Stewart Crameri can accept 2 games for rough conduct on Dylan Addison. Brendon Goddard can accept 2 games for striking Sam Wright. Taylor Walker can accept 3 games for rough conduct on Steven Morris. Penalty impacted by bad record.
I'm guessing the crows will challenge the "high impact" ruling on walker given morris was clearly uninjured?
Walker was charged with medium impact and high contact (meaning head), can't see him getting out on these terms though he should go to the tribunal to make the umpire admit he f@cked up. Problem is that would cost him a match on the sidelines; no way they would do that. Mind you I want to hear Sando's thoughts on the matter because at the presser afterwards he said he loved Walker's actions! I could see Guerra maybe trying to get himself downgraded so he plays in the match v Collingwood in 3 weeks time.
Ahh, my bad. I must have misread the high contact and medium impact bit. But yeah, don't think he can get it downgraded to low impact... Can you tell I have him in my team?... lol
<blockquote>Quote from Fez on July 2, 2012, 16:08 Guerra offered 3 weeks as well </blockquote> Yea i only put down the supercoach relevant ones
Only thing they could do with Walker is say that it was low or negligible or even not worthy of taking to the tribunal impact, because Morris went on to play out the rest of the match. Bit the same with Guerra, try to put the incident down but accept a slightly lower penalty but still a few games. Maybe the MRP came down hard on players thinking well even if it gets downgraded they still go for a few weeks.
Guerra's a Hammerhead, wouldn't you know it. Would have won overall this week in the ORFFL if I hadn't had Gunston and Stokes cop the sub vest. A shame about Guerra and Shiel but we press on regardless.
Brilliant...Walker and Goddard's suspension is going to have to make me re-think on trading. On a side note, Goddard has been quite disappointing this year. He has been averaging 101 which is still good but his role has changed slightly with less midfield time. Also, just realised that Buddy is probably not playing this week. Fantastic!!!
Looking like a dismal round - Goddard and Walker out, Buddy and Chappy in question. SC is killing me this year.
Tough choices ahead, number of trades remaining becoming crucial, much earlier than expected. Buddy = 2-3 weeks according to Doc Larkins. Goddard = 2 weeks. Walker = 3 weeks. Crameri = 2 weeks. Guerra = 3 weeks. Everyone has at least 2 of them, many have 3 & some even 4. Anyone ranked in the top 200, who sits and waits, is likely to drop 200 or more places over the next 3 weeks. Anyone ranked 200th - 800th, who has the trades and is prepared to use them, could improve their position by 200 or more. I'm in the latter group with 7 trades remaining & am only chasing league, but if I were in the top 100 & still in the hunt for over all, this situation would be very difficult strategy wise.
MRP/Tribunal inconsistency needs addressing. Guerra's hit on Betts was careless, dangerous & does deserve some reprimand, 3 weeks does seem excessive though, given it was deemed reckless, although no intent to cause injury. & no, I don't have either of them. A few weeks ago Betts v Geelong had his hand stomped on, deliberately, then Josh Hunt repositioned his right foot to more firmly pin Betts hand into the turf, & then he raised his left foot off the ground, shifting all his body weight onto Betts hand. Consider Josh Hunt weighs over 100 kg, concentrate that weight onto 6 studs of his boot & onto Eddie's hand. That's a shitload of pressure concentrated onto a small area onto a hand. A deliberate attempt to injure a player. For me, that's a serious offense, I would've rubbed Hunt out for half a season over that, It's not where any of us want to see footy heading, malicious intentional injury to players. That deliberate act cost Hunt absolutely nothing, other than complete loss of any respect from me. Seriously AFL, WTF?
^ ^ tbh watching that Guerra hit I thought that was really really bad - you can't attack the head like that. Hit like that could make someone a quadraplegic. That's the difference between the Josh Hunt one - worst Betts could have ended up with a broken finger, 6 weeks in a cast at the most. The Guerra hit? That could have been a wheelchair for life.
& while taking a swipe @the AFl, why not let players and officials bet on their own team, with the provision that it be public knowledge? If I own or have shares in a racehorse, not only am I allowed to bet, I even get the incentive of extra % on the odds by bookies. Public knowledge being the proviso, sure if I'm a player or member of coaching staff and I bet against my team then gotta smell a rat, but why can't someone publicly bet on their own team to do well? & ... "Daniher has spent significant time at the club this year working with the fitness and conditioning staff, and tends to be at the club most days. Under AFL rules he is not allowed to train with the team yet." wtf? He's 17, with the bombers under the father son rule, bombers are working with him, he could benefit heaps from being mentored by elite seniors, fair enough not being allowed to actually play seniors at that age yet, but honestly, where do the afl get off with a rule that he's not allowed to even train with the team? If a club wanted to allow even primary school kids to train with them, where's the issue? what possible reason could the afl offer and not sound like total morons?
<blockquote>Quote from Astro39 on July 2, 2012, 23:51 ^ ^ tbh watching that Guerra hit I thought that was really really bad - you can't attack the head like that. Hit like that could make someone a quadraplegic. That's the difference between the Josh Hunt one - worst Betts could have ended up with a broken finger, 6 weeks in a cast at the most. The Guerra hit? That could have been a wheelchair for life. </blockquote> I understand what you're saying, have watched the replays from both incidents a dozen times each, my issue is with the intent, something every court in the nation takes into consideration. Look at Guerra, where is he looking?, not at Eddie, but at the ball, Eddie wasn't even in his line of sight when contact was made, he had eyes only for the ball. I agree potential for serious injury was greater with the Guerra incident, but there was no intent to cause harm. Even though the Hunt incident had lesser potential for injury, it was a blatant attempt to injure. In a court of law, &/or morally, If defendant "A" with determination, chases down a pedestrian, runs him over & only breaks his arm, & defendant "B" accidently hits a pedestrian, breaking both arms and a leg, despite the end result, taking into account intent, who has committed the more heinous act?
<blockquote>Quote from fidelsfinger on July 2, 2012, 23:56 I need to start a thread some other time, sober, called "Demetriou WTF?"</blockquote> Start the thread! I would add that the stupid rules that may see Melbourne miss out on Viney would be included in there. IMO - Goddard should get off, nothing in it.
If Addison's jaw wasn't broken I reckon Crameri should've got off. Was a clumsy bump but doesn't deserve 3 reduced to 2 in my opinion.
The AFL love their results-based reporting though- Heck, even the Walker tackle had "after effects". I wonder if he would have gotten less punishment if not for said after-effects. Not saying it should have been given, but damn, the action is what counts, it shouldn't be results based. (Though, as a Bombers fan, to be honest, I'm kinda glad Crameri is getting a forced 2 weeks off. He's been playing sore and could do with it.)
<blockquote>Quote from fidelsfinger on July 2, 2012, 23:53 "Daniher has spent significant time at the club this year working with the fitness and conditioning staff, and tends to be at the club most days. Under AFL rules he is not allowed to train with the team yet." wtf? He's 17, with the bombers under the father son rule, bombers are working with him, he could benefit heaps from being mentored by elite seniors, fair enough not being allowed to actually play seniors at that age yet, but honestly, where do the afl get off with a rule that he's not allowed to even train with the team? If a club wanted to allow even primary school kids to train with them, where's the issue? what possible reason could the afl offer and not sound like total morons? </blockquote> The doggies have been doing this for ages. Both Wallis and Libba were trained and conditioned at the club from about the age of 16, and I think the club is doing the same with a few more father-son picks coming up in the next few years. I like the initiative. The risk is all on the club anyway (in the case that they cannot match a draft bid from another club).