When is a hit on a player not a hit ?

[wce4premiership]

It is a little bit pathetic now.

 

[skipper kelly]

you jest?

You already stated that the tribunal stuck to the rules. What error did they make?

 

[Mister B]

Yet Paul "Mr Spin" Roos would have you believe the AFL is out to 'get' sydney and him.

Its all a scam really - swans consistenly get the highest frees against but it should be three times as many considering the crap they play - they bet on the umps not penalisng them as much as they should because if they did it would look bad and Paul would ring his media mates up and throw a hissy fit

Would that be the crap play that allowed us to beat Port by more than ten goals, kicking over 20 of our own. The type of play that allowed us to force the port attack backwards 70-80 metres. Geez how disgusting is that??

 

[Harvey to Hayes]

You already stated that the tribunal stuck to the rules. What error did they make?

At least pretend to be objective. Or do you really know nothing about football?

 

[dan warna]

At least pretend to be objective. Or do you really know nothing about football?

swans supporters dont care what their players do as long as the beat the tribunal.

 

[DST]

Forget Sydney v Saints. I have NO DOUBT the tribunal makes decisions bearing in mind AFL pressure and bearing in mind public reaction. If that isn’t true then there is some mystical unexplainable force making some decisions inexplicable. The Hall decisions for example was an invention of definition and rule. Whether that is a Sydney issue, an AFL issue or a case of the tribunal not wanting a player to miss for a relatively harmless hit I don’t know but it sure as hell wasn’t application of any legitimate “rule of law”.

Yes it was, the AFL's own video provided to all clubs in the pre-season in 2005 confirmed that the incident was in play which is what the Swans argued, won that aspect of the case and had the charge demoted to less than 100 points with carry over's.

Barry Hall pleaded guilty to striking and was found guilty on that charge.

People seem to have very short memories of the facts when it comes to previous cases.

Personally as a Swans supporter I didn't think the action was in play and he therfore should not have played. But you can't go around providing helpfull videos to clubs confirming what the AFL's interpretation of the laws are and then just give up on those when it suits which is what the MRP did when charging him for behind the play contact.

DST

 

[MF]

Does anyone think Campbell brown would have got off for doing what Goodes did?
Personally I dont think there was much in it, but I know darn well Brown would have got at least 2.

But you have to remember Campbells not the sharpest bloke getting around.
Mike Sheehan "Did you tell a fib at the tribunal?"
Campbell "Yes"

Maybe he's just not very good at answering the tribunals questions