SA Footy

SimonH wrote:It's at 11:25 of the 'Recovery Session' video on the SANFL site.

Barmby could have contested the ball, Phillips was blindsided because he only had eyes for the ball, Barmby decided to go the body instead and hit Phillips with an elbow to the head. That's bad news every day of the week at the Tribunal, or should be, regardless of whether the SANFL Tribunal is now following the path of the AFL. The only real question is whether it's classed as negligent or reckless. I would be flabbergasted if Barmby plays this week. He might as well give it a go at the Tribunal, though, as he could well do better than 3.

Flabbergast away.
'Barmby decided to go the body instead and hit Phillips with an elbow to the head'. Nice yellow journalism.

Sanity prevails in this case

Jim05 wrote:Sanity prevails in this case

Agree that's one reason why I enjoy the SANFL so much.

Though I probably could have handled it if he got one week (three was a joke) based on the way football is heading in regards to protecting the head, and terms such as reckless, forceful contact etc etc.

Didn't think it would eventuate this way but thankfully it did. With the entry of the reserves teams I was so afraid of the SANFL following the AFL's lead in punishing players for common footy collisions - collisions that warrant no more than a free kick or play-on!

CedeNullis wrote:Flabbergast away.
'Barmby decided to go the body instead and hit Phillips with an elbow to the head'. Nice yellow journalism.

Speaking of playing the man, I presume there's a reason why you decided to attack me rather than argue why the phrase was inaccurate. Cheap snipes off the ball—fun for the whole family!

Doddy wrote:So I'm saying:
1. It's OK to play the man even when the ball is right there
2. As long as you act within 5m and you don't get that sacred head then you should be OK.
3. Throw out the charge. 0 games.

Point 2 contradicts point 3, in this case. Anyone who thinks there was no contact with the head, is watching different footage to what I saw.

SimonH wrote:

CedeNullis wrote:Flabbergast away.
'Barmby decided to go the body instead and hit Phillips with an elbow to the head'. Nice yellow journalism.

Speaking of playing the man, I presume there's a reason why you decided to attack me rather than argue why the phrase was inaccurate. Cheap snipes off the ball—fun for the whole family!

If you genuinely think a shepherd, five metres away from the ball, is a 'cheap snipe', then the AFL is winning their war on hardness easier than I thought.

Good result. I would've worn won because of the head contact - but seems there's still a little wiggle room in SANFL interpretations, which is a good thing for all clubs.
The fact they could offer three games and then he gets none is ridiculous.

Dogwatcher wrote:That last one may have gone against him in regards to the offer of three matches?

The runner - Sean Watt. Former Trinity College school captain. Handy cricketer

Ha, old watty. I remember him well. Handy cricketer is stretching it

Jimmy wrote:

Dogwatcher wrote:That last one may have gone against him in regards to the offer of three matches?

The runner - Sean Watt. Former Trinity College school captain. Handy cricketer

Ha, old watty. I remember him well. Handy cricketer is stretching it

Bloody good cricket coach though.... was not surprised at all when I saw the article about the North runner front the tribunal.

South defender Bradley Crabb offered a 1 week suspension by the SANFL Incident Review Panel...

http://www.sanfl.com.au/news/sanfl_news/2453/

Crabb accepted his one match suspension and will miss the clash against the Bulldogs out at Elizabeth...

From the SANFL site:

'North Adelaide defender Ben Williams has been offered a two-match ban for engaging in rough conduct with Norwood’s Simon Phillips on Anzac Day.

The SANFL’s Incident Review Panel deemed that Williams’ conduct was intentional, the contact was high and of medium impact.

Williams has until 9am on Tuesday to decide whether he will accept or contest the charge.'

Id be taking the 2 weeks and running if I was Williams, in AFL it would have been 4-5

Dutchy wrote:Id be taking the 2 weeks and running if I was Williams, in AFL it would have been 4-5

Yep, agreed. I thought Williams would have had carry over points and expected more, seeing the hit a couple of times on The Recovery Session...

Recovery Session seems very selective with incidents and teams to show in so mo over and over and over and hence highlighting things to the SANFL.
2 weeks probably fair but if you slowed down every incident of the game you'd probably have 20 players getting 2 weeks every week.

Recovery Session is prepared by the SANFL, which is hardly the CIA in terms of size and one section being discrete from another. So safe to say that those things targeted by the editors of the Recovery Session have been slated to attract interest anyway.

The most recently published AFL Tribunal booklet says that rough conduct, intentional, high contact, medium impact is 425 basis points (i.e. a 4 game starting point). You can still start from there and get to 2 games, but only if you've got a 'no record for 5 years' discount plus an early guilty plea discount.

SimonH wrote:Recovery Session is prepared by the SANFL

No surprises there, some do have the perspective that they have their favourites.
Cheers for the info.

Wedgie wrote:

SimonH wrote:Recovery Session is prepared by the SANFL

No surprises there, some do have the perspective that they have their favourites.
Cheers for the info.

The Recovery Session is produced and edited by a contractor of the SANFL, the owner of the company that films all the SANFL games...

He uses the Champion Data coding software that highlights all goals, contested marks, injuries, reports etc. All the editor of The Recovery Session has to do is piece them together and tidy it all up into a continuous package...

The incident review panel look over the games on a Monday morning and then if there are any reports or incidents out of the games, these are then emphasised in the Recovery Session end products, following on from what was mentioned above...

SANFL don't really have a say in what gets put in the vision, that is what they pay their contractor to do...

Slattery about to break Grocke's record? According to SANFL show on 5AA he hit a Sturt player late who was stretchered off and has jaw broken in a couple of places. Sometimes these incidents sound worse than they are but that level of injury is rare. Could be an interesting day tomorrow.