one in his favour I guess!

All the article does is state facts? wrong. it's full of satire, sarcasm and opinion.
the behaviour of hitting the wall was violent yes, but it was not strictly violence against women.
Part of my intention was to get people riled up, but also just simply because I didn't agree with the notion that this has everything to do with violence against women, when really there wasn't any.
So if you agree that, in your words, "threatening someone with a weapon in your hand" is violent behaviour, then why was Adam Goodes celebrated for pretending to throw a spear at a crowd of people? besides you can't possibly think that chopsticks are a "weapon". A weapon by definition is "a thing designed or used for inflicting bodily harm or physical damage". Now I'm not a rocket scientist, but I can quite easily deduce that the chopsticks weren't designed for inflicting bodily harm, and Dustin Martin also didn't use them for such a thing. A spear on the other hand was designed for inflicting bodily harm.
And I completely agree with you that Dustin Martin should be charged for his actions, however inferring there was violence against this women involved, is simply untrue.

Well done. Great article. I hope they don't disappoint me. I live in NRL country, would like to feel superior.

Lucky it wasn't a steak restaurant!

Timothy = troll. A poor one at that. Next thing it will be her fault.

Well in all honestly, it's primarily Dustin Martin's fault. but the girl could have handled things differently, leading to a different outcome. However this isn't an excuse for Dustin Martin and he should be charged with threatening to kill her.

Gale and Richardson absolutely pathetic and for the only club with a female president.Fringe player would be sacked,star player it is just a hic cup staggering !

Spot on, Titus. Thank you for writing this.

Almost exactly the words that went through my mind.

While she had the right to confront a drunk footballer for annoying people, it would be naive for her to believe that she wouldn't receive a spirited reaction from someone that highly intoxicated. If she had not drawn his attention, her chances of not being threatened would have increased dramatically, and she should have some idea that would be the case in real time. Preferably, she firstly should have contacted the owner of the venue and/or any security at the venue, before attempting to curb the disruptive behavior of Dustin Martin.

Seriously mate, educate yourself and/or quit trolling.

Educate myself on what, have I said anything incorrect?

Ah. There it is. Oh bless. It's her fault. Should've been at home making sandwiches.

Please Tina, inform me as to where I stated that the events which occurred were her fault? In fact, I said that "it's primarily Dustin Martin's fault."

But if she was at home making sandwiches it'd make it much harder for Martin to threaten her. Also a sandwich would be cheaper. Although if she receives any compensation for these events, perhaps it wouldn't be. Financial gain has always been a great motivator.

Matt for one, walls don't have common rights, and 2, the remainder of the definition refers to "cases of robbery".

"A Law Dictionary, Adapted to the Constitution and Laws of the United States." Nice try, maybe find one that's adapted to the laws of Australia?

They were all super offended about an invisible spear too, but when it's a white fella waving a real (small) spear around...that's all fine...leave him be mate!

But when did Martin claim to be racially targetted because he got bood at a football game? You're another flog to think the targetting towards Goodes was racism, just a sook, like you!'

No thanks. We trade our idiots to other clubs, even if they're good players. We don't want other clubs trash.

http://definitions.uslegal.com/v/violent-crimes/
The definition of violent crime suggests that violence is a behavior by persons, against persons or property that intentionally threatens, attempts, or actually inflicts physical harm.

Booing is a form of sooking you troll. Also, if you read the original post, he was talking about the double standards, nothing about race

Be fair on poor Dustin. A gruelling day at Stereosonic could leave anyone a bit Dusty.

Again you give me a website for the United States, which have different laws and definition of laws than Australia. You also give me a definition of a term which is more specific than the one used by Titus and myself. We use the terms "violence" and "violence against woman" which have slight differences in meaning than the Unites States legal term of "violent crime".

So he's comparing 2 unrelated topics and not expecting someone to spot a difference? odd that.. and making valid points makes me a troll? okkkkkkk denial much

Hahaha Dusty Billal Ali

Maybe you need to re read what I wrote.

I read it quite well thanks, you are comparing Goodes to Martin, Goodes was targetted because of his constant whinging and crying about being racially targetted when it was in fact just because he was a flog, When Martin crys for media attention to complain about the way people treat him, then you can call it double standards.

