SA Footy

Trader wrote:
Huh? is that 1min and 2 seconds into the 4th quarter? Cause Trinity are having a set shot then.
Or is that 1 hour 2 mins into the game, which is in the third quarter, not the 4th?

1 hour and 2 minutes in.

Ah, found it, one hundred and two minutes into the game. Cheers.

Safe to say the tribunal aren't going to look at that.

Trader wrote:Ah, found it, one hundred and two minutes into the game. Cheers.

Safe to say the tribunal aren't going to look at that.

why not?

It's a deliberate punch to the guts is it not?

Those last few minutes, Salisbury West do really well to control the tempo and chip it around hitting their targets.. managed the match very well.

redyellow&blue wrote:

Trader wrote:Ah, found it, one hundred and two minutes into the game. Cheers.

Safe to say the tribunal aren't going to look at that.

why not?

It's a deliberate punch to the guts is it not?

At a guess the Westies lad got red carded and they may lose points, that's only my guess.

The Bedge wrote:Those last few minutes, Salisbury West do really well to control the tempo and chip it around hitting their targets.. managed the match very well.

Three things spring to mind, the number 50 looked like a baby giraffe when he dropped that mark near the goals that could've made it within grasp.

The mullet on #12 for Westies thoroughly deserves a mention.

Well done to Justin Davies for what it seems to pretty much send his team might off to cool down.

Still cracks me up every week how many spectators scream out "deliberate"

The Bedge wrote:Still cracks me up every week how many spectators scream out "deliberate"

Para Hills v Fitzroy the A grade umpire paid deliberate against Fitzroy.

I just laughed......

carey wrote:

The Bedge wrote:Still cracks me up every week how many spectators scream out "deliberate"

Para Hills v Fitzroy the A grade umpire paid deliberate against Fitzroy.

I just laughed......

Proof, ammo umpires watch too much Friday night footy and think they're umpiring AFL

Umpire pinged is deliberate last year when a player kicked the footy 50m up the line.

Free kick, mark, siren and goal.

We lost

redyellow&blue wrote:

Trader wrote:Ah, found it, one hundred and two minutes into the game. Cheers.

Safe to say the tribunal aren't going to look at that.

why not?

It's a deliberate punch to the guts is it not?

By last look, there have been 18 counts of striking go to the tribunal in the SAAFL this season, 0 of them were for body shots.

If you're not punching someone in the head, the SAAFL are happy for it to occur.

Trader wrote:By last look, there have been 18 counts of striking in the SAAFL, 0 of them were for body shots.

If you're not punching someone in the head, the SAAFL are happy for it to occur.

We have a young lad whose been given 2 games for "charging" as a result of a bump Saturday that wasn't high, wasn't heavy contact, as the player kicked it that you would see every single week.

Umpire's said it wasn't dirty or that bad, player came back on after 10min and played the game out but now misses two weeks for what at best should've been a FAD, at worst a yellow, but the umpires were rapidly losing control of the match so guess they decided a red was best course of action.

The Bedge wrote:

Trader wrote:By last look, there have been 18 counts of striking in the SAAFL, 0 of them were for body shots.

If you're not punching someone in the head, the SAAFL are happy for it to occur.

We have a young lad whose been given 2 games for "charging" as a result of a bump Saturday that wasn't high, wasn't heavy contact, as the player kicked it that you would see every single week.

Umpire's said it wasn't dirty or that bad, player came back on after 10min and played the game out but now misses two weeks for what at best should've been a FAD, at worst a yellow, but the umpires were rapidly losing control of the match so guess they decided a red was best course of action.

so umpire even stated it wasn't bad or dirty.., not high or heavy.. yet the tribunal still gave 2 weeks?

redyellow&blue wrote:so umpire even stated it wasn't bad or dirty.., not high or heavy.. yet the tribunal still gave 2 weeks?

He got a red card, so a report had to go in, the umpires stated after the game it wasn't bad/dirty and their initial thoughts were a recommendation of 1 game.

They don't get that power though, and the prescribed penalty offered from the league was 2 games for the offence of charging.

Hard part is, you challenge the charge and get found guilty you run the risk of getting more games - but by accepting the penalty you're also admitting guilt and copping a penalty excessive to the offence.

The Bedge wrote:

redyellow&blue wrote:so umpire even stated it wasn't bad or dirty.., not high or heavy.. yet the tribunal still gave 2 weeks?

He got a red card, so a report had to go in, the umpires stated after the game it wasn't bad/dirty and their initial thoughts were a recommendation of 1 game.

They don't get that power though, and the prescribed penalty offered from the league was 2 games for the offence of charging.

Hard part is, you challenge the charge and get found guilty you run the risk of getting more games - but by accepting the penalty you're also admitting guilt and copping a penalty excessive to the offence.

Yep found that out the hard way.

Any news on salisbury west tonight they in or out

Love a rumour wrote:Any news on salisbury west tonight they in or out

They're in

Any word on sw situation?

There's no situation - he got 1 game.

Why does everyone have to bloody over react to everything.

Do you need a hug FC?

BTW, I love the irony of you overreacting to their alleged overreactions.