Bock is out this week

[chadleverington]

Admitted guilt of assaulting GF.

Should have been sacked.

No excuse for Domestic Violence.

I am not so sure about that, what would happen if joe bloggs from salisbury did the same thing? would he lose his job? (yes i know someone from salisbury with a job could be a stretch, but you get my point )

I think Bock did well in the interview, and he needs to play. Not for the supporters, not for the club but to help him in his rehabilitation. As long as he is taking the steps with councelling and working on anger issues then i can't see why he wouldn't play on Saturday night.

Don't be so quick to just there Wildmanwok, Peter Burgoyne or Dean Brogan could very well be in the same situation, would you be calling for them to be sacked?

 

[jo172]

Don't be so quick to just there Wildmanwok, Peter Burgoyne or Dean Brogan could very well be in the same situation, would you be calling for them to be sacked?

Lol at the players you used as examples. Considering indiscretions in the Western Parklands and at Airports and all that

 

[James23]

Admitted guilt of assaulting GF.

Should have been sacked.

No excuse for Domestic Violence.

I seem to recall an incident involving Peter Burgoyne and a young female, I think thats how he got the nickname Peter Parklands?

Infact Peter Parklands is still playing isnt he? Infact I do not remember any punishment at all tbh

There's some culture for ya

 

[chadleverington]

Lol at the players you used as examples. Considering indiscretions in the Western Parklands and at Airports and all that

Yes that is exactly my point. glad you picked up on it and it didn't go over your head.

 

[chadleverington]

I seem to recall an incident involving Peter Burgoyne and a young female, an incident much worse than what Nathan Bock did, I think thats how he got the nickname Peter Parklands?

Infact Peter Parklands is still playing isnt he? Infact I do not remember any punishment at all tbh

getting off track, but i believe there was no charges made? that is why there was no punishment? back on the topic of Bocky.

 

[seababoon]

meh stupid.. shouldnt have even been suspended.. he didnt actually touch her did he..?.. just broke her handbag..

 

[footy4ever]

getting off track, but i believe there was no charges made? that is why there was no punishment? back on the topic of Bocky.

Certainly no charges in Burgoyne's case. Just a mere $200,000ish 'settlement'.

 

[jo172]

getting off track, but i believe there was no charges made? that is why there was no punishment? back on the topic of Bocky.

Having said that, if we look deeper into why no charges were laid I think you'll find the Adelaide Football Club comes out looking all the more clearer by comparison

And according to the interview charges are still yet to be laid against Bock

Shows how truly minor this incident was, probably just the beer/handbag.

 

[King Elvis]

Admitted guilt of assaulting GF.

He did?

 

[CaptainDangerfield]

getting off track, but i believe there was no charges made? that is why there was no punishment? back on the topic of Bocky.

If he didn't do anything why did Port Power fine him $5000. As for Bock, 1 game was enough.

 

[CaptainDangerfield]

Having said that, if we look deeper into why no charges were laid I think you'll find the Adelaide Football Club comes out looking all the more clearer by comparison

And according to the interview charges are still yet to be laid against Bock

Shows how truly minor this incident was, probably just the beer/handbag.

If Bock gets suspended for 1 week, what do Deano and Pete get - 20 games and life respectively???

 

[chadleverington]

If Scott Stevens doesn't come up (i would think he would be fine, no structural damage) then does that help bock? Hentschel,Gill,Stevens out. Putting a huge amount of responsibility on Walker up forward, and a tall short in backline? Or does someone like Greg Gallman/Aaron Kite get a game?

 

[Cynic]

If Scott Stevens doesn't come up (i would think he would be fine, no structural damage) then does that help bock? Hentschel,Gill,Stevens out. Putting a huge amount of responsibility on Walker up forward, and a tall short in backline? Or does someone like Greg Gallman/Aaron Kite get a game?

It could actually make it harder for Bock is Stevens is cleared as it could be looked at in a rather negative or cynical sense if Bock is brought back as soon as a hole in the team appears...

 

[Hodges 153!]

And according to the interview charges are still yet to be laid against Bock

They said this on Nova this morning also.

Is it possible to be 'uncharged' yet know you have a date in court sometime in June?

Also, Nathan says in the interview that he has had zero contact with the g/f, as required by his "bail conditions", which apparently expire sometime next week.

 

[jenny61_99]

They said this on Nova this morning also.

Is it possible to be 'uncharged' yet know you have a date in court sometime in June?

Also, Nathan says in the interview that he has had zero contact with the g/f, as required by his "bail conditions", which apparently expire sometime next week.

How can you have bail conditions if you haven't been charged?

 

[Hodges 153!]

No idea.

But Im pretty sure that was what Nathan said in the interview snippet they played this morning.

