scottroo wrote:3+1 suspended for the bloke from smithfield
Even as a mate of his I think that is slightly on the low side. I believe he has a really good record so they obviously took that into account but the footage looked pretty damming.
They don’t care about previous history anymore.
Was a low impact hit.. bloke got up straight after, took his kick and played out the game.
Video might look bad but I suspect it looked worse than it was - I’m still not convinced he actually clocked him in the jaw based on team mates reactions nearby and also his reaction to the red.
Dolphin Treasure wrote:Your an attention seeking embarsement..
scottroo wrote:3+1 suspended for the bloke from smithfield
Even as a mate of his I think that is slightly on the low side. I believe he has a really good record so they obviously took that into account but the footage looked pretty damming.
They don’t care about previous history anymore.
Was a low impact hit.. bloke got up straight after, took his kick and played out the game.
Video might look bad but I suspect it looked worse than it was - I’m still not convinced he actually clocked him in the jaw based on team mates reactions nearby and also his reaction to the red.
See personally I would be suspending the action.
Whilst he didn’t do to much damage that action itself could do devastating damage and the player throwing a punch doesn’t have total control over it.
Completely non football related violent act, I’m happy the league went ridiculously harsh on it. No place in sport for ‘belting’ someone, regardless if on this occasion the player copped it well.
That is type of act the league has to have no tolerance to and completely stamp out. For mine the area that gets blurred is the dangerous tackle stuff but at least a tackle is part of football
My understanding is that strictly speaking history doesn't come into it albeit I think for the very serious offences (ones that border on instant de-registration) there's at least a subconscious element taken into **** which isn't unreasonable.
It's a fine line between leading to possibly unfair results on an individual basis against a broader unfairness that could lie in perceived inconsistency for like offences.
If you're really getting into the weeds it would be nice to distinguish between a "football" incident which, albeit unlawful, happens in a game of football where you might take an unblemished record into account as opposed to a "non-football" incident such as belting a bloke not in play where I would be more inclined to throw the book at them without any other regards. Makes it tough with shades of grey though.
Very impressive jo172 even if I'm not sure I quite understand all of it. Try writing that again when you are 5 or 6 beers in on the Payneham balcony!!!
Down the Hill wrote:Very impressive jo172 even if I'm not sure I quite understand all of it. Try writing that again when you are 5 or 6 beers in on the Payneham balcony!!!
Try reading it again when you are 5 or 6 beers deep - equally as challenging.
Dolphin Treasure wrote:Your an attention seeking embarsement..
Down the Hill wrote:Very impressive jo172 even if I'm not sure I quite understand all of it. Try writing that again when you are 5 or 6 beers in on the Payneham balcony!!!
It's much the same except you need a Rosetta stone of Cooper's dark ales to really decipher it.
There are some doubters out there as we have some notable omissions. I’m really looking forward to seeing how our blokes go - Pressure creates diamonds as a person on here says. Ball looks like spending a fair bit of time on the deck tomorrow with the wind. Everything to gain tomorrow for our boys and we need to win.
Can you bring a man to his feet when defeat is on repeat?
LaughingKookaburra wrote:There are some doubters out there as we have some notable omissions. I’m really looking forward to seeing how our blokes go - Pressure creates diamonds as a person on here says. Ball looks like spending a fair bit of time on the deck tomorrow with the wind. Everything to gain tomorrow for our boys and we need to win.
I see Wilson King and Krakour out, I change my tip
July 11th 2012....
Brodlach wrote:Rory Laird might end up the best IMO, he is an absolute jet. He has been in great form at the Bloods
2024 Melbourne Cup Punting Challenge winner knocking off the Pirate King!
LaughingKookaburra wrote:There are some doubters out there as we have some notable omissions. I’m really looking forward to seeing how our blokes go - Pressure creates diamonds as a person on here says. Ball looks like spending a fair bit of time on the deck tomorrow with the wind. Everything to gain tomorrow for our boys and we need to win.
I see Wilson King and Krakour out, I change my tip
There is more than that but I’ll still back us in to give it a red hot shake.
Can you bring a man to his feet when defeat is on repeat?
LaughingKookaburra wrote:Kenilworth by 4 points. Pulled it from the fire and looked dead 3/4 time kicking in to the wind.
Lockleys premiership shirts and hat order currently on hold.
Game was a bloody good standard. I thought we were dead at 3/4 time and was likely to lose by 6-7 goals. What our boys showed in the last was all about how far they have come this year and was all heart. Outstanding effort from such a young side. These results don’t mean much until you win finals but it’s hard not to admire the effort shown today.
Can you bring a man to his feet when defeat is on repeat?
LaughingKookaburra wrote:Kenilworth by 4 points. Pulled it from the fire and looked dead 3/4 time kicking in to the wind.
Lockleys premiership shirts and hat order currently on hold.
Game was a bloody good standard. I thought we were dead at 3/4 time and was likely to lose by 6-7 goals. What our boys showed in the last was all about how far they have come this year and was all heart. Outstanding effort from such a young side. These results don’t mean much until you win finals but it’s hard not to admire the effort shown today.
Well done. Flag is up for grabs, even though PFC knocked you off i thought you were a better side than Lockleys that smashed PFC. All the best.
