SA Footy

Spargo wrote:

woodublieve12 wrote:Good to see common sense prevail in the buddy case. Nothing in it

Chance to tackle, chose to bump opponent in the head instead.
This goes against everything the AFL is trying to stamp out.
Truly baffling.

I think the first contact was with the shoulder, however, I tend to agree that the AFL is trying to stamp this sort of bump out. I see both sides here.

I think the actual bump/contact isn't worthy of a suspension, but I think the action of choosing to bump a player who is head over the ball is.

I'm ok with this one being a fine, I'm not with Selwoods though.

It all comes down to impact vs intent.
It seems every other incident other than a jumper punch is graded on impact not intent, which is a joke.
Selwood clearly wanted to hurt Mitchell with an elbow to the back of the neck/head...and Mitchell knew it. The only thing that saved Selwood games was Mitchell got straight up.

MW wrote:It all comes down to impact vs intent.
It seems every other incident other than a jumper punch is graded on impact not intent, which is a joke.
Selwood clearly wanted to hurt Mitchell with an elbow to the back of the neck/head...and Mitchell knew it. The only thing that saved Selwood games was Mitchell got straight up.

Watts got right up after Rance clobbered him and Rance got 2...nothing like consistency.

Well they are consistent in how they treat Lance and Joel at the MRP...

MW wrote:Well they are consistent in how they treat Lance and Joel at the MRP...

Definitely protected species but I'm not complaining.

nor should you!

Spargo wrote:

woodublieve12 wrote:Good to see common sense prevail in the buddy case. Nothing in it

Chance to tackle, chose to bump opponent in the head instead.
This goes against everything the AFL is trying to stamp out.
Truly baffling.

Probably lucky not to get a game given the message the AFL has sent in the last 5 or so years, but I'm glad he didn't, would hate to see anyone go for that.

Schuey seemed lucky for mine, Selwood too probably, and I wish there was a "Dickhead" charge so that no-talent hack Thompson from the Roo's could have gone.

JK wrote:

Spargo wrote:

woodublieve12 wrote:Good to see common sense prevail in the buddy case. Nothing in it

Chance to tackle, chose to bump opponent in the head instead.
This goes against everything the AFL is trying to stamp out.
Truly baffling.

Probably lucky not to get a game given the message the AFL has sent in the last 5 or so years, but I'm glad he didn't, would hate to see anyone go for that.

Schuey seemed lucky for mine, Selwood too probably, and I wish there was a "Dickhead" charge so that no-talent hack Thompson from the Roo's could have gone.

Can't argue with that, although he could be a "top-liner".

Can't believe some people's hysteria over Selwood still, he got tripped, stuck his arm out to protect himself like everyone does and landed on the guy who tripped him. If that was a game then there would be 50 games suspensions every game. The only reason he got fined is because so many fools tried to make something out of nothing. Classic tall poppy syndrome.

Wedgie wrote:Can't believe some people's hysteria over Selwood still, he got tripped, stuck his arm out to protect himself like everyone does and landed on the guy who tripped him. If that was a game then there would be 50 games suspensions every game. The only reason he got fined is because so many fools tried to make something out of nothing. Classic tall poppy syndrome.

Generally when people fall the natural reaction is to place the hands (or at least the forearms) out.
But I agree it was purely coincidence (if not truly courageous) that he went with the elbow & even more coincidental that it landed in the back of his head.

Nathan Jones out for 4-6 weeks

O'Meara has a "different" knee injury

What did Zak Jones do to get reported???

Found this amusing.........

amber_fluid wrote:Found this amusing.........

IMG_1491.JPG

I might just wait to see how we do this weekend before I comment on that picture Amber.

therisingblues wrote:

amber_fluid wrote:Found this amusing.........

IMG_1491.JPG

I might just wait to see how we do this weekend before I comment on that picture Amber.

It'll be a walk in the park based on the last 2 weeks

Timing has never been my strength either!

woodublieve12 wrote:What did Zak Jones do to get reported???

Not sure but I'll take anything we can get

Striking, off the ball.

Spargo wrote:Striking, off the ball.

Only footage I could find is footage from about 130m away. All you see is 2 players come together. 1 goes down. Jones runs off. Can't really see what he did.

helicopterking wrote:

Spargo wrote:Striking, off the ball.

Only footage I could find is footage from about 130m away. All you see is 2 players come together. 1 goes down. Jones runs off. Can't really see what he did.

Yeah can't find anything really that shows what happened properly. Bit odd

Wedgie wrote:Can't believe some people's hysteria over Selwood still, he got tripped, stuck his arm out to protect himself like everyone does and landed on the guy who tripped him. If that was a game then there would be 50 games suspensions every game. The only reason he got fined is because so many fools tried to make something out of nothing. Classic tall poppy syndrome.

People can't wait to rip into Joel. They'd all love to have him in their midfield or leading their team in the last quarter of a tight game though. Stay Jelly folks. They've changed the rules because people have bleated but you know what, he gets the frees because he puts his head in places where many players don't have the balls to put their hips. Dead set champ.

regards,

REB