 

[spexau]

Yeah it doesn't seem to make sense but on FiveAA last night he confirmed that he had bail constraints when it came to contacting his partner and that he also hadn't been charged. Not sure how it all works but him having bail conditions might have something to do with being arrested. But being arrested and no charges made but still have a court date? Doesn't seem to add up. Oh well, will have to wait until June to find out whats going on. Lets hope he's done enough for the leadship group, the coaches and selection panel's eyes to let him play this weekend and have a ripper against Geelong.

 

[jackster83]

From the AFL website:

By Katrina Gill
10:14 AM Wed 15 April, 2009
ADELAIDE defender Nathan Bock has declared himself ready to resume his 88-game career, one week after being suspended indefinitely by the club for allegedly assaulting his girlfriend.

Bock, 26, was arrested by police and charged with assault earlier this month after an alcohol-fuelled incident outside an Adelaide hotel.

The All-Australian centre half-back was also fined $5000 and ordered by the Crows to undergo counselling and community service.

He spent time away from West Lakes, but rejoined his teammates last Thursday and will train fully at Wednesday's main session.

Bock, who met with representatives of the Domestic Crisis Centre last week, said he had taken steps towards rehabilitation.

"The club has given me some criteria to follow in terms of meeting specific expectations with my counselling. I feel that we put a lot of those in place last week and I'll follow on with those this week and throughout the rest of the season," Bock told Adelaide Radio 5aa on Tuesday.

"Mentally, I'm feeling a lot better. I'm looking forward to training tomorrow and being out on the track. In terms of playing this week, it's out of my hands. That decision will be made by the leadership group in conjunction with management and the coaching staff.

"I'm doing everything I can to give myself the best opportunity to resume playing as soon as possible. Hopefully, that will happen sooner rather than later."

Bock, in accordance with his bail conditions, has not had contact with his long-term girlfriend since the alleged incident, but was hopeful of reconciliation.

The reigning club champion expressed remorse and regret and said he was mentally prepared for a return to footy.

"In anyone's life, and in mine there are a lot of things that go on other than just playing footy," Bock said.

"I think it's just about having the ability to overcome adversity and showing a bit of resilience to get back on the footy field and perform.

"I'm fully confident that I'll be able to do that."

The Crows appeared in desperate need of Bock's services when both Scott Stevens and Nick Gill were forced from the ground in the win over Fremantle.

Gill will miss at least a fortnight with a hamstring strain, but Stevens is rated a good chance to play against Geelong despite being taken off on a stretcher after a sickening clash with Luke McPharlin at Subiaco.

Stevens will have a lighter session on Wednesday, but Bock expected the in-form switchman to play against the Cats at AAMI Stadium on Saturday night.

"I heard reports about how severe the incident (between Stevens and McPharlin) was, but looking at Stevo today – he was obviously a bit groggy – but in terms of bruising and his facial expression, it didn't seem as bad as first thought.

"He should be fine to play."

 

[chadleverington]

I guess something else to look at is that Geelong doesn't have a tall forward line. Mooney is a key tall obviously, but other than that, Stokes, Stevie J, Gamble, Ablett (resting forward), Kelly, Chapman and Hawkins. Would Rutten take Mooney? if so who does that leave for Bock?

 

[WALL-e]

Rutten will take Hawkins I imagine.

 

[Vader]

I guess something else to look at is that Geelong doesn't have a tall forward line. Mooney is a key tall obviously, but other than that, Stokes, Stevie J, Gamble, Ablett (resting forward), Kelly, Chapman and Hawkins. Would Rutten take Mooney? if so who does that leave for Bock?

Rutten on Hawkins, Bock on Mooney.

 

[Wood_Duck]

Rutten on Hawkins, Bock on Mooney.

Geez I'd luv to see that. Rutten will pants Hawkins and Bock would be too good for Mooney in current form.

 

[Crow-mo]

How can you have bail conditions if you haven't been charged?

You can't.

 

[jo172]

You can't.

Yes you can. Check Sections 4 and S6(1b(b)) of the Bail Act 1985.

 

[Southerntakeover]

Yes you can. Check Sections 4 and S6(1b(b)) of the Bail Act 1985.

Eligibility for bail

(1) The following persons are eligible for release on bail under this Act:

(a) a person who has been taken into custody—

(i) on a charge of an offence; or

(ii) in the case of a child—on suspicion of having committed an offence;

(b) a person who has been convicted of an offence but has not been sentenced for that offence;

(c) a person who has been convicted of, and sentenced for, an offence but has not exhausted all rights of appeal against the conviction or sentence, or to have it reviewed;

(d) a person who is appearing before a court for allegedly failing to observe a condition of a recognizance;

(e) a person who appears before a court in answer to a summons (including a person who so appears as a witness);

(f) a person who has been arrested on a warrant and is appearing or is to appear before a court as a witness.

(2) Where a person who has been arrested is being detained pursuant to the Summary Offences Act 1953 for a purpose related to the investigation of an offence, the person is not eligible for release on bail until the end of that detention.



What am i missing Jo?