1 minute ago, Fromgotowoewodin said:

He didn’t do that, it was a clash of heads that caused the damage. 

 

It was a regulation hip & shoulder except the guy didn’t see it coming and got ragdolled because he wasn’t ready for contact. 
 

Parker’s evidence was in line with how I saw it, and the tribunal didn’t disagree, but as he’s caused damage he gets a long holiday. That’s fine I guess but apply that interpretation consistently. I seem to remember an incident in the finals last year where causing damage didn’t matter if you didn’t mean to do it, all of a sudden it does again. 

Swans also tried the good guy discount of only 1 suspension in over 200 games but the tribunal noted he’d been fined 9 times so threw that out too. Fines didn’t count when Cameron tipped Lever on his head so who knows what the rule is there. 

Overall he was always going to go, I tipped 4-5, he got 6 so be it but some consistency would be nice. 

Fair enough, didn't realise it was just a clash of heads, saw the raised elbow at the end and presumed that's what's done the damage. Good example of not presuming things off grainy footage.

Has 1 year left on his contract with Sydney.

Would you offer him 2+1 contract. Will get him for peanuts.

Gives us the midfield depth we need. If we can’t get LDU this has to be a legit target if there’s no one else on the market.

2 hours ago, binman said:

Six weeks for a shepperd?

What's the world coming to?

The calamity! The world is ending.

You can imagine the uproar had Parker done this to, say, Petracca.

Parker should have been rubbed out for 12 weeks. 
 

by the way, this post has some savage trolling, chapeau!

6 weeks to Smith. Parker could have busted his elbow on his face. 

59 minutes ago, Gawndy the Great said:

Has 1 year left on his contract with Sydney.

Would you offer him 2+1 contract. Will get him for peanuts.

Gives us the midfield depth we need. If we can’t get LDU this has to be a legit target if there’s no one else on the market.

yep

he's too good to be playing vfl

it can be the reverse grundy

8 hours ago, Gawndy the Great said:

Has 1 year left on his contract with Sydney.

Would you offer him 2+1 contract. Will get him for peanuts.

Gives us the midfield depth we need. If we can’t get LDU this has to be a legit target if there’s no one else on the market.

We could play him forward and put Tracc back in the guts. And switch them during the match of course

Edited May 21, 2024May 21 by John Demonic

On 20/05/2024 at 17:59, spirit of norm smith said:

Parker CLEARLY RUNS PAST THE BALL 

not even is dispute 

then he goes at Smith and applies head contact 

Intentional 

Head high

SEVERE IMPACT 

6 weeks in my view 

if that’s in suburban footy when I played, there would be an all in brawl 

it was a dog act 

QED.  

11 hours ago, Fromgotowoewodin said:

That’s fine I guess but apply that interpretation consistently.

I get your point but in this case the VFL tribunal is not made up of the same people as the AFL version.

It's a seperate organisation.

So consistency needs to be measured on their past actions.

9 hours ago, layzie said:

6 weeks to Smith. Parker could have busted his elbow on his face. 

Smith not guilty of face to elbow contact, it was a head clash

6 minutes ago, rjay said:

I get your point but in this case the VFL tribunal is not made up of the same people as the AFL version.

It's a seperate organisation.

So consistency needs to be measured on their past actions.

Fair point

I’m still astounded Maynard got off

14 hours ago, Fromgotowoewodin said:

He didn’t do that, it was a clash of heads that caused the damage. 

 

It was a regulation hip & shoulder except the guy didn’t see it coming and got ragdolled because he wasn’t ready for contact. 
 

Parker’s evidence was in line with how I saw it, and the tribunal didn’t disagree, but as he’s caused damage he gets a long holiday. That’s fine I guess but apply that interpretation consistently. I seem to remember an incident in the finals last year where causing damage didn’t matter if you didn’t mean to do it, all of a sudden it does again. 

Swans also tried the good guy discount of only 1 suspension in over 200 games but the tribunal noted he’d been fined 9 times so threw that out too. Fines didn’t count when Cameron tipped Lever on his head so who knows what the rule is there. 

Overall he was always going to go, I tipped 4-5, he got 6 so be it but some consistency would be nice. 

Yes, but am I allowed to point out that Cameron had an elder speak as to his character, plus a reference from a player that has acknowledged many years ago falsely accusing his striking victim of a racial slur to justify/excuse striking.

1 hour ago, Bystander said:

Yes, but am I allowed to point out that Cameron had an elder speak as to his character, plus a reference from a player that has acknowledged many years ago falsely accusing his striking victim of a racial slur to justify/excuse striking.

Point out whatever you like, I don’t even know what your second sentence means tbh

42 minutes ago, Fromgotowoewodin said:

Point out whatever you like, I don’t even know what your second sentence means tbh

Actually I retract that and apologise.

I had read an incorrect report that a misnamed former player had given a reference. That player had some years ago testified that he punched an opponent after racial abuse. He later admitted it was untrue.

The reference in the Cameron case was from Eddie who is a legend.

Mea culpa.

 

 

19 minutes ago, Demonland said:

 

6+4 = 10, seems ok by me!

 

 

I had no idea that Sydney were challenging the decision. I can’t believe it. Hope they give him an extra couple of weeks.