Adelaide Footy League Division 1 - 2018

[jo172]

8? For striking? That seems on the high scale?

[Senor Moto Gadili]

8? For striking? That seems on the high scale?

It does, but they have obviously graded it as intentional, so it would be within the guidelines. I assume it has been graded as one of the following....

Striking - Intentional/Severe Impact/High = 8 to 10 games
Striking - Intentional/High Impact/High = 6 to 8 games

The Goody Saints player left the field and didn't return. I hope he is OK and doesn't miss any footy.

[S Demon]

8? For striking? That seems on the high scale?

It does, but they have obviously graded it as intentional, so it would be within the guidelines. I assume it has been graded as one of the following....

Striking - Intentional/Severe Impact/High = 8 to 10 games
Striking - Intentional/High Impact/High = 6 to 8 games

The Goody Saints player left the field and didn't return. I hope he is OK and doesn't miss any footy.

From what I heard, this isn't over just yet. Pub talk though..

[Love a rumour]

Spittle very good bloke, definitely out of character

[jo172]

The footage is rather damning

[Senor Moto Gadili]

TTG 20.18 d Modbury 9.2. Gullies way too strong. Going to be a long year for the Hawks, absolutely no depth.

[teamdefense2017]

Big result for University to beat Henley at home!!

[jo172]

http://www.adelaidenow.com.au/sport/afl/local-footy-sa/amateur/tea-tree-gullys-ryan-spittle-receives-eightweek-ban-from-adelaide-footy-league-for-striking/news-story/aa85da88f68192e0829d0810039de96c

Spittle footage in this Advertiser story.

Not good

[Footy Chick]

bah, stupid Advertiser wall..

[jo172]

https://www.foxsports.com.au/afl/watch-suburban-player-with-ankle-bracelet-breaks-opponents-jaw-behind-play/news-story/0f3ac1df21454f02a4d753c4d51aa814

Looks like the Victorians have higher standards than our tribunal, automatic 16 games and Australia wide de-registration for this elbow.

This might be the wrong thread for it, but what are people's thoughts regarding automatic 12 week deregistering suspensions for intentional, high, severe, off-ball hits?

I tend to think it's 2018, people should know better now, why bother with second chances?

[Lightning McQueen]

https://www.foxsports.com.au/afl/watch-suburban-player-with-ankle-bracelet-breaks-opponents-jaw-behind-play/news-story/0f3ac1df21454f02a4d753c4d51aa814

Looks like the Victorians have higher standards than our tribunal, automatic 16 games and Australia wide de-registration for this elbow.

This might be the wrong thread for it, but what are people's thoughts regarding automatic 12 week deregistering suspensions for intentional, high, severe, off-ball hits?

I tend to think it's 2018, people should know better now, why bother with second chances?

Yeah, that was plain thuggery.

[Footy Chick]

I love that, - a guy wearing a black ankle bracelet - are they sure it just wasn't a black ankle brace?

[Down the Hill]

https://www.foxsports.com.au/afl/watch-suburban-player-with-ankle-bracelet-breaks-opponents-jaw-behind-play/news-story/0f3ac1df21454f02a4d753c4d51aa814

Looks like the Victorians have higher standards than our tribunal, automatic 16 games and Australia wide de-registration for this elbow.

This might be the wrong thread for it, but what are people's thoughts regarding automatic 12 week deregistering suspensions for intentional, high, severe, off-ball hits?

I tend to think it's 2018, people should know better now, why bother with second chances?

Bit harsh on our leagues tribunal jo172. I think we all agree that they have handed out penalties in recent years on the harsher end of the scale compared to previous standards but that we all applaud their stance. Assuming first offence for the TTG player then 8 games seems about right considering it was a concussion injury and no broken face. A fair chance that Victorian bloke had a previous record which may have contributed to dishing out 16 games plus a weekend in hospital with a badly broken jaw for the victim probably means the incident was worth double the penalty.

[jo172]

https://www.foxsports.com.au/afl/watch-suburban-player-with-ankle-bracelet-breaks-opponents-jaw-behind-play/news-story/0f3ac1df21454f02a4d753c4d51aa814

Looks like the Victorians have higher standards than our tribunal, automatic 16 games and Australia wide de-registration for this elbow.

This might be the wrong thread for it, but what are people's thoughts regarding automatic 12 week deregistering suspensions for intentional, high, severe, off-ball hits?

I tend to think it's 2018, people should know better now, why bother with second chances?

Bit harsh on our leagues tribunal jo172. I think we all agree that they have handed out penalties in recent years on the harsher end of the scale compared to previous standards but that we all applaud their stance. Assuming first offence for the TTG player then 8 games seems about right considering it was a concussion injury and no broken face. A fair chance that Victorian bloke had a previous record which may have contributed to dishing out 16 games plus a weekend in hospital with a badly broken jaw for the victim probably means the incident was worth double the penalty.

I realise I may have a minority (even solitary) view. But I tend to think anything high/behind play/severe should get you the automatic 12 for life. Don't care first offence.

My post comes off as a criticism of the tribunal itself which is unintended and i retract. More the guidelines which we as a league accept. Why don't we have a guideline saying that the guideline for some conduct is an automatic life ban? Why are we relying on areas of discretion when instead we could have an instant deterrent?

[Footy Chick]

That also has it's dangers and do automatically ban someone, you'd need to come in with undeniable proof I'd think - rather than banishing someone based on almost heresay,

[jo172]

That also has it's dangers and do automatically ban someone, you'd need to come in with undeniable proof I'd think - rather than banishing someone based on almost heresay,

When you have the act on video it's a pretty bloody good start.

Hell, when two people are down one end of the field in 100 metres of space and one ends up unconscious or serverely injured it's a pretty good start.

[Q.]

Everybody deserves a second chance.

[Look Good In Leather]

That also has it's dangers and do automatically ban someone, you'd need to come in with undeniable proof I'd think - rather than banishing someone based on almost heresay,

When you have the act on video it's a pretty bloody good start.

Hell, when two people are down one end of the field in 100 metres of space and one ends up unconscious or serverely injured it's a pretty good start.

Whilst the footage was damning, there is nothing showing any events leading up to the incident. Could be a retaliation incident?

[jo172]

That also has it's dangers and do automatically ban someone, you'd need to come in with undeniable proof I'd think - rather than banishing someone based on almost heresay,

When you have the act on video it's a pretty bloody good start.

Hell, when two people are down one end of the field in 100 metres of space and one ends up unconscious or serverely injured it's a pretty good start.

Whilst the footage was damning, there is nothing showing any events leading up to the incident. Could be a retaliation incident?

I very much do not subscribe to any two wrongs make a right view.

[Executive Member]

That also has it's dangers and do automatically ban someone, you'd need to come in with undeniable proof I'd think - rather than banishing someone based on almost heresay,

When you have the act on video it's a pretty bloody good start.

Hell, when two people are down one end of the field in 100 metres of space and one ends up unconscious or serverely injured it's a pretty good start.

Whilst the footage was damning, there is nothing showing any events leading up to the incident. Could be a retaliation incident?

I very much do not subscribe to any two wrongs make a right view.

Its a great debate and what I am most impressed about is, the argument isn't about the penalty being too harsh but if its adequate. Shows The League has started to change the hearts and minds on what is acceptable on a footy field now days