She was poking the bear so she deserved it was the worst I've heard. Great work Titus.

Last bit of troll food for you, Tim. Enjoy. https://www.legalaid.vic.gov.au/find-legal-answers/criminal-offences/violent-behaviour

So well executed Titius you're a true wordsmith!

Like it says, it may be a violence related offense in the law as he no doubt threatened to harm someone, which is somewhat related to violence on a psychological level as she believed her health was being threatened. I stand by my opinion that the actions involved were still not strictly violent, and aren't classified as such despite it technically being a violence related offense. "You don’t have to make physical contact with someone to be charged with a violence-related offence. Placing a person in fear that you will be violent towards them can also be an offence, including:
threatening to harm someone
being physically intimidating, such as standing over someone."

Yes I have proven my point lol, thanks xo

I wouldn't be surprised if her got 0-2 weeks.... It's a great opportunity for the afl to make a stand, but they won't, not with a marquee player. If it was Joe blogs playing 2nds for St kilda he'd be frog marched out of the game never to be seen again

Shades of Travis tuck

How is it wrong if i proved it lol, thanks xo

I'm not the one comparing Goodes to Martin :')

So you defending Martin?

Not at all, what he did was wrong yes, but comparing him to Goodes is moronic.

Guys. It's not worth it xo

Oh Matt. Don't bother.

Amen weak as p#ss AFL. And tigers.

Who was that to James?

Im a richmond supporter and love watching dusty on the field but I Agree 100% with this.
The only thing that I will say is about the clubs initial response. I will almost put the soft reply down to it being rushed. Yes, it was poor, but it could be because of the need to say something straight away. I'm sure if they had more time to structure the statement properly it would have been stronger.

Watch Martin walk scot free....it's all about definition of law....not public opinion

Innocent until proven guilty, then we'll see what the AFL and Richmond come up with Georgia Taylor

'Lovable Larrikin' by next seasons footy shows

Make him the face of the AFL Womyn's Round

What women's refuge would want someone like that hanging around society's most vulnerable for 10 hours a week?

Martin definitely won't walk free. The AFL/Richmond will definitely penalize him.. and most likely he'll be found guilty in the eyes of the law as well.

Rach O'Dwyer how spot on is this??

MariusAbbott Well that will come out in the wash but I'll leave it to the AFL and the club to do the investigating rather than keyboard CSIs if that's ok with you. ;)
BTW I'm ok with Dustin copping a fair whack if that's what is decided. Have to wait and see what unfolds.

Haha hope he goes bro

Like your whole club?

Bravo. This addresses the fundamental issue of violence against women and exposes the weak response by the Richmond Football Club and the AFL as pathetic and unacceptable. Don't let up, Titus! The football world needs a guiding light and, amazingly, it's you!

Good onya Titus. You nailed it.

TitusOReily best defense is , he didn't actually say or do what she alleged . That witnesses expose her story as a lie . Will u say sorry ?

TitusOReily eye witnesses have come out saying the victim overblew the story, you must feel slightly stupid

TitusOReily Hopefully new govt innovation initiative will inspire discovery of violent gene and how to neutralise it. See Clockwork Orange.

TitusOReily You'd think Richmond had punished you enough for supporting them :(

Violence against women is good cos dusty does it

TexasPinkSock TitusOReily don't think it's just Titus, everyone is on board

Reidox4 TitusOReily people jumped on the bandwagon fast. Cant blame them guess the off season gets boring

TitusOReily great comments! Defending these actions is hypocritical when the AFL talks about no tolerance for VAW.

TitusOReily congrats Titus.

TexasPinkSock TitusOReily police involved... Sounds serious to me wightsnake24 ThomLemmon morgdoggg

Reidox4 TitusOReily wightsnake24 ThomLemmon morgdoggg not really not that surprising that the afl would rather some one else deal

Reidox4 TitusOReily wightsnake24 ThomLemmon morgdoggg the issue instead of them

I'm glad you were paying attention to me, I think I used 3 of those in one post! :)

The trouble is no one is ever going to know what really happened, unless a parton who was there gives a corroborated account of the indecent to the media..  The media goes nuts because Dustin is covered in tats and looks like a bogan, the police get involved because the AFL cant investigate the dirt under their toe nails. No one can defend what Dustin did and no one should, but we should also be careful not to jump to conclusions and condemn him because of what and how he is.

