View Full Version : Stokes Offered One Match
Exhale You
5 May 2008, 18:49
Got done despite neither the umpire seeing, or the video evidence showing, the point of contact (if any).
Meanwhile, Fevola was given the all-clear for an identical 'gut' punch.
Wouldn't be surprised if we challenged it.
Generalissimo
5 May 2008, 18:51
If he challenges and loses, does that mean two weeks? If not, go for it. I'd say fight it regardless except that he'd miss the Collingwood game and we definitely need him for that.
Weak, weak, weak report.
Vegas 15
5 May 2008, 18:51
Outrage. Appeal.
0 weeks.
Worth a free kick and maybe a stern word, but not a week. Fev's looked worse but still with that one, isnt worth missing a game.
Vegas 15
5 May 2008, 18:56
Matty has copped the rough end of the stick a couple of times from the tribunal, can't really understand why.
cat_fanatic_21
5 May 2008, 19:10
Absolute cr@p!
They will appeal and he will get off.
BTW, is the tribute match included in the suspension... what happens if you get reported in the match..?
thegerman
5 May 2008, 19:13
The MRP is an absolute joke. I had a vast amount of respect of some of the ex-players on it. However now it is getting ridiculous.
Hall can get off for a blow to the stomach, so can Fev in the same week. What a joke. Free kick was awarded, that should have been it.
It's like they have to stick up for the umpire and believe him. Yes I know, even though his view would have been totally blocked.
thegerman
5 May 2008, 19:15
Absolute cr@p!
They will appeal and he will get off.
BTW, is the tribute match included in the suspension... what happens if you get reported in the match..?
Tribute match not included, he can play. Reports in the match go before the MRP in the same manner.
I think the difference between Stokesy's punch and Fev's punch is Fev's was "in play" while Stokesy's was at a boundary throw in IIRC, and could possibly be deemed behind the play.
Having said that though, if the club can prove the umpire couldn't have possibly seen point of impact, which they should be able to quite easily, and given the inconclusiveness of the footage available, by all means appeal!
I think the only reason Rischitelli went down was to milk the free kick, as he got up pretty quick afterwards and played out the match.
Ah well, he only misses the richmond game if he doesn't appeal, and going on prismall's killer game in the Vfl, maybe we should give him another crack and move chappy back down to a flank.
randyzany
5 May 2008, 22:11
Unbelievable, Fev gets off. The inconsistencies are a travesty.
Tonycam*
5 May 2008, 22:12
Has Fevola been up yet? What he did was very similar to the Stokes incident so if he gets off....
He got off
randyzany
5 May 2008, 22:14
He got off
I should have read the thread before I posted. :o
I don't think they'll appeal. I expected one week, even though its ridiculously soft, but I had no doubt they'd offer him a match and I fully expect them to accept it.
Unfortunately his pre-season bump has put himself and the club in a difficult situation. He was unfairly made an example of in the NAB Cup and it counted against him during the review I expect and certainly won't help during an appeal.
TEDDY24INC
6 May 2008, 00:22
MRP is a disgrace, if stokes goes fev must 2... why the inconsistancies???? lucky it wasnt mooney or he would have got 2 weeks plus:rolleyes:
tin can sam
6 May 2008, 12:43
If the AFL are as serious as they say about the HOF game, he should be able to take the 1 week and miss that.
goyoucatters
6 May 2008, 14:19
afl.com.au has posted a report declaring that Stokes has accepted the one week, and will miss the Tigers game.
As has been noted several times in this thread, seems like Stokesy has been singled out, and having to plead guilty to aviod copping the extra week is farcical. Anyway, Tigers game hopefully OK to miss...
(Just looked at note on gfc.com.au - they're suggesting he was only looking at 175 points anyway, so would have only been one week if he went to the Tribunal)
cat in sydney
6 May 2008, 14:23
afl.com.au has posted a report declaring that Stokes has accepted the one week, and will miss the Tigers game.
As has been noted several times in this thread, seems like Stokesy has been singled out, and having to plead guilty to aviod copping the extra week is farcical. Anyway, Tigers game hopefully OK to miss...
Exactly right. Double standars on this one.
On the one hand, it's so important that you can get suspended whilst playing in it, and if you miss it through injury you also must miss the week after.
On the other hand, they won't have to miss it through suspension from normal games.
Doing everything they can to make sure it gets going no matter what the potential cost to the clubs are. Very worried about potential injury during this 'tribute' match. By the way... who are we 'tributing' anyway?
Stokes suffered more from having carry over points from his 4 match ban in last years preseason for the front on bump that was only penalised for the opening few rounds of the NAB Cup. Everyone else that did it during the year either got off or had a one match penalty. If he had've been given a week or two last year then his points may've saved him from missing next weeks game. Mind you, he shouldn't have hit him.
goyoucatters
7 May 2008, 09:10
Well said, Rosso. Stokes is the only player to have copped a hiding from the MRP over that 'protect the head of the player' issue. Some media is talking about his bad Tribunal record, noting that he's been suspended for four weeks in the past three years.
He was, of course, suspended once for four weeks, as a result of the front-on crackdown. Ridiculous...
Your last comment is also spot-on, though. You know someone somewhere gets footage of all these incidents - why do it?
And let's not get started on why you can get suspended from incidents in Saturday's game, but can't get suspended for it!
Stokes suffered more from having carry over points from his 4 match ban in last years preseason for the front on bump that was only penalised for the opening few rounds of the NAB Cup. Everyone else that did it during the year either got off or had a one match penalty. If he had've been given a week or two last year then his points may've saved him from missing next weeks game. Mind you, he shouldn't have hit him.
There was 1 other player who copped pretty much the same penalty around the same time (week before I think?), but it was definitely Stokes and the other player I can't think of who were made the scapegoats under the crackdown.
cat_fanatic_21
7 May 2008, 10:25
There was 1 other player who copped pretty much the same penalty around the same time (week before I think?), but it was definitely Stokes and the other player I can't think of who were made the scapegoats under the crackdown.
Michael Johnson from Freo was the other player.
Michael Johnson from Freo was the other player.
Ahh, that's right. Cheers.
Wasn't much between the two hits either from memory, both soft and appeared legitimated hits & both got massive penalties.