SA Footy

I’m not sure who looks worse here, the Adelaide Football Club or the AFL.

Rankine should be suspended, however 5 games seems excessive - Even Grahams suspension of 5 is ridiculous. I keep hearing the media say that there is no precedence of finals suspensions carrying more weight compared to regular season games and whilst specifically this is true there is also the argument that reportable incidents in Grand Finals carry double the weeks of suspensions. Seems a stretch but it’s worth the efforts from Adelaide. Moving forward the AFL needs more clear cut penalties than just making it up as they go.

LaughingKookaburra wrote:Rankine should be suspended, however 5 games seems excessive - Even Grahams suspension of 5 is ridiculous. I keep hearing the media say that there is no precedence of finals suspensions carrying more weight compared to regular season games and whilst specifically this is true there is also the argument that reportable incidents in Grand Finals carry double the weeks of suspensions. Seems a stretch but it’s worth the efforts from Adelaide. Moving forward the AFL needs more clear cut penalties than just making it up as they go.

On the basis ( Hello Alastair Lynch ) that you ruin the spectacle.

Spargo wrote:I’m not sure who looks worse here, the Adelaide Football Club or the AFL.

It's quality "hold my beer" stuff

Booney wrote:

LaughingKookaburra wrote:Rankine should be suspended, however 5 games seems excessive - Even Grahams suspension of 5 is ridiculous. I keep hearing the media say that there is no precedence of finals suspensions carrying more weight compared to regular season games and whilst specifically this is true there is also the argument that reportable incidents in Grand Finals carry double the weeks of suspensions. Seems a stretch but it’s worth the efforts from Adelaide. Moving forward the AFL needs more clear cut penalties than just making it up as they go.

On the basis ( Hello Alastair Lynch ) that you ruin the spectacle.

Also the Dean Wallis "I'm retiring anyway" defense

Spargo wrote:I’m not sure who looks worse here, the Adelaide Football Club or the AFL.

Given the magnitude of the situation I think it was incumbent on Adelaide to ask the question and put forward a case, once that was dismissed though I think going again reflects poorly particularly for the playing group and letting them move forward.

Booney wrote:

Spargo wrote:I’m not sure who looks worse here, the Adelaide Football Club or the AFL.

Given the magnitude of the situation I think it was incumbent on Adelaide to ask the question and put forward a case, once that was dismissed though I think going again reflects poorly particularly for the playing group and letting them moving forward.

Adelaide damned if they do and damned if they don't.

IF Rankine isn't taking ownership of his actions and believes the club needs to fight for him than that puts the footy department in a pickle.

Fight and you look like insensitive jerks, don't fight and all of a sudden, you're million dollar a season asset becomes seriously disgruntled.

This is taking longer than the major Port 2025 announcement …

----

whufc wrote:

Booney wrote:

Spargo wrote:I’m not sure who looks worse here, the Adelaide Football Club or the AFL.

Given the magnitude of the situation I think it was incumbent on Adelaide to ask the question and put forward a case, once that was dismissed though I think going again reflects poorly particularly for the playing group and letting them moving forward.

Adelaide damned if they do and damned if they don't.

IF Rankine isn't taking ownership of his actions and believes the club needs to fight for him than that puts the footy department in a pickle.

Fight and you look like insensitive jerks, don't fight and all of a sudden, you're million dollar a season asset becomes seriously disgruntled.

You've sat on the only aspect of this that would have happened, him taking ownership. Of course he would have. The rest of the post is fanciful.

whufc wrote:

Booney wrote:

Spargo wrote:I’m not sure who looks worse here, the Adelaide Football Club or the AFL.

Given the magnitude of the situation I think it was incumbent on Adelaide to ask the question and put forward a case, once that was dismissed though I think going again reflects poorly particularly for the playing group and letting them moving forward.

Adelaide damned if they do and damned if they don't.

IF Rankine isn't taking ownership of his actions and believes the club needs to fight for him than that puts the footy department in a pickle.

Fight and you look like insensitive jerks, don't fight and all of a sudden, you're million dollar a season asset becomes seriously disgruntled.

It’s not the first time clubs challenge the league until the last minute of major games. Whether it’s Cloke knocking out Edwards and having Eddie McGuire on the footy show on Thursday night crying for leniency after challenging the AFL’s ban or Barry Hall, clubs are going to fight tooth and nail if they see a potential loop hole to get their players off at important times of the year. Rankine deserves a suspension no doubt, but the Crows are well within their right to challenge it.

Who knows but would he have taken ownership of the 5 games when others earlier had been given 3....... or if he infact believes he was seriously provoked.

I think sometimes we give footballers too much credit because they are AFL players.....

Only have to read this thread, Facebook or listen to some of the local footballers at training and their personal thoughts on the penalties. Common sense aint that common......especially when you've lost a potential GF appearance and potentially a fair bit of bonus coin ect.

Only have to go back to his own team mate and how much 'ownership' Tex took.
Not sure Rioli owned his one either to be honest.

The point being if Rankine feels the five games is harsh and wants the penalty to be appealed then the club really has a very difficult decision to make.

If the Crows get to the GF and Rankine somehow plays in it, he'll be the most booed player in a Grand Final

Fricky wrote:If the Crows get to the GF and Rankine somehow plays in it, he'll be the most booed player in a Grand Final

Imagine the reception Snoop Dog or whatever its name is will get iof the Crows are playing

locky801 wrote:

Fricky wrote:If the Crows get to the GF and Rankine somehow plays in it, he'll be the most booed player in a Grand Final

Imagine the reception Snoop Dog or whatever its name is will get iof the Crows are playing

Fo Shizzle

Rankine findings to be announced shortly.

Booney wrote:Rankine findings to be announced shortly.

Rumour is 1 week

That can’t be correct

Brodlach wrote:

Booney wrote:Rankine findings to be announced shortly.

Rumour is 1 week

That can’t be correct

That’s a disgrace from the AFL if so. Should be 3 imo.

Brodlach wrote:

Booney wrote:Rankine findings to be announced shortly.

Rumour is 1 week

That can’t be correct

Not a chance.

I wonder how many times the AFL social media team review their post before they click "Submit" on the various platforms?