View Full Version : Wanganeen report
Mudholian
2 Sep 2002, 02:40
Well I hope this is clarified by the time I get the paper tomorrow and someone has written that it is some sort of mistake.
Apparently there is "no vision" of the incident according to one news source while another showed a collision at 6:30 min remaining of the 2nd term, where Wanganeen is moving to Akermanis and Lappin gets in the way.
Now this collision is so fleeting and minor that it can't possibly be the incident but it has been highlighted by one TV crew as the one.
So did anyone see the incident and what's in it?
rubberman
2 Sep 2002, 03:01
The vision shown on the news barely captured the report, but it does clearly show that Gavin had eyes only for Ackermanis and the ball and the collision happened when Lappin provided a shepard. Basically I reckon Gavin didnt see Lappin and did not deliberatly knee him. I dont know what that stupid maggot who reported him was looking at.
My cousin, who seated along side me, saw it. Apparently Lappin went to shephard off, Wanganeen dodged it and then subtly gave him a corky. The severity of the incident was minimal in his eyes, so take that for what you will.
Should definately go for 2- 3 weeks, it was not a very nice act on a ball player such as Lappin,
dreamkillers
2 Sep 2002, 13:43
Originally posted by noddy
Should definately go for 2- 3 weeks, it was not a very nice act on a ball player such as Lappin,
and on that basis you never saw the actual incident.........:rolleyes:
From what i've heard (i didn't actually see the incident) it wasn't that bad, basically struck his leg out, could argue he didn't see him or he put his leg out to change direction etc etc.
Perhaps might go for one, but i guess it will depend on Lappin's testimony. Hopefully he isn't as pathetic as the Jet.
I had a look at it on the video I made of the game(hope the AFL aren't trolling these boards or I may be in trouble) and I couldn't make out anything other than Wanganeens was in a normal running gait as he was moving towards Aker and he was still moving the same way as he passed Aker. There could have been a collision with Lappin on the way through but in no way could he have deliberately lifted his leg and then continued running in a normal manner. The only way to do that is to make an exaggerated goosestep like David Campese used to.
koulagirl32
2 Sep 2002, 22:22
Charge dropped.
Apparently, to celebrate Port's first minor premiership, the tribunal decided it would attempt to be sane for a week.
-B.
Mudholian
2 Sep 2002, 22:31
Thanks Koulagirl.
Once the finals are over, this disgraceful episode should be looked into. Why on earth was Wanganeen cited?Maybe the umpire saw nothing but was hounded by squealing Brisbane officials into making a report, only to recoil in embarrassment when he actually saw the video footage -which showed nothing more than Wanganeen trying to get out the way - footage by the way was claimed "did not exist"?
Shameful.
As I was leaving the game I did hear a lady mention that Brisbane had lodged a complaint. Unfortunately I could not quiz her on this as she was talking on her mobile and was not walking in my direction. Maybe this was the squealing you refer to?
Mudholian
3 Sep 2002, 00:25
I'd heard that the charge did not arise during the game but after, yes. I assumed that there must have been some other incident than the collision, but no, that was what they were complaining about.
Was reported on radio at half time that he was reported.
Tredders#16
3 Sep 2002, 14:09
Happy to have rubberman ready for this week's final!
Tredders#16
Mudholian
3 Sep 2002, 21:14
Reported at half time.? Fine, I didn't see it in the play so I suppose he had to havea chat about it with someone.
The protected species Wanganeen should sue the AFL and everybody else connected with football over this slurr on his name.
Seriously good to see this crappy charge thrown out & Wanganeen go on to stick it up Collingwood in the first final.