Bets on this being the topic of the week...?

Message Bookmarked
Bookmark Removed
I'd put money on this being the topic of the week on Mr Ed's show along with the Umpiring incident, which he'll no doubt let Trevor M speak about and reply with "..no I can't say anymore on that"

http://www.realfooty.theage.com.au/realfooty/articles/2004/04/13/1081838721328.html

Unless Crawford has eyes in the back of his head (and maybe he does) he never looked at the ball once.

Lucy Lion (Lucy Lion), Tuesday, 13 April 2004 21:42 (sixteen years ago) link

The real issue with the tribunal is consistency, how can brown belt a bloke in the head and get 1 week whilst white throws his leg out, hardly making contact and gets the same penalty.

How can lynch belt a bloke, break his cheekbone and not get a game, isnt what lynch did reckless, and therefore should be suspended. Biglands threw his elbow out and copped 4, polak had conc and broken tooth will play next week, yet wakelin (being he is sharlene) will miss 4 and lynch gets off.

Nick stevens gives a love tap and gets 2 games, lynch breaks a cheekbone and gets none

can someone please explain

jsa, Tuesday, 13 April 2004 21:53 (sixteen years ago) link

The tribunal is afraid of the Roid Rage from lynchy if they gave him a week.........

Bennö (Bennö), Tuesday, 13 April 2004 22:39 (sixteen years ago) link

Sorry but I don't see Lynchie's as deliberate as Big Lands. Whether or not is was deliberate (and Lynch says it wasn't) it certainly did not look as vicious or as deliberate.

Very surprised about Whitey getting a week for the love tap to Lokan but then Lokan does have Eddie on his side!

Lucy Lion (Lucy Lion), Tuesday, 13 April 2004 23:41 (sixteen years ago) link

Lucy the viciousness or whether its deliberate should only be used when determining the number of weeks the fact that he did the crime means he should have got some time

jsa, Wednesday, 14 April 2004 00:14 (sixteen years ago) link

How can White get a week and Lynch get off! Maybe they got their verdicts mixed up.

chrisso (chrisso), Wednesday, 14 April 2004 00:21 (sixteen years ago) link

But Lucy, you probably also thought Jono Browns two weeks being harsh...

I honestly thought Lynch deserved a week at least for recklessness (going from the other judgements of the weekend) and White had to get a week after having previous form for kicking. Repeat offender, he got the absolute minimum sentance...

Crawf, fair call, Campbell Brown fair ball, Biglands 4 weeks? Maybe 2 too many for an ill-timed fend off...

Bennö (Bennö), Wednesday, 14 April 2004 00:25 (sixteen years ago) link

"... you probably also thought Jono Browns two weeks being harsh..."

Nope I think Brown's 2 weeks was fair and well worth to might I add. Just a shame Scotty Burns didn't get the same verdict at the time.

Lucy Lion (Lucy Lion), Wednesday, 14 April 2004 01:01 (sixteen years ago) link

and White had to get a week after having previous form for kicking.

Forgot about that. 1 week is fair enough then.

chrisso (chrisso), Wednesday, 14 April 2004 01:17 (sixteen years ago) link

LL 1. - Unless Crawford has eyes in the back of his head (and maybe he does) he never looked at the ball once.

The replay that I saw, I'd say he did. However, it was a bit reckless and hence a week. Although if he appeals he may have a chance.

LL 2. - Sorry but I don't see Lynchie's as deliberate ...
as jsa stated, it does not matter. I have seen all the replays, (should have taped them) but was Lynchys a bit of "round arm" action or was his arm straight?
Either way he and Brissy should consider themselves kissed ..... by a fairy.

Hawka (hawka), Wednesday, 14 April 2004 09:57 (sixteen years ago) link

Hawka, From all the replays I've seen, his arm was straight. Nothing like Cloke who came around with a roundhouse punch from behind. But no doubt Collingwood supporters will see him as having delivered a 'Rocca Elbow'.

Lucy Lion (Lucy Lion), Wednesday, 14 April 2004 21:09 (sixteen years ago) link

Lucy, Bottom line is he belted a bloke whether accidental or not and should have got games.

Hawka, crawford has been living dangerously for a long time, cant blame taggers this week, as cornes is not your typical tagger, i think crawford was frustrated by his sides crap performance coupled with the fact he's a complete tosser

jsa, Wednesday, 14 April 2004 23:53 (sixteen years ago) link

Has anyone heard Hird's (oops repeating myself) fate as yet?

Lucy Lion (Lucy Lion), Thursday, 15 April 2004 03:31 (sixteen years ago) link

jsa, I think most of the hawks were frustrated. Having a look at what they did to Sam Mitchell, I am not surprised that some of the hawks attacked the ball callously and hence a couple of them get rubbed out. So be it. What happed to those guys looked at for incidents agains Sam Mitchell? I last heard the incidents were being viewed by the video ref.

BTW I wouldn't rate Crawf as a "complete" tosser ;)

Hawka (hawka), Thursday, 15 April 2004 06:17 (sixteen years ago) link

I can't remember the last time the appeals board has overturned so many decisions. A happy hawka though.

Hawka (hawka), Thursday, 15 April 2004 19:35 (sixteen years ago) link

Considering the number of decisions overturned, I think Aaron Hamill has every right to feel hard done by.

Lucy Lion (Lucy Lion), Thursday, 15 April 2004 21:53 (sixteen years ago) link

Hawka
Sam Mitchell did the right thing at the tribunal, he basically got primus off with good evidence, good on him, unlike zantuck who put hamill in

jsa, Thursday, 15 April 2004 22:22 (sixteen years ago) link


You must be logged in to post. Please either login here, or if you are not registered, you may register here.