Remove this Banner Ad

Player Watch Izak Rankine Part II

Do you think the 4 week suspension handed to Rankine is reasonable?

  • Yes

  • No - too harsh

  • No - not harsh enough

Results are only viewable after voting.

🥰 Love BigFooty? Join now for free.

Reader mode
Thrillthorpe7 said:
No doubt it changes from next season though and at least forces them to come out with a consistent penalty across the board. There is no 'usual penalty', the original penalty was 3 weeks, then magically 5 weeks, a couple at 6 weeks and now we've had two 4 week penalties.
Click to expand...
Please, a lot of hysteria and misinformation spouted on here, none of which helps anyone understand the outcome.

There is a "usual" penalty and that was going to be applied the minute Izak transgressed.

THE REAL FACTS

Finlayson 3 weeks with a warning given to all players that future penalties will be harsher
Powell 5 weeks
Collard 6 weeks
Graham 4 weeks but self reported, wasn't flagged by the opposition club
Andrew 5 weeks

So as soon as we reported to the AFL it was always going to be 5 weeks. Whether you agree or not with the size of the penalty the AFL was always going to apply the "usual" penalty. They have been consistent since May 2024 when they whacked Powell with five weeks.

Slow learners are AFL players it seems. We as a club are the ones paying the biggest price due to the time of season.

Club has fought a long fight, was never going to get any less. Any sanitised statement put out by the club is to publicly show we don't want these incidents occurring in our game AND to not poke City Hall who control so many things in our future! Don't bite the hand that feeds you.
 

Log in to remove this Banner Ad

CharlieCrow said:
What a boring unimaginative reactionary decision by the AFL. The obvious choice was to stick to their five game theory and just split it over two seasons. How hard would that have been. That gormless peanut Dillon could easily have sold it that five in a row would be manifestly harsh as it includes all finals. That has been the narrative before over many seasons and is defendable. Instead they have given a half assed maybe depending on us losing week one of the finals. I can just see the smarmy guys off the Melbourne clubs and the Victorian media sharpening their pencils with "It's in your court Adelaide. All you have to do is lose round one of the finals then he can play .... if you make the Grand Final. It's your own fault"
Click to expand...

So, your obvious choice was to do something that they'd never done before?
 
woopedazz said:
I can't really say that, sorry. Not from South Australian players or staff.
Click to expand...
it can only come from Collingwood or crows though, Izak apologized on Sunday morning, nothing was known until Sunday night.
I don’t see there was any leaks?
 
Dillon: “We can’t vouch for every lyric in every song ever written or performed by any artist who has or will appear on our stage…”

Well that’s the point Andrew. If you are going to be the moral arbiters of society, then you have to be able to vouch for that. It’s incumbent on you to vouch for that.

Of course, you could always just go back to running the f*cking game of football, then you don’t have to worry about it.

Dickhead.
 
Drugs Are Bad Mackay? said:
Out of interest, how would the suspension rules work for someone like Hugh Bond who could get squeezed out of the AFL 23 at any point?

Would the SANFL game during the pre-finals bye count for him?
Click to expand...
Probably not

I think the last time it was a young St Kilda player who was actually suspended playing in the VFL. There was a bye in the AFL the next week, so they counted the VFL game as 1 served
 
Language policing.

Thought crime. That's where we're at now as a society.

Treat grown adults like children - don't be surprised if your society ends up looking like a daycare.

I'm all for political equity, discrimination laws, and clampdowns on hate crimes.

But language policing goes against most of my philosophical inclinations.

Hate this shit. What a damn shame.
 

Remove this Banner Ad

Absolutely do not care what supporters of other clubs think of our club. It’s ludicrous to think team x wouldn’t have done exactly what we did for their star player. For years we have been the equivalent of the Geelong handbags the little kitty cats. This was one time our club had a harden up moment. Good on em.

Note I do not condone what was said and yes I think the punishment was a bit much.

But I do agree that this outcome was blatantly obvious and this situation avoided pretty easily. Unfortunately the amygdala has a funny way of responding in stress, hence things like road rage, which in the face of it seem so stupid.
 

🥰 Love BigFooty? Join now for free.

catsfootyfan89 said:
Language policing.

Thought crime. That's where we're at now as a society.

Treat grown adults like children - don't be surprised if your society ends up looking like a daycare.

I'm all for political equity, discrimination laws, and clampdowns on hate crimes.

But language policing goes against most of my philosophical inclinations.
Click to expand...
Behave like children get treated like a child.

You can’t support equity and be opposed to discrimination while supporting racism, homophobia and bigotry.

The pen is mightier than the sword, as they say. Words are the most powerful thing in the world.
 
Reader mode

Remove this Banner Ad

Player Watch Izak Rankine Part II

Similar threads

M
Opinion New AFC HQ (Part 2): Dale dug a hole
43 44 45 46 47
Replies
1K
Views
69K
Daniel6
Daniel6

🥰 Love BigFooty? Join now for free.

Back
Top