SA Footy

The Big Shrek wrote:Broken jaw, wasn’t the most forceful looking punch, not looking at him when he threw it:8-10 in my view.

jo172 wrote:If the same act happened in the clubrooms at the bar after the game you'd be worried about jail time.

Instead he'll be lining up in Round 1 next year.

Strange.

The Big Shrek wrote:

jo172 wrote:If the same act happened in the clubrooms at the bar after the game you'd be worried about jail time.

Instead he'll be lining up in Round 1 next year.

Strange.

Wouldn’t be worried about jail with me as his lawyer.

Lightning McQueen wrote:

Footy Chick wrote:Unassuming guy that no one has even heard of, let alone have any prior form, does a stupid thing and gets 10 games - I'd say that the prospect of him never playing in Adelaide again is deterrent enough if it was indeed out of character.

I don't think he'll have another brain fart, he would be genuinely remorseful and hating himself right now, at the same time relieved that he is still allowed to play.

Dutchy wrote:
Im not sure how you can say that with any confidence.

Lightning McQueen wrote:

Dutchy wrote:
Im not sure how you can say that with any confidence.

There's only one person in this world that I trust so obviously I don't have 100% confidence in someone else's actions or how their brain functions.

I can only go by playing cricket against him several times, he has always come across as a very level headed lad who'd hate to deliberately hurt someone.

He's relatively sharp on his day and a tad erratic, I've seen him hit someone in the ribs with a ball and was the first to ask if he was alright.

I'm by no way defending his actions, I did find it extremely surprising learning that it was him.

morell wrote:To compare off the field incidents with on the field is really quite spurious. Completely different scenarios and they require different judgements.

Looking at incidents that happen whilst playing football through a civil lense is also a very slippery slope. Who defines what is and is not a reasonable transgression to have occurred? A high elbow like Bickley on Wakelin? What about a Choppy Picket bump? We had a really serious incident on the weekend where Nat ended up in hospital because of a dangerous hit. Turns out the kid was brand new to footy and was just unco. If he copped a conviction of any kind it would be manifestly unfair.

Context is really important in other words and in this scenario the tribunal got it exactly right IMO.

morell wrote:To compare off the field incidents with on the field is really quite spurious. Completely different scenarios and they require different judgements..

jo172 wrote:

morell wrote:To compare off the field incidents with on the field is really quite spurious. Completely different scenarios and they require different judgements..

Disagree in the circumstances where the incident is behind play.

morell wrote:To compare off the field incidents with on the field is really quite spurious. Completely different scenarios and they require different judgements.

Looking at incidents that happen whilst playing football through a civil lense is also a very slippery slope. Who defines what is and is not a reasonable transgression to have occurred? A high elbow like Bickley on Wakelin? What about a Choppy Picket bump? We had a really serious incident on the weekend where Nat ended up in hospital because of a dangerous hit. Turns out the kid was brand new to footy and was just unco. If he copped a conviction of any kind it would be manifestly unfair.

Context is really important in other words and in this scenario the tribunal got it exactly right IMO.

Down the Hill wrote:The Mawson Lakes player hasn't been rubbed out for the season. Even with the fixture nuances after Round 14, I believe there are still 9 minor round games remaining in Div 7 so he could be back for Mawson Lakes 2nd final. They are currently sitting 2nd so a good chance they will play at least one final. And that 2nd final could potentially be against the Units. 9 games, 14 goals, and 4 times in best, would indicate he is an automatic selection once available.

Dutchy wrote:

Down the Hill wrote:The Mawson Lakes player hasn't been rubbed out for the season. Even with the fixture nuances after Round 14, I believe there are still 9 minor round games remaining in Div 7 so he could be back for Mawson Lakes 2nd final. They are currently sitting 2nd so a good chance they will play at least one final. And that 2nd final could potentially be against the Units. 9 games, 14 goals, and 4 times in best, would indicate he is an automatic selection once available.

So he can be a premiership player in less than 90 days time, that would not be a great look.

Dutchy wrote:

Down the Hill wrote:The Mawson Lakes player hasn't been rubbed out for the season. Even with the fixture nuances after Round 14, I believe there are still 9 minor round games remaining in Div 7 so he could be back for Mawson Lakes 2nd final. They are currently sitting 2nd so a good chance they will play at least one final. And that 2nd final could potentially be against the Units. 9 games, 14 goals, and 4 times in best, would indicate he is an automatic selection once available.

So he can be a premiership player in less than 90 days time, that would not be a great look.

Backintheday wrote:If the league are serious about stamping out thuggery, a deliberate hit from behind and the injuries incurred is 12 weeks. Regardless of history. Go play somewhere else mate.

Jones received three suspensions for striking, one for 10 weeks (by knee), a second for six weeks (by knee) and a third for an elbow. He also received three games for attempting to trip, while a stomping charge was dismissed.