btdemon 482 Posted June 5, 2011 Posted June 5, 2011 Looking at the vision it would seem that he definitely has a case to answer for. I guess its a matter of how many points are racked up. I wouldn't surprise me if he got off, being a Collingwood favorite.
M_9 2,215 Posted June 5, 2011 Posted June 5, 2011 Would have to get two weeks, possibly reduced to one if he takes an early plea. The fact the Jones lip needed attention won't help his cause. You'd think after the Campbell Brown incident, and the furore that it happened behind play, they'd have to take a dim view of assaults 'off the ball' (which Thomas' was).
Eth 4 Posted June 5, 2011 Posted June 5, 2011 The thing is, Thomas will get two weeks, max. Compare that to Trengove's tackle...
Tony Tea 2,816 Posted June 5, 2011 Posted June 5, 2011 Cynical me says: Not many players are playing as well as Thomas so far this season, which means he is in the running for the Brownlow, which means he will not get reported.
NC MFC 0 Posted June 5, 2011 Posted June 5, 2011 Definitely at least one, which is all that matters for us
deeflog 679 Posted June 5, 2011 Posted June 5, 2011 must be suspended. the ball had left the immediate vacinity which in my eyes makes it behind play, intentional, high contact and Jones had to go off with a bloody lip which means it had to be of some force and that evidence won't help daisy's case no pressure MRP but your creditbility( what is left of it) is on the line
Triple Jack 13 Posted June 5, 2011 Posted June 5, 2011 Surely its two weeks (early plea brings it down to one). Which means no Swan or Thomas which surely helps our chances of a win. Saying that their depth is very good plus Pendelbury is a very good player.
Diablo Deemon 220 Posted June 5, 2011 Posted June 5, 2011 2 weeks reduced to 1 surely. Anyone else think there is irony in the fact Thomas smacks Jones in the face he has to go off and Malthouse doesn't apologise for his team cheating. Or what about the Krakouer goal which he claimed off a St Kilda mark nice little can of worms Mick has opened.
Demon Dynasty 17,164 Posted June 5, 2011 Posted June 5, 2011 MRP is answerable to the AFL. Pies are the jewel in their Vic crown and the heavy weight (ie., biggest money earner/spinner). IMO the AFL would more than likely want the best possible outcome for their heavy weight favourites both Vic and interstate. Provided of course the incident isn't too controversial or likely to be questioned to the point of being embarrassing. At worst.... he gets off with a fine/reprimand. Preferred outcome would be no sighting at all. That way the MRP avoids the scrutiny/controversy if he gets off with fine/reprimand and Daisy is still in the Brownlow running. Demons and other lessor Vic clubs (in the eyes of the AFL.... this is only my opinion/gut feel...i hope i'm wrong on this) are fair game and likely to be scape goated in such incidents in order to demonstrate that they're upholding the goodwill and spirit of the game (eg., Trengove incident... 3 week fiasco).
Guest Artie Bucco Posted June 5, 2011 Posted June 5, 2011 In the scheme of things, I don't really care as long as he isn't allowed to line up against us.
Gorgoroth 13,216 Posted June 5, 2011 Posted June 5, 2011 I watched most of the game but did not see this incident, is their any footage going around?
Blistering 545 Posted June 5, 2011 Posted June 5, 2011 The MRP has no qualms about monstering Melbourne with decisions like the one involving Trengove but I doubt they have the cohunas to take on Collingwood. Here's how they'll view it - the MRP considered the clash and determined there was insufficient force used to warrant taking the matter further i.e. these days you can take a punch at an opponent but don't tackle.
Eth 4 Posted June 5, 2011 Posted June 5, 2011 I watched most of the game but did not see this incident, is their any footage going around? Tackled Clint Jones who got the handball off to another Saint and the play moved on. Jones was on hands and knees, getting up, with Thomas on top of him. Thomas basically punched in the jaw from behind then.
Akum 2,660 Posted June 5, 2011 Posted June 5, 2011 must be suspended. the ball had left the immediate vacinity which in my eyes makes it behind play, intentional, high contact and Jones had to go off with a bloody lip which means it had to be of some force and that evidence won't help daisy's case no pressure MRP but your creditbility( what is left of it) is on the line They'll call it "accidental" and no case to answer.
Sir Why You Little 37,450 Posted June 5, 2011 Posted June 5, 2011 They'll call it "accidental" and no case to answer. Just ask Colin Sylvia....It Stinks, but tomorrow will give us an answer...The Media have been quiet though. Nobody wants to challenge the Filth....(except us!)
bjDee 1,249 Posted June 5, 2011 Posted June 5, 2011 If Trenners gets 3 weeks for accidental concussion arising from a tackle during play, how can Daisy get anything less than 3 for a DELIBERATE AND FORCEFUL contact to the head with his fist, off the ball, resulting in a head wound?
David Williamson 37 Posted June 5, 2011 Posted June 5, 2011 This was fun to put together: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eNu-fztgC5E
Red and Blue Flame 242 Posted June 5, 2011 Posted June 5, 2011 Surely its two weeks (early plea brings it down to one). Which means no Swan or Thomas which surely helps our chances of a win. Saying that their depth is very good plus Pendelbury is a very good player. swan was playing last night....he will be playing queens birthday
No16 1 Posted June 5, 2011 Posted June 5, 2011 swan was playing last night....he will be playing queens birthday Going to Arizona to take care of a few minor injuries to be fit for second half of the year. Said it himself after the game last night
Sir Why You Little 37,450 Posted June 5, 2011 Posted June 5, 2011 This was fun to put together: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eNu-fztgC5E Well done Dave...i just sent that too my Filth Mates Facebook page...He will be Furious!!!!
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.