TexasPinkSock Reidox4 wightsnake24 morgdoggg How we starting to feel here boys? Got the horn? http://twitter.com/ThomLemmon/status/674887987700764672/photo/1

TitusOReily that's the best thing you've ever written

TitusOReily agreed.

Brim63 Thank you.

TitusOReily for a funny man I think a serious post is great as people actually listen to you. Well said entirely.Hope he gets a serious ban

TitusOReily thank you for this Titus

TitusOReily the top comments on the AFL's Facebook page are just fantastic.

TitusOReily Spot on. Great article. The more I think about it, the more I'm of the opinion that a minimum 12 month ban is fitting.

TitusOReily yet again well stated #notoviolence #notodrunkenviolence #pplkilledfromblackouts

TitusOReily Ben Cousins got 12 months for NOT failing a drug test. He was persecuted for admitting to an addiction...

The AFL is an absolute joke of an organisation.

Brad Healy is that king valleys own bevis?

Cos he's the saviour

It is I recon U0001f44dU0001f3fb

I appreciated you explaining an alternative perspective Timothy U0001f60a even if it's too hard for some people to comprehend that alternative perspective does not = trolling.
Working at a pub I've heard lots of "I'll kill you"s and "you're dead" and the more vague "you're f*cked". Often directed at me for cutting people off at the bar. Can people really be punished for that? I really didn't think so (but could totally be wrong). Or is it the hitting the wall thing that took it over the line?

Trent Sutton...take a read mate.

Timothy having a physically stronger individual stand over you and threaten you is really frightening. That's what blokes have done for years and has been socially acceptable. It's not now. Violence and abuse is not just doing actual physical harm. So many serious offenders go for years inflicting verbal threats with victims saying he didn't hurt me, and then one day there is a tragic outcome. Just ask Rosie Batty about that one. The standard you walk past is the standard that you accept.

It may be frightening, but still doesn't constitute it being a violent act towards her. It may be true that for some, it will eventually turn into a severe physical incident one day, but you can't condemn Dustin for being a women beater, because you believe his behavior may lead to that down the road, which is mostly irrelevant in this case anyway because he won't see her again outside of a court room. For sure charge him with threatening violence, but what is this standard exactly you want me to oppose? people talking loudly? people looking scary? people saying something mean? I'm sorry but you can't label the man as something which you think he may become further in his life.

mj_lynch It has been very interesting that Sydney Swans ambassador Rebecca Wilson has been silent on this issue!

I'm just trying to work out how he could have "killed" her by poking a chopstick at her.  He would have to be pretty skilled to be able to make a chopstick into a deadly weapon.  Can we stop talking about someone threatening to "kill" someone with a chopstick?  That said, violence and even threatening violence against another person is not acceptable and should not be let go without punishment.  The police have concluded that he did not actually commit a crime.  This is true.  Threatening to hurt someone is not a crime.  Hurting them is.  If he had actually hurt this lady then he would have been found guilty of unlawful assault.  He threatened to hurt her which is unacceptable but not criminal.  He clearly needs to attend a Mens Behavioural Change program.  He could benefit from speaking to victims of Family violence to understand how frightening his behaviour might have been for the victim.  Let's hope he learns from his behaviour and doesn't put himself in this position again.

What do you think about the Police saying Dustin has no charges to answer Titus?

Catherine Simpson a well place chopstick could very easily kill someone, don't worry about that. Straight into the inside corner of your eye with enough force up the nasal cavity and your into the brain. And of corse your ears are a great entry point too. I know this from military training, I'm not a saddist of weirdo.

So, now that Caroline WIlson has come out and said that this was basically a bunch of lies I am assuming this article will be retracted? Of course not...

Catherine Simpson Threatening to kill someone is indeed a criminal offence. It can even be construed to be assault. That is, even if he didn't touch her.

That's wrong. https://www.legalaid.vic.gov.au/find-legal-answers/criminal-offences/violent-behaviour
Threatening someone is a criminal offence. I suggest you stop now.

Some good points here albeit some did sound like personal injury lawyer speak. I did think assault had to be on a person not on a wall or has the wall Mr Miyagis filed charges?