MRP / Trib. Holeman and Plowman both Given 2 Weeks WTF

Remove this Banner Ad

Wonders why Hawthorn players players are copping it after this...




And this...




And this...




And this...




And this...





Are you sure you follow the sport if you're wondering why your player's copping it a bit, after a literal decade of your players sniping other sides?
Clips from 7 years ago showing players that haven't played for the club in 5 years and all finished their careers else where with half the clips showing current Hawthorn players as the victim. Holy s**t thats funny.
 

Log in to remove this ad.

Clips from 7 years ago showing players that haven't played for the club in 5 years and all finished their careers else where with half the clips showing current Hawthorn players as the victim. Holy sh*t thats funny.
I'm glad you liked it. A trip down memory lane, when you dished it out instead of being forced to take it.

It's unsurprising that you lot are as glass-jawed as you are.
 
Wonders why Hawthorn players players are copping it after this...




And this...




And this...




And this...




And this...





Are you sure you follow the sport if you're wondering why your player's copping it a bit, after a literal decade of your players sniping other sides?

love your what aboutism there. Because somethign rough or unsportsamnlike has been done by a player from a club you support before even if he got suspended therefore you cant say any other player can be suspended. Great logic, just move to america already and watch fox news 24/7. They love their what aboutisms.
 
love your what aboutism there. Because somethign rough or unsportsamnlike has been done by a player from a club you support before even if he got suspended therefore you cant say any other player can be suspended. Great logic, just move to america already and watch fox news 24/7. They love their what aboutisms.
Now I'm intrigued.

Could you demonstrate where, precisely, I said or implied any of that? I'll be holding my breath in anticipation, so you'd best be quick.
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

Are there any videos of O'Meara 'sniping' blokes?

Unsure as to why he 'deserves it' or cops the 'weak dog' type comments because he happens to be wearing certain team colours.

I don't recall anyone in this thread calling Plowman a sniper. I think the strongest wording is 'He made O'Meara earn it', O'Meara earned his concussion alright, by playing the ball and showing some courage in doing so.

You chose to bump, you hit the head, you're in trouble with the tribunal, Blues' player or otherwise.
 
How naive are you to think that a decade of Hawthorn players ironing other other teams players has nothing to do with the conversation in here?
They aren't shirts mate (although they might be girl's blouses). BTW here's a glass jaw for you...

 
Are there any videos of O'Meara 'sniping' blokes?

Unsure as to why he 'deserves it' or cops the 'weak dog' type comments because he happens to be wearing certain team colours.

I don't recall anyone in this thread calling Plowman a sniper. I think the strongest wording is 'He made O'Meara earn it', O'Meara earned his concussion alright, by playing the ball and showing some courage in doing so.

You chose to bump, you hit the head, you're in trouble with the tribunal, Blues' player or otherwise.
Where the point of dispute lies is solely on the assertation that he chose to bump. If you look at his right arm, all the way through his reorientation of his body to defend himself, he has the right arm extended with his fist out; that arm/forearm made contact with the ball.

I don't think he 'chose' to bump at all. I think he saw he was going to make contact and still tries to spoil, whilst turning to protect himself.

According to the rules as written - letter of the law, rather than spirit - that should result in an acquittal. However, they chose to interpret the rules in a different way, which is unsurprising given the way the original Tribunal chair chose to interpret Plowman's verbal evidence.
 
Where the point of dispute lies is solely on the assertation that he chose to bump. If you look at his right arm, all the way through his reorientation of his body to defend himself, he has the right arm extended with his fist out; that arm/forearm made contact with the ball.

I don't think he 'chose' to bump at all. I think he saw he was going to make contact and still tries to spoil, whilst turning to protect himself.

According to the rules as written - letter of the law, rather than spirit - that should result in an acquittal. However, they chose to interpret the rules in a different way, which is unsurprising given the way the original Tribunal chair chose to interpret Plowman's verbal evidence.

Right arm extended? Youre just inventing things.

It was a bump exactly because his arm *wasnt* extended for a spoil.

The consensus literally is that if he had his arm out to spoil it would have been cleared. Instead he tucked in to protect himself.
 
Where the point of dispute lies is solely on the assertation that he chose to bump. If you look at his right arm, all the way through his reorientation of his body to defend himself, he has the right arm extended with his fist out; that arm/forearm made contact with the ball.

I don't think he 'chose' to bump at all. I think he saw he was going to make contact and still tries to spoil, whilst turning to protect himself.

According to the rules as written - letter of the law, rather than spirit - that should result in an acquittal. However, they chose to interpret the rules in a different way, which is unsurprising given the way the original Tribunal chair chose to interpret Plowman's verbal evidence.
Nah. Take a screenshot of the part where his arm's extended and post it up...

 
Right arm extended? Youre just inventing things.

It was a bump exactly because his arm *wasnt* extended for a spoil.

The consensus literally is that if he had his arm out to spoil it would have been cleared. Instead he tucked in to protect himself.
There's more irony than can be put into words when you're accusing me of inventing things, HairyO.
Nah. Take a screenshot of the part where his arm's extended and post it up...


I don't need to. Look at the position of his right arm and clenched fist; straight, not completely extended, but moving towards the ball.

He's attempted to spoil that ball.
 
There's more irony than can be put into words when you're accusing me of inventing things, HairyO.

I don't need to. Look at the position of his right arm and clenched fist; straight, not completely extended, but moving towards the ball.

He's attempted to spoil that ball.
Ok mate...
 
Hardly a bump imo, Plowman has his arms folded into his chest like he's carrying something precious. Clearly just trying to protect himself, I don't think he sees O'Meara or doesn't realise they are going to collide until it's much too late. He doesn't have an arm fully extended to spoil but it's clear to me that he approached that contest to spoil and I don't see any evidence to suggest he entered that contest to bump. They have literally just collided trying to contest the ball. I honestly have no idea where this sport is going, I'm not against removing the rougher elements of the game to protect the head but suspending players for accidental collisions in a full contact sport is ridiculous.
 

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top