5 hours ago, daisycutter said:

waiting for siciy's advocate to claim siciiy was the real victim here

 

poor guy is from a broken family (club)

You can blame the afl and their matrix for Sicily not getting a ban.

AFL deals up another howler straight up in 2024.
I knew they would but didn't think it'd be so early in the year.
Prepare for more as the season wears on.
Mind boggling MRO decisions and corrupt umpiring/goal reviews are the reasons the game's losing its integrity.
 

I didn't punch him hard at all........

He kicked another player .

Ok he didn't sink in the proverbial slipper but he had a go.

One week just for the optics of it all.

Another week for the mug on him.

 

19 hours ago, daisycutter said:

waiting for siciy's advocate to claim siciiy was the real victim here

Or that his victim changed direction and ran into his foot...

Becoming so predictable now. Big name player gets suspended. Tribunal hands out get out of jail free card.

But, your honour, kicking is surely a football action. 

Kicking. Yeah but but but it’s a star player and yeah but but but it’s a soft one …free to play. ITS A JOKE. Imv it’s still a dog act.  It was worth one week.  

I swear it is a criteria of the tribunal to determine who they're playing next.  "Who's the opposition next round?"  "Melbourne." "Oh, let's clear him then."

When I played football in the 1950-60 kicking anyone was punished harshly by the tribunal but we seem to have gone woke on etiquette of the game where brutality and disgusting behaviour towards your opponent is ok.

 

6 minutes ago, Demonland said:

 

Any talk on Newcomes’ late shirtfront on Clarry?

14 minutes ago, Redleg said:

Any talk on Newcomes’ late shirtfront on Clarry?

Of course not.  

4 matches for Wright? that’s over the top. No malice in that

1 hour ago, Redleg said:

Any talk on Newcomes’ late shirtfront on Clarry?

That Preeek should go but wont for 2 weeks for that late hit. If it was an AFL DARLING he would go for 3-4.

35 minutes ago, DubDee said:

4 matches for Wright? that’s over the top. No malice in that

Agree

He was legitimately well positioned (and very almost timed) to take a chest mark, he was running in a straight line at the direction of the ball that was kicked to him as the leading target 

Cunningham was running on a backwards diagonal, which was courageous and a legitimate play but significantly contributed to timing and impact of contact

Both player make decisions in real time. Ump called play on in real time...

46 minutes ago, DubDee said:

4 matches for Wright? that’s over the top. No malice in that

starts at 4

should be 4-6

worse than peppa-pig, not as bad as webster

4 minutes ago, whatwhat say what said:

starts at 4

should be 4-6

worse than peppa-pig, not as bad as webster

No way is it worse than SPP

Wright, Cunningham and the Ball all arrived at the same time. SPP hit a player who had clean possession of the ball, then got tackled and spun by another Port player, SPP arrived 3rd with a high bump instead of a tackle

 

 

 

 

Edited March 24, 20241 yr by Graeme Yeats' Mullet

1 hour ago, DubDee said:

4 matches for Wright? that’s over the top. No malice in that

Wright clearly recognised that he was not going to be first to the ball, because when it arrived he had already left the ground at speed and braced his shoulder for contact with Cunningham's head. Cunningham was in Wright's direct line of sight, whereas Cunningham could not see Wright coming.

If Wright had done that to Clayton Oliver (or any of our players, for that matter), everyone on Demonland would be calling for a a long suspension.

19 minutes ago, Dee-monic said:

Wright clearly recognised that he was not going to be first to the ball, because when it arrived he had already left the ground at speed and braced his shoulder for contact with Cunningham's head. Cunningham was in Wright's direct line of sight, whereas Cunningham could not see Wright coming.

If Wright had done that to Clayton Oliver (or any of our players, for that matter), everyone on Demonland would be calling for a a long suspension.

he left the ground to contest the ball. then i’m the air realised he wouldn’t get it. what can he do in the air?

2 hours ago, Redleg said:

Any talk on Newcomes’ late shirtfront on Clarry?

wasn’t high. maybe a fine at best

42 minutes ago, DubDee said:

wasn’t high. maybe a fine at best

But the Tribunal has already ruled a hard bump can whiplash the head and cause a concussion. They have suspended previously.

Ask Kozzie about his low impact to Bailey Smiths chest, how he felt about the 2 weeks suspension he got.

 

3 minutes ago, Redleg said:

But the Tribunal has already ruled a hard bump can whiplash the head and cause a concussion. They have suspended previously.

Ask Kozzie about his low impact to Bailey Smiths chest, how he felt about the 2 weeks suspension he got.

 

are you seriously comparing both bumps as equal? 

if so, best to end the conversation there

9 minutes ago, Redleg said:

But the Tribunal has already ruled a hard bump can whiplash the head and cause a concussion. They have suspended previously.

Ask Kozzie about his low impact to Bailey Smiths chest, how he felt about the 2 weeks suspension he got.

 

I know the MRO triggers you Red from every angle, but Kozzie was extremely lucky he didn’t catch Smith in the head last year. 

Edited March 24, 20241 yr by Dee Zephyr

On 05/03/2024 at 19:38, Demonland said:

 

I hate Gleeson. Hate. Biased POS.

Just as avoidable as Maynard’s hit.

Who does Gleeson barrack for .

Oh no poor brayden might miss a finals