SA Footy

In fairness to the tribunal the SANFL did release a statement 6 weeks ago that they were going to be tougher in regards to the interpretation of rough conduct anywhere around the head. They've just followed through on what they said which is fair enough IMHO.

frogcake wrote:

topsywaldron wrote:AFL reserves players are obviously protected species.

and so they should be.

No, they should receive the same treatment as other every other player in the competition.

I don't think Clinch's penalty is related to who the offense was committed against, more the nature of the incident and his record.

No problem with dangerous head contact receiving harsher penalties.

topsywaldron wrote:When was the last five match ban handed down at the SANFL tribunal?

AFL reserves players are obviously protected species.

I don't care who it is, whether it be from a bump or being pile driven into the ground, that type of impact is what causes spinal injury and has no place in sport. We had a glaring example in the NRL over the weekend.

beenreal wrote:I don't care who it is, whether it be from a bump or being pile driven into the ground, that type of impact is what causes spinal injury and has no place in sport. We had a glaring example in the NRL over the weekend.

That's the first time you've ever indicated an awareness of the big wide world beyond the creepy Port bunker you scuttle around in.

Well done.

topsywaldron wrote:

beenreal wrote:I don't care who it is, whether it be from a bump or being pile driven into the ground, that type of impact is what causes spinal injury and has no place in sport. We had a glaring example in the NRL over the weekend.

That's the first time you've ever indicated an awareness of the big wide world beyond the creepy Port bunker you scuttle around in.

Well done.

Don't get excited, the tackle in the NRL was 8 days ago on a Monday, not "over the weekend" so you can continue to bag his awareness of the big wide world.

I personally think the intentional ruling is hard to prove. King hits behind play, headbutting etc are intentional. A hip and shoulder that catches the head I don't think can intentional.

The Sleeping Giant wrote:

topsywaldron wrote:When was the last five match ban handed down at the SANFL tribunal?

AFL reserves players are obviously protected species.

If I was a North supporter, I'd be furious.

GO PANTHERS

You can have a one night stand with another chick mate but the mother of your children will always be your true love

johntheclaret wrote:

The Sleeping Giant wrote:

topsywaldron wrote:When was the last five match ban handed down at the SANFL tribunal?

AFL reserves players are obviously protected species.

If I was a North supporter, I'd be furious.

GO PANTHERS

You can have a one night stand with another chick mate but the mother of your children will always be your true love

Pigs arse!!!!

Wedgie wrote:

johntheclaret wrote:

The Sleeping Giant wrote:

topsywaldron wrote:When was the last five match ban handed down at the SANFL tribunal?

AFL reserves players are obviously protected species.

If I was a North supporter, I'd be furious.

GO PANTHERS

You can have a one night stand with another chick mate but the mother of your children will always be your true love

Pigs arse!!!!

Ok, the mother of your children will always be your pigs arse