by bayman » Wed Sep 13, 2006 8:24 pm
by BPBRB » Wed Sep 13, 2006 8:35 pm
bayman wrote:i saw what parry did at norwood earlier in the year & for him to get off, mouse had to as well its all about consistency in the system also remember this is sanfl football not afl ballet` football as both would've got 3-6 games in that grade as for cupido yes he was stiff he probably should've got a reprimand at worst (unless he has been up before ?)
as for officials or not they're allowed they're opinion on this site no one knows who they are unless others give it away i know phantom panther but will not divulge his/her identity & i'll see you at the cricket throughout the year no doubt
by blueandwhite » Wed Sep 13, 2006 8:44 pm
by bayman » Wed Sep 13, 2006 8:52 pm
blueandwhite wrote:The sanfl have obviously set a precedent now. Its open season on a player standing under a high kick going for a mark. I just hope no-one gets killed.
As for Cupido's decision, I cannot beleive that a field umpire could be so f---n dumb to fall for the biggest dive of all time. The contact was made with an open hand to the chest. The umpire was behind McConnell at the time and he was the only person at the ground who thought it was a free kick let alone a report.
Oh well we'll just have to stick it up the sanfl even more by beating poort this week.
by BPBRB » Wed Sep 13, 2006 9:01 pm
bayman wrote:blueandwhite wrote:The sanfl have obviously set a precedent now. Its open season on a player standing under a high kick going for a mark. I just hope no-one gets killed.
As for Cupido's decision, I cannot beleive that a field umpire could be so f---n dumb to fall for the biggest dive of all time. The contact was made with an open hand to the chest. The umpire was behind McConnell at the time and he was the only person at the ground who thought it was a free kick let alone a report.
Oh well we'll just have to stick it up the sanfl even more by beating poort this week.
mind you if stupido didn't 'touch him' he would not have got reported in the first place
by bayman » Wed Sep 13, 2006 9:03 pm
BPBRB wrote:bayman wrote:i saw what parry did at norwood earlier in the year & for him to get off, mouse had to as well its all about consistency in the system also remember this is sanfl football not afl ballet` football as both would've got 3-6 games in that grade as for cupido yes he was stiff he probably should've got a reprimand at worst (unless he has been up before ?)
as for officials or not they're allowed they're opinion on this site no one knows who they are unless others give it away i know phantom panther but will not divulge his/her identity & i'll see you at the cricket throughout the year no doubt
Consistency - your joking? Parrys and Backwells incidents are completely different. Did Parry elbow Lower in the head? No. Go look at the video of it Seems to be a hell of a lot of Glenelg people defending Backwell but none have actually watched the vision shown on TV.
by BPBRB » Wed Sep 13, 2006 9:14 pm
bayman wrote:BPBRB wrote:bayman wrote:i saw what parry did at norwood earlier in the year & for him to get off, mouse had to as well its all about consistency in the system also remember this is sanfl football not afl ballet` football as both would've got 3-6 games in that grade as for cupido yes he was stiff he probably should've got a reprimand at worst (unless he has been up before ?)
as for officials or not they're allowed they're opinion on this site no one knows who they are unless others give it away i know phantom panther but will not divulge his/her identity & i'll see you at the cricket throughout the year no doubt
Consistency - your joking? Parrys and Backwells incidents are completely different. Did Parry elbow Lower in the head? No. Go look at the video of it Seems to be a hell of a lot of Glenelg people defending Backwell but none have actually watched the vision shown on TV.
no i'm not joking parry came from about 40 metres (in the dark) mouse from about 25 metres, if your going to crucify someone fine, but when similar actions are put up to you, you dont like it.
i'll say it again YES HE SHOULD HAVE GONE (MY OPINION) BUT WHEN COMPARED TO PARRY (SIMILAR) THE TRIBUNAL HAS TO BE CONSISTENT & HAD TO THROW IT OUT, AS IT SHOULD BE FAIR TO EVERY PLAYER FROM EVERY CLUB
by bayman » Wed Sep 13, 2006 9:32 pm
by smac » Wed Sep 13, 2006 10:12 pm
BPBRB wrote:There not similar cases - Parry only knocked Lower over - he never tried to take his head off with an elbow like Backwell intended to do and suceeded.
by mal » Wed Sep 13, 2006 10:31 pm
smac wrote:BPBRB wrote:There not similar cases - Parry only knocked Lower over - he never tried to take his head off with an elbow like Backwell intended to do and suceeded.
I've told you a million times not to exagerate!
by smac » Wed Sep 13, 2006 10:37 pm
mal wrote:smac wrote:BPBRB wrote:There not similar cases - Parry only knocked Lower over - he never tried to take his head off with an elbow like Backwell intended to do and suceeded.
I've told you a million times not to exagerate!
SMAC, leave BP alone ...he's my bunny
by BPBRB » Wed Sep 13, 2006 11:31 pm
bayman wrote:i bow to your obvious intellegience as you state you can 'know' what backwell INTENDED TO DO i dont know anybody else that can know what another person INTENDS TO DO, if you watch both clashes they are very similar parry hit more from behind that is the only difference its that your too one eyed to admit it, i am very happy he got off as i backed him at 40/1 to win the medal but it did not stop me giving an honest assesment without putting my heart or pocket in the way why dont you try be impartial ?
by bayman » Wed Sep 13, 2006 11:32 pm
by Pseudo » Thu Sep 14, 2006 11:59 am
mal wrote:SMAC, leave BP alone ...he's my bunny
by Wedgie » Thu Sep 14, 2006 2:01 pm
by Wedgie » Thu Sep 14, 2006 2:33 pm
by Wedgie » Thu Sep 14, 2006 2:42 pm
smac wrote:You should be almost back by now anyway?
by smac » Thu Sep 14, 2006 2:52 pm
Wedgie wrote:smac wrote:You should be almost back by now anyway?
Ive been held up a bit on the Pakistan/Afghanastan border but hope to make up some time on the way back by just swimming direct.
by Punk Rooster » Thu Sep 14, 2006 2:54 pm
Wedgie wrote:Media Release from SAFC :
Panthers take suspension to Supreme Court
Following a one match suspension handed down to Damian Cupido by the SANFL Tribunal on Tuesday night, the South Adelaide FC has decided to take the matter to the Supreme Court.
The footage shown at the hearing clearly showed Cupido make minimal contact with an open hand to the chest on Glenelg player Justin McConnell.
“Normally we would not dream of such action, but following what we view as an extraordinary decision and the fact that there is no appeal mechanism in place, we believe we have an obligation to our Club, Damian and the members to have the matter reviewed at a higher level. Unfortunately the only avenue open to us is a hearing in the Supreme Court†advised South Adelaide FC General Manager Ben Kavenagh.
AFL clubs have the right to appeal Tribunal decisions as do WAFL, VFL and even all country and metropolitan league clubs throughout Victoria.
“The matter is now in the hands of our Solicitor and no further comment will be made by the South Adelaide FC until after the hearing†Kavenagh stated. "
Ralph Wiggum wrote:That's where I saw the leprechaun. He told me to burn things
Competitions SANFL Official Site | Country Footy SA | Southern Football League | VFL Footy
Club Forums Snouts Louts | The Roost | Redlegs Forum |