SA Footy

MW wrote:

Rik E Boy wrote:

DOC wrote:Just saw Buddy's elbow. 2 weeks maybe 3.

Just imagine the collective outrage of this site if that was Joel Selwood who threw that elbow. There would have been a collective hard on that would have rivaled the set of Deep Throat. **** you blokes make me laugh.

regards,

REB

Impossible. Joel would have been trying too hard to milk a free at the time.

Please. He doesn't have to milk a free. He's Joel! He just gets them by right.

regards,

REB

RB wrote:Carlton v St. Kilda on Friday night?

Olympics it is.

I'll be Netflixing by the look of it.

Swans are challenging Buddy’s suspension. Should get off considering 3 other blokes only got fined for doing the exact same thing

Bit surprised that the Swans don't just take the opportunity to let the 34 year old have a spell before finals time.

Inconsistent?

Lycetts was as bad as any of them and not cited.

Thought the AFL was all about protecting the head?

It's all about protecting the bottom line.

woodublieve12 wrote:Swans are challenging Buddy’s suspension. Should get off considering 3 other blokes only got fined for doing the exact same thing

Except he has already been fined twice for the same thing.

woodublieve12 wrote:Swans are challenging Buddy’s suspension. Should get off considering 3 other blokes only got fined for doing the exact same thing

His 5th or 6th offence this year isn’t it?
Your reserves would beat us so not sure why you would bother challenging it

Justice prevails. Buddy free to play

woodublieve12 wrote:Justice prevails. Buddy free to play

Has there been a player this year go to the Tribunal to challenge and not got off

Eagles2014 wrote:

woodublieve12 wrote:Justice prevails. Buddy free to play

Has there been a player this year go to the Tribunal to challenge and not got off

He should’ve got a game but the AFL set the precedent.

Unfortunately not many of our crowd there to boo him constantly

Jim05 wrote:Unfortunately not many of our crowd there to boo him constantly

You can't boo him.....its racist

tigerpie wrote:

Jim05 wrote:Unfortunately not many of our crowd there to boo him constantly

You can't boo him.....its racist

That post came a bit later than I thought it would.

woodublieve12 wrote:

Eagles2014 wrote:

woodublieve12 wrote:Justice prevails. Buddy free to play

Has there been a player this year go to the Tribunal to challenge and not got off

He should’ve got a game but the AFL set the precedent.

If a no name player did the same thing they'd get 2 matches.

Being a high profile thug like Franklin, no surprise he got off.

The inconsistent messages the AFL send with their penalties or lack there of with suspension worth incidents is beyond pathetic.

Jim05 wrote:Unfortunately not many of our crowd there to boo him constantly

You'd think you'd be a little nicer to your owner.

regards,

REB

jackpot jim wrote:

woodublieve12 wrote:

Eagles2014 wrote:

woodublieve12 wrote:Justice prevails. Buddy free to play

Has there been a player this year go to the Tribunal to challenge and not got off

He should’ve got a game but the AFL set the precedent.

If a no name player did the same thing they'd get 2 matches.

Being a high profile thug like Franklin, no surprise he got off.

The inconsistent messages the AFL send with their penalties or lack there of with suspension worth incidents is beyond pathetic.

Literally 3 lesser named players got off with just a fine

woodublieve12 wrote:

Eagles2014 wrote:

woodublieve12 wrote:Justice prevails. Buddy free to play

Has there been a player this year go to the Tribunal to challenge and not got off

He should’ve got a game but the AFL set the precedent.

So? What's the AFL got to do with consistency? Give him a game and stamp it out.

Booney wrote:

woodublieve12 wrote:

Eagles2014 wrote:

woodublieve12 wrote:Justice prevails. Buddy free to play

Has there been a player this year go to the Tribunal to challenge and not got off

He should’ve got a game but the AFL set the precedent.

So? What's the AFL got to do with consistency? Give him a game and stamp it out.

I think he's referring to the fact the 3 cases that were almost identical to this and didn't get games.
I agree with him, they couldn't treat Buddy any different just because he gets more exposure and heaps of people jump on the suspension train because it's a big name.

Booney wrote:
So? What's the AFL got to do with consistency? Give him a game and stamp it out.

To his defence he's probably not used to stringing 11 games in succession together.

I was just doing a bit of a history search for him and he did play the majority of the games in 2017 & 2018, he polled 22 & 16 votes respectively in those two seasons although the umpires seem to not mind casting votes his way.

Round 14 of 2019 he managed to poll a vote when he only had 5 kicks for the day, admittedly he kicked four goals but there were a dozen players that got 20+ disposals, Mills managed 21 touches and 13 marks, Lloyd 28 and 7, Dawson 22 and n11, Henderson 29 and 8, Shiels 25 and 11 tackles all failed to catch the eyes of the umpires that day.

Wedgie wrote:I think he's referring to the fact the 3 cases that were almost identical to this and didn't get games.
I agree with him, they couldn't treat Buddy any different just because he gets more exposure and heaps of people jump on the suspension train because it's a big name.

Understood, but the AFL make shit up on the run all the time and this was an opportunity to make a stance. It's not the the legal system you're talking about here, it's the AFL.