Jump to content

Salem Suspended

Featured Replies

Posted

Salem has been given a week for his elbow. 

Cunnington predictably got a $1000 fine for intentionally punching someone on the field.

The MRP are a joke! How Salem can get the same as Thompson is beyond me. 

Update. Higgins also got $1000 for striking Clarry. Both Higgins and Cuntington were deemed intentional with low impact. Higgins got off completely for hitting Vince.

The protection of that puss bag of a club continues. I hope we smash them in Hobart later in the year, don't care if the whole team ends up suspended just pummel the twerps into the ground.

 

F

M

D

:huh:

 

Utter garbage.

What Salem needed to do was grab a handful or his jumper, then beat him to death with an iron bar.

Really? It was a bit silly, but there was hardly any force whatsoever, I honestly didn't even contemplate it being a suspension.


  • Author
Just now, Forest Demon said:

Really? It was a bit silly, but there was hardly any force whatsoever, I honestly didn't even contemplate it being a suspension.

I thought maybe a week but going off precedent of what Thompson did to Dangerfield there is no way it is a week. Maybe a suspect medical report came in about a broken jaw he will play with next week is behind it!

Why the f*** are we always made an example out of !? I'm sure there has been similar incidents this year with no suspensions.

 

Joke. The AFL has it in for us  I'm sure of it, handful of teams they'd rather see successful before us.

and the club does ?


MRP hate our guts. How does Cnutington not get banned for a deliberate punch.

6 minutes ago, Clint Bizkit said:

Any footage of it?

http://www.afl.com.au/news/2017-05-22/mrp-cunnington-escapes-with-fine-salem-suspended

Salem should get a week. Stupid unnecessary thing to do. How Cunnington and Higgins escape suspension after intentionally striking is beyond me. Higgins was offered a fine for 'intentionally striking to the head'. Not even in play, just intentionally hit someone in the head. How is that not suspension worthy? The AFL and MRP should be ashamed of themselves for the inconsistency and stupidity. According to their rules it's now ok to punch your opponent in the head, jumper grabbed or not. The precedent is set after letting multiple people off in the past fortnight. Hopefully our club got the memo and next week they try to break a few jaws. What a farce!

  • Author

Next time we play the Roos we should just openly punch every player, just not to the head, hit them really hard in the stomach repetedly. Do that all game, cop the fines, walk away.

  • Author
1 minute ago, Lord Travis said:

http://www.afl.com.au/news/2017-05-22/mrp-cunnington-escapes-with-fine-salem-suspended

Salem should get a week. Stupid unnecessary thing to do. How Cunnington and Higgins escape suspension after intentionally striking is beyond me. Higgins was offered a fine for 'intentionally striking to the head'. Not even in play, just intentionally hit someone in the head. How is that not suspension worthy? The AFL and MRP should be ashamed of themselves for the inconsistency and stupidity. According to their rules it's now ok to punch your opponent in the head, jumper grabbed or not. The precedent is set after letting multiple people off in the past fortnight. Hopefully our club got the memo and next week they try to break a few jaws. What a farce!

The MRP decided the strike was to his body so he got off. Punch away boys, just not to the head!


Any chance we might appeal or do we just cop their crap?

i could handle losing to Hawthorn 16 times but not this team of scum.

FFS.

 

1 minute ago, Die Hard Demon said:

 I'm sure there has been similar incidents this year with no suspensions.

That almost goes without saying.

Next week someone will elbow someone in the head and get off under some tortured logic, and someone else will get a week for a jumper punch that the recipient barely notices.

The MRP are a befuddled bunch who don't seem to have a clear handle on what they are doing. They probably walk into doors a lot and have ink on their tongues from sucking their biros.

In any other walk of life such inconsistency and weird reasoning would have them labelled as "in crisis".

Salem deserves a week but it's the fact Scott Thompson did an almost identical act earlier in the year and got a fine... There is no consistency whatsoever. Cotchin punches someone in the jaw & it's rated as careless not intentional so why's Salems intentional ? The AFL needs to do something at the end of this year, scrap the ticking the boxes & just look at an incident & say that deserves X about of weeks... Not rocket science

Cunnington should have got a week. 

  • Author
1 minute ago, Biffen said:

Any chance we might appeal or do we just cop their crap?

i could handle losing to Hawthorn 16 times but not this team of scum.

FFS.

 

No point appealing Salem. Was worth a week, unless you look at precedent! Nothing we can appeal for fines against players boxing on that aren't in our team. 

Just now, Biffen said:

Any chance we might appeal or do we just cop their crap?

i could handle losing to Hawthorn 16 times but not this team of scum.

FFS.

 

No point appealing the Salem suspension. Watch the footage in the link I posted a few posts back. It was a stupid thing to do and a fair penalty.

The North ones are a joke though. Intentional strikes that left players either dazed on the ground for 30-60 seconds or dry reaching on the bench for 2-3 minutes. Disgusting decision by the AFL and MRP, and sets an ugly precedent going forward. The game may get very ugly for a while until they change their tune. It's now fine to punch away!


  • Author
1 minute ago, JV7 said:

Salem deserves a week but it's the fact Scott Thompson did an almost identical act earlier in the year and got a fine... There is no consistency whatsoever. Cotchin punches someone in the jaw & it's rated as careless not intentional so why's Salems intentional ? The AFL needs to do something at the end of this year, scrap the ticking the boxes & just look at an incident & say that deserves X about of weeks... Not rocket science

Cunnington should have got a week. 

