SA Footy

At the risk of having one particular moron poster on this site calling me a conspiracy theorist yet again........................

Byron Pickett laying out Ryan Crowley while wearing a Melbourne guernsey = no citation from the AFL tribunal.

Byron Pickett going through Brendan Krummel like a train wreck while wearing a Kangaroos guernsey = no citation from AFL tribunal.

Byron Pickett going through James Begley while wearing a Power guernsey = 6 weeks suspension

Byron Pickett laying out Simon Wiggins while wearing a Power guernsey (in a far less severe incident) = 2 weeks suspension!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

What the F*&% gives????

it proves that the AFL tribunal and the AFL in general hate the SA teams in the AFL, it happens to all SA based players doesnt matter if player for the crows or power. they get suspended whilst victorian based players may commit a similar or more serious offence and nothing happens. its been going on since the crows entered the AFL.

Good to see KG and Cornsey posting on this site.

nah wedgie, not KG or Cornesy but, just an observation that i have made over the years of watching the AFL and highlighted by that soft suspension of Andrew McLeod a few years back if that was a victorian nothing would have happend about it.

The six weeks Byron copped for that 'hit' on Begley was a joke.

Good to see that he's back playing good footy again.

And still dishing out bone-crunching bumps!

Reakon he might have something to prove when he plays the Power.

God help anyone who gets in his way...

Magpiespower wrote:
Reakon he might have something to prove when he plays the Power.

I reckon catching taxis would do just that....

I think that this topic needs a little attention.

Port have made a mistake by trading him !!!

The six weeks he got for the begley incident was more for the potential of injury rather than the damaged it caused. It was one of the more reckless things I have seen on the footy field and could of caused a paralysing injury. I think he got what he deserved FWIW

Byron got shafted because Begley took his eyes off it and was fumbling around.

When a player has his head over the ball, you do not try and hip-and-shoulder the bloke coming from the front of him, regardless if he cannot pick the thing up. It is way too dangerous. Most people realise that except for Byron.

So you are suggesting Pickett lined him up?

No, I am suggesting that Byron does not have the intelligence to realise the impact that his actions can cause.

I think they were both at fault for the way the clash turned out.

Begley needed to be cleaner with the ball and Pickett needed to be cleaner with the bump.

Pickett deserved games - but 6 games was not correct.

I don't agree. Yes Begley should of been cleaner with the ball but Byron should of gone for the ball himself if it was there to be won

MW wrote:No, I am suggesting that Byron does not have the intelligence to realise the impact that his actions can cause.

Your kidding aren't you mate? Why do you think he bump's as hard as he does,he knows exactly what damage can be caused.The Begley incident was a case of poor timing and Begleys fumble.A split second either way and it would never have happened,no doubting the potential for injury,but every time you run out on the ground that potential is there.Getting suspended for "potential injury" is crap at best.

West Adelaide fans are hardly in a position to question some one's intelligence......

Booney wrote:

MW wrote:No, I am suggesting that Byron does not have the intelligence to realise the impact that his actions can cause.

Your kidding aren't you mate? Why do you think he bump's as hard as he does,he knows exactly what damage can be caused.The Begley incident was a case of poor timing and Begleys fumble.A split second either way and it would never have happened,no doubting the potential for injury,but every time you run out on the ground that potential is there.Getting suspended for "potential injury" is crap at best.

West Adelaide fans are hardly in a position to question some one's intelligence......

Thats why they have the words "reckless" and "intentional" at the tribunal to differenciate between the seriousness of each offense.

You are quite naive to think that it was Begleys fault that Byron did what he did.

And the Westies comment is valid! (this year anyway...)

MW wrote:

Booney wrote:

MW wrote:No, I am suggesting that Byron does not have the intelligence to realise the impact that his actions can cause.

Your kidding aren't you mate? Why do you think he bump's as hard as he does,he knows exactly what damage can be caused.The Begley incident was a case of poor timing and Begleys fumble.A split second either way and it would never have happened,no doubting the potential for injury,but every time you run out on the ground that potential is there.Getting suspended for "potential injury" is crap at best.

West Adelaide fans are hardly in a position to question some one's intelligence......

Thats why they have the words "reckless" and "intentional" at the tribunal to differenciate between the seriousness of each offense.

You are quite naive to think that it was Begleys fault that Byron did what he did.

And the Westies comment is valid! (this year anyway...)

Reckless,negligent,intentional are all subjective.

I did not suggest Begley had a role in the incident,I merely stated a split second either way and things would have been different.

MW wrote:

Booney wrote:

MW wrote:No, I am suggesting that Byron does not have the intelligence to realise the impact that his actions can cause.

Your kidding aren't you mate? Why do you think he bump's as hard as he does,he knows exactly what damage can be caused.The Begley incident was a case of poor timing and Begleys fumble.A split second either way and it would never have happened,no doubting the potential for injury,but every time you run out on the ground that potential is there.Getting suspended for "potential injury" is crap at best.

Booney wrote:I did not suggest Begley had a role in the incident

hmmmm.....

Like I said,pick it up and nothing goes wrong.....