Will PB go?

Remove this Banner Ad

Log in to remove this ad.

I am disgusted with the club.

All others are taking the tribunal option, we should have as well. It would make a long night but I think that all clubs should take a stand against the the match review panel as they have proved this weekend that they are not impartial.

So much for no controversy over the tribunal. It is worse
 
They've worn us down, then. AFL and its stupid new system get the win. Inconsistent as it ever was, only now there's no real way to lodge a serious appeal. It's all preordained on the Sunday night.

So far our men have taken the brunt of it. There will be no cries of rage from the (Victocentric) media until a few Melbourne-based clubs are burnt as badly as we have been.

Meh.
 
My god that is a pathetic effort from the club.
 
Porthos said:
My god that is a pathetic effort from the club.

Unfortunately it's like you said earlier Porthos, the player is now guilty until proven innocent ... the antithesis of natural justice.

And with the footage on the reverse angle which doesn't look good, I don't think they would have had a chance of getting the decision overturned (pardon the pun).
 
Porthos said:
My god that is a pathetic effort from the club.
PB was suspended for three games in 2003 for a spear tackle and now he has been reported for doing the same stupid thing. He can cop it sweet and take a 2 game suspension or the club can contest it and he gets a 3 game suspension. The clubs "effort" on this is perfectly reasonable.
 
Grrrrrrrr!

In another post I made mention that I would be taking up tidly winks if Peter Burgoyne got games. I now must adjust what I said, if the Port Adelaide Football Club had of had the guts to go to the tribunal he wouldn't have got games, does that allow me back?

But seriously taking the two game suspension hasn't helped Peter Burgoyne. The club has just further tightened the noose that was already around Peter's head for any future time he might end up at the tribunal.

Not happy! :mad:
 
wharfie_1870 said:
PB was suspended for three games in 2003 for a spear tackle and now he has been reported for doing the same stupid thing. He can cop it sweet and take a 2 game suspension or the club can contest it and he gets a 3 game suspension. The clubs "effort" on this is perfectly reasonable.

It wasn't the same though.
 
Considering the cattle we already have out for the next few weeks, I can understand why the club took this option rather than risk PB getting an extra game. It really wasn't time to roll the dice (and with this tribunal, those dice seem to be loaded).
 
blackdiamond said:
It wasn't the same though.
But the system has changed which appears to make it harder for the player to get off once reported.

I'm just thinking that the club perhaps learnt something about the new tribunal in the Pickett case and have decided not to appeal on that basis. It doesn't make sense on the facts we have been provided that we wouldn't be able to appeal.

Who knows?
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

blackdiamond said:
As Port supporters we should just treat each and everyone of our reports in the future as done and dusted, what a farce this all is.

I feel your frustration. However, the club also has to pick and choose the cases that it fights on. While you and I (and most rational people) believe that there was enough doubt in this incident for PB to get off, the club obviously doubted its prospects of success, thus the plea.

It may be a lawyer thing, but most of the people I have spoken to about this at work, whilst they agree that PB should not have been reported, think that taking the plea is reasonable. I guess we see too many litigants p***ing their money against the wall on 'matters of principle' when to think that pursuing priciple through a courts or a tribunal is a good thing.

Unfortunately, the new system is weighted against reported players. There's not much that we can do to fix that. Anderson is not going to admit a mistake and, as others have noted, it will take a few high-profile Victorian cases to have the media examine it in any depth (if they are ever capable of depth).
 
I don't think I've ever been less enthusiastic about football after the first round.
 
You and me both. I think it's a 'fans' premiership hangover', if there is such a thing.
 
portentous said:
I've been feeling the same way too-more enthusiastic about the Magpies than the AFL. It just seems to be getting less and less like "real" footy in the AFL now. Talk about sterilised.......Demetriou has totally neutered it.

Actually, after watching the Magpies - South game on the weekend, i was amazed by how much better the game was to watch. The umpiring was great. They seem to only pay free kicks when an infringement actually affects the game. An amazing new idea, haw haw.
 
Have to say that the Magpies-South game was a beauty to watch. Fantastic to see a genuine full-forward kick a bag. It is no coincidence that under Jack's coaching Scott Cummings kicked so many goals in 1997 as the game plan suits the stay-at-home forward.
Looking forward to seeing much more SANFL footy this year.
 
Given Hamill got off on knocking someone's teeth out, I am extra annoyed that we didn't take this to the tribunal.
 
How the hell did he get off. Surely it activated all those points and such? He swung a fist around with a fair expectation that someone was there, made high contact, and knocked his teeth out.

I don't know what to say.

Edit: Apparently Scott said he didn't even make contact. Hah, nice one, channel 9 commentary.
 

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top