SA Footy

bennymacca wrote:

Booney wrote:

Wedgie wrote:Hodges incident worse than Lewis?
I officially have no idea about anything.

You,me and 99% of the football world mate.

i dunno - using elbows means it is immediately an intentional conduct thing. thats different to being extremely late and careless in a spoil

Hodge, IMO, probably meant to get Swallow in the chest area, he just threw it too high. If Hodge had got him in the chest, like we see dozens of times a game, maybe a free kick at most.

Lewis, IMO, was late, with a swinging arm, high, to a player eyes on the ball, much worse.

reckon hodge will get 3 as well...

Throw the book at the two Hawthorn carnts.

*geez i wish some blokes on my team played the way these two do.

Lewis' described as "careless" - not intentional, LMFAO.

Booney wrote:

bennymacca wrote:

Booney wrote:

Wedgie wrote:Hodges incident worse than Lewis?
I officially have no idea about anything.

You,me and 99% of the football world mate.

i dunno - using elbows means it is immediately an intentional conduct thing. thats different to being extremely late and careless in a spoil

Hodge, IMO, probably meant to get Swallow in the chest area, he just threw it too high. If Hodge had got him in the chest, like we see dozens of times a game, maybe a free kick at most.

Lewis, IMO, was late, with a swinging arm, high, to a player eyes on the ball, much worse.

Hodge and Lewis, IMO are typical Hawthorn dogs who should have got life.

regards,

REB

Booney wrote:

bennymacca wrote:

Booney wrote:

Wedgie wrote:Hodges incident worse than Lewis?
I officially have no idea about anything.

You,me and 99% of the football world mate.

i dunno - using elbows means it is immediately an intentional conduct thing. thats different to being extremely late and careless in a spoil

Hodge, IMO, probably meant to get Swallow in the chest area, he just threw it too high. If Hodge had got him in the chest, like we see dozens of times a game, maybe a free kick at most.

Lewis, IMO, was late, with a swinging arm, high, to a player eyes on the ball, much worse.

Had to double check that post to make sure I hadon't posted it. Agree 100%

Booney wrote:

bennymacca wrote:

Booney wrote:

Wedgie wrote:Hodges incident worse than Lewis?
I officially have no idea about anything.

You,me and 99% of the football world mate.

i dunno - using elbows means it is immediately an intentional conduct thing. thats different to being extremely late and careless in a spoil

Hodge, IMO, probably meant to get Swallow in the chest area, he just threw it too high. If Hodge had got him in the chest, like we see dozens of times a game, maybe a free kick at most.

Lewis, IMO, was late, with a swinging arm, high, to a player eyes on the ball, much worse.

Hodge was also when the play had stopped, got to his feet and belted the poor bastard. Lewis intentional but at least he put up a piss weak attempt to hide it in a spoil......

Alistair Clarkson has a lot to answer for

Can't believe Lewis only got 2 for that and May gets the same for his hip and shoulder.

Ridiculous

IMHO and it might start people yelling at me but I don't think Steven May should've got anything but then ends up getting 3!

Tribunal has been pretty good this year. Until now, That decision baffles me. Yes it's unfortunat what happened to Rockcliff (and no one wants to see Players get injured) But it's a contact sport and that was just an unfortunate incident.

Surely Gold Coast appeal that???

Havent read all this thread and will probably get at laughed at for this.

But i honestly believe Hodges elbow was actually an attempt at heavy forearm push to the chest that went wrong.

No where near as bad as Lewis swinging arm which if it wasn't on a footy field would have been considered a 'king' hit.

I honestly think Hodge and Lewis have corsed so much talk as people hate the fact Hawthorn has had Sucess over the past few years.

I thought right from the start Lewis 3 down to 2 and Hodge 2 down to 1 and May not even front the tribunal.

I think Hodgy will get at least 3 now going straight to the tribunal.

carey wrote:IMHO and it might start people yelling at me but I don't think Steven May should've got anything but then ends up getting 3!

Tribunal has been pretty good this year. Until now, That decision baffles me. Yes it's unfortunat what happened to Rockcliff (and no one wants to see Players get injured) But it's a contact sport and that was just an unfortunate incident.