Thompson got a week but hit much harder and with the point of his elbow. 

1 minute ago, Chris said:

Thompson got a week but hit much harder and with the point of his elbow. 

He did too.. I knew whatever he got was unders, I thought he should have got 2 weeks

The Salem call is likely a fair one.

But the North players getting away with $1000 fines is ridiculous - MRP made a rod for their own back last week with the Cotchin 'fine' and we just got the rough end of it yesterday 

 

Something is wrong with the system and needs to be changed, Salem can cop his week but the punch in the gut to Vince who was forced from the ground and was almost spewing and to only cop $1000 is just wrong, if AFL Doesn't change the rules on that this week I would be telling the players if someone is giving you a hard time punch them in the guts as it will only cost $1000 it's not a good look for the game 


Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Featured Content

  • CASEY: Sydney

    The Casey Demons were always expected to emerge victorious in their matchup against the lowly-ranked Sydney Swans at picturesque Tramway Oval, situated in the shadows of the SCG in Moore Park. They dominated the proceedings in the opening two and a half quarters of the game but had little to show for it. This was primarily due to their own sloppy errors in a low-standard game that produced a number of crowded mauls reminiscent of the rugby game popular in old Sydney Town. However, when the Swans tired, as teams often do when they turn games into ugly defensive contests, Casey lifted the standard of its own play and … it was off to the races. Not to nearby Randwick but to a different race with an objective of piling on goal after goal on the way to a mammoth victory. At the 25-minute mark of the third quarter, the Demons held a slender 14-point lead over the Swans, who are ahead on the ladder of only the previous week's opposition, the ailing Bullants. Forty minutes later, they had more than fully compensated for the sloppiness of their earlier play with a decisive 94-point victory, that culminated in a rousing finish which yielded thirteen unanswered goals. Kicks hit their targets, the ball found itself going through the middle and every player made a contribution.

      • Like
    • 1 reply
  • REPORT: St. Kilda

    Hands up if you thought, like me, at half-time in yesterday’s game at TIO Traeger Park, Alice Springs that Melbourne’s disposal around the ground and, in particular, its kicking inaccuracy in front of the goals couldn’t get any worse. Well, it did. And what’s even more damning for the Melbourne Football Club is that the game against St Kilda and its resurgence from the bottomless pit of its miserable start to the season wasn’t just lost through poor conversion for goal but rather in the 15 minutes when the entire team went into a slumber and was mugged by the out-of-form Saints. Their six goals two behinds (one goal less than the Demons managed for the whole game) weaved a path of destruction from which they were unable to recover. Ross Lyon’s astute use of pressure to contain the situation once they had asserted their grip on the game, and Melbourne’s self-destructive wastefulness, assured that outcome. The old adage about the insanity of repeatedly doing something and expecting a different result, was out there. Two years ago, the score line in Melbourne’s loss to the Giants at this same ground was 5 goals 15 behinds - a ratio of one goal per four scoring shots - was perfectly replicated with yesterday’s 7 goals 21 behinds. 
    This has been going on for a while and opens up a number of questions. I’ll put forward a few that come to mind from this performance. The obvious first question is whether the club can find a suitable coach to instruct players on proper kicking techniques or is this a skill that can no longer be developed at this stage of the development of our playing group? Another concern is the team's ability to counter an opponent's dominance during a run on as exemplified by the Saints in the first quarter. Did the Demons underestimate their opponents, considering St Kilda's goals during this period were scored by relatively unknown forwards? Furthermore, given the modest attendance of 6,721 at TIO Traeger Park and the team's poor past performances at this venue, is it prudent to prioritize financial gain over potentially sacrificing valuable premiership points by relinquishing home ground advantage, notwithstanding the cultural significance of the team's connection to the Red Centre? 

      • Like
    • 4 replies
  • PREGAME: Collingwood

    After a disappointing loss in Alice Springs the Demons return to the MCG to take on the Magpies in the annual King's Birthday Big Freeze for MND game. Who comes in and who goes out?

      • Like
    • 202 replies
  • PODCAST: St. Kilda

    The Demonland Podcast will air LIVE on Monday, 2nd June @ 8:00pm. Join Binman, George & I as we have a chat with former Demon ruckman Jeff White about his YouTube channel First Use where he dissects ruck setups and contests. We'll then discuss the Dees disappointing loss to the Saints in Alice Springs.
    Your questions and comments are a huge part of our podcast so please post anything you want to ask or say below and we'll give you a shout out on the show.
    Listen LIVE: https://demonland.com/

      • Thanks
      • Like
    • 47 replies
  • POSTGAME: St. Kilda

    After kicking the first goal of the match the Demons were always playing catch up against the Saints in Alice Spring and could never make the most of their inside 50 entries to wrestle back the lead.

      • Like
    • 330 replies
  • VOTES: St. Kilda

    Max Gawn still has a massive lead in the Demonland Player of the Year award as Christian Petracca, Jake Bowey, Clayton Oliver & Kozzy Pickett round out the Top 5. Your votes please. 6, 5, 4, 3, 2 & 1

      • Sad
      • Like
    • 32 replies