Surely Gold Coast appeal that???

Totally agree, just a footy collision

Brodlach wrote:

carey wrote:IMHO and it might start people yelling at me but I don't think Steven May should've got anything but then ends up getting 3!

Tribunal has been pretty good this year. Until now, That decision baffles me. Yes it's unfortunat what happened to Rockcliff (and no one wants to see Players get injured) But it's a contact sport and that was just an unfortunate incident.

Surely Gold Coast appeal that???

Totally agree, just a footy collision

Yep just because someone gets injured doesn't mean that someone has to be reported.

For me the intention should be the number 1 factor taking into account when handing suspensions

Unfortunatly it's the damage caused that has become the major factor despite the fact there will ALWAYS be accidental collisions in aussie rules

whufc wrote:

Brodlach wrote:

carey wrote:IMHO and it might start people yelling at me but I don't think Steven May should've got anything but then ends up getting 3!

Tribunal has been pretty good this year. Until now, That decision baffles me. Yes it's unfortunat what happened to Rockcliff (and no one wants to see Players get injured) But it's a contact sport and that was just an unfortunate incident.

Surely Gold Coast appeal that???

Totally agree, just a footy collision

Yep just because someone gets injured doesn't mean that someone has to be reported.

For me the intention should be the number 1 factor taking into account when handing suspensions

Unfortunatly it's the damage caused that has become the major factor despite the fact there will ALWAYS be accidental collisions in aussie rules

I can't believe that got games, that hit didn't even look all that hard May was taller which caused the shoulder to hit the head, no intention to put him out just wanted to have body contact to get the ball, was there even a free kick given?

carey wrote:IMHO and it might start people yelling at me but I don't think Steven May should've got anything but then ends up getting 3!

Tribunal has been pretty good this year. Until now, That decision baffles me. Yes it's unfortunat what happened to Rockcliff (and no one wants to see Players get injured) But it's a contact sport and that was just an unfortunate incident.

Surely Gold Coast appeal that???

I'm with you on that one.

Booney wrote:

bennymacca wrote:

Booney wrote:

Wedgie wrote:Hodges incident worse than Lewis?
I officially have no idea about anything.

You,me and 99% of the football world mate.

i dunno - using elbows means it is immediately an intentional conduct thing. thats different to being extremely late and careless in a spoil

Hodge, IMO, probably meant to get Swallow in the chest area, he just threw it too high. If Hodge had got him in the chest, like we see dozens of times a game, maybe a free kick at most.

Lewis, IMO, was late, with a swinging arm, high, to a player eyes on the ball, much worse.

Lewis's one was so late that it was marked down in round 6.

Lightning McQueen wrote:

carey wrote:IMHO and it might start people yelling at me but I don't think Steven May should've got anything but then ends up getting 3!

Tribunal has been pretty good this year. Until now, That decision baffles me. Yes it's unfortunat what happened to Rockcliff (and no one wants to see Players get injured) But it's a contact sport and that was just an unfortunate incident.

Surely Gold Coast appeal that???

I'm with you on that one.

Now May has 3 weeks, what an absolute joke.

Feenix wrote:

Lightning McQueen wrote:

carey wrote:IMHO and it might start people yelling at me but I don't think Steven May should've got anything but then ends up getting 3!

Tribunal has been pretty good this year. Until now, That decision baffles me. Yes it's unfortunat what happened to Rockcliff (and no one wants to see Players get injured) But it's a contact sport and that was just an unfortunate incident.

Surely Gold Coast appeal that???

I'm with you on that one.

Now May has 3 weeks, what an absolute joke.

Agree with you but the precedent was set in regards to Fye, Jonas and even an incident by Hartlett a few years back. All were typicall bumps which got games.

The bump has been dead for a while now and anyone choosing to bump will be in striff if it goes slightly off.

Which in itself is more of a joke than tham anything I have seen in our great game.

whufc wrote:Havent read all this thread and will probably get at laughed at for this.

But i honestly believe Hodges elbow was actually an attempt at heavy forearm push to the chest that went wrong.

No where near as bad as Lewis swinging arm which if it wasn't on a footy field would have been considered a 'king' hit.

Totally agree.

Rubbish decision by the tribunal