Didak Cleared

[dave_27]

Slattery copped a week for raising his elbow and missing a bloody adelaide player but didak goes one step further and actually makes contact with a carlton player and gets nothing. lol

Pies players are certainly getting a golden run on and off the field atm.

 

[MarkT]

Re: SEN - Didak Cleared

The difference here is that Didak was trying to impact the player, the others were in a contest for the ball.

How was Gia’s more of a contest for the ball than Didak’s? Get a grip. You are clutching.

 

[jerry springer]

Re: SEN - Didak Cleared

that is the best post of the year

 

[Ari]

The match day report laid against Collingwood's Alan Didak was reviewed. It was the view of the Match Review Panel that Scotland took possession of the ball and Didak began to moved towards him from the side and slightly behind the Carlton player. Scotland first realised his opponent was approaching when he was approximately two metres away. Didak had positioned himself to bump and had his arm and shoulder tucked in for contact. Scotland attempted to avoid contact but unfortunately contact was made to his head. Despite the high contact, Didak's action was viewed as a legitimate attempt to bump. Therefore, the contact to the head was considered accidental and the action was not considered to be a reportable offence.

The match day report laid against Collingwood's Alan Didak was reviewed.
-Yes.

It was the view of the Match Review Panel that Scotland took possession of the ball and Didak began to moved towards him from the side and slightly behind the Carlton player.
-So Dids came from behind him, got it.

Scotland first realised his opponent was approaching when he was approximately two metres away.
-So Scotland realised "oh crap, here comes Dids on a mission"... got it.

Didak had positioned himself to bump and had his arm and shoulder tucked in for contact.
-So Didak was coming from behind (and to the side) and had braced himself to make heavy contact with Scotland who had only just realised he was coming.

Scotland attempted to avoid contact but unfortunately contact was made to his head.
-So Scotland tried to avoid the approaching Didak, but couldnt get away from him time... okay.

Despite the high contact,
-See photo above

Didak's action was viewed as a legitimate attempt to bump.
-Coming from behind the player and causing head high contact??

Therefore, the contact to the head was considered accidental and the action was not considered to be a reportable offence.
-An accident? But he was running toward him from behind (and the side!) braced for contact which was made to the head causing malace harm to the player.... again, see photo above.



My conclusion?

+

=

 

[Johnson#26]

Re: SEN - Didak Cleared

Fantastic.

 

[MarkT]

What puzzles me is that accidental contact to the head is ok yet attempted striking where there's no contact results in suspension.
Very strange.

It’s not always ok. It depends on the circumstances. Why do people think every incident is the same. Lots of head high contact slides by, even when damage is done (eg Kosi and Cara). Other go because of negligence for instance. Attempted striking goes due to the intent. That’s not strange. It doesn’t generally go anyway. Headland tried to kill someone earlier this year. Holland went for attempted striking on Hird.

 

[Coin_Toss]

Justice has been served.

 

[Cyclops]

Re: SEN - Didak Cleared

Bad both ways? The Sporn free I grant you but not much more. Fev was monstered up forward while Rocca got frees every time someone touched him. The 50/50 went against us all day but the main thing that made me sit up and take notice is that they would let one go for us and then award one merely seconds later against us. Totally killed our momentum all day.

Before the incident the very Collingwood heavy crowd was snarling about the umpiring. I certainly felt we missed some obvious frees, but I saw Carlton miss some too.

There were weird ones going both ways, and stuff getting let go too like Fevola was getting away with niggle: he's as bad as Didak. I felt at the time is was going to be a bad match, I just didn't realise how bad.

After the brawl the umps went whistle happy, and you made yourselves a target. They punished you, but what do you expect? Also they often favour the percieved better side, we have benefited and suffered from it at different times this year.

I do feel the umps contributed to the brawl: the players were getting fractious with the silly frees and the obvious mistakes the umps made. In a way the animosity toward Dids and the outrage about him getting cleared is some of the same bad atmosphere I felt at the game. Its also because he's a niggling irritating fella, and maybe people feel he deserves something for what he gets away with (eg stopping and ankle tapping).

 

[mad-saint-guy]

How does Steven Baker get two weeks without even making contact with someone and Didak gets off after concussing someone by hip and shouldering them in the face?

Absolute bullshyt.

 

[Murray]

People you still don't understand this very basic rule:

Collingwood run the AFL

 

[Marklar_33]

Re: SEN - Didak Cleared

that is the best post of the year

Was probably better when it was first done

 

[Marklar_33]

People you still don't understand this very basic rule:

Collingwood run the AFL

Jason Cloke 2002 and Anthont Rocca 2003 beg to differ

 

[cs61]

Re: SEN - Didak Cleared

Can't believe that he got off and Guerra got two or three for something that didn't cause as much damage.

Totally inconsistent. Pickett or Guerra both would have been suspended in that incident, I have no doubt.

 

[jerry springer]

To be honest I thought Alan would get a week,but how can you predict this tribunal....

Makes up for Tarrants suspension last year with his phantom punch that no-one saw but he still got 2 weeks for

The tribunal is a dead set farce no matter what way you look at it.The guy going for the ball rarely gets protected anymore just look at the Caracella incident.

 

[MarkT]

It was the view of the Match Review Panel that Scotland took possession of the ball and Didak began to moved towards him from the side and slightly behind the Carlton player.
-So Dids came from behind him, got it.

Scotland first realised his opponent was approaching when he was approximately two metres away.
-So Scotland realised "oh crap, here comes Dids on a mission"... got it.

Didak had positioned himself to bump and had his arm and shoulder tucked in for contact.
-So Didak was coming from behind (and to the side) and had braced himself to make heavy contact with Scotland who had only just realised he was coming.

Scotland attempted to avoid contact but unfortunately contact was made to his head.
-So Scotland tried to avoid the approaching Didak, but couldnt get away from him time... okay.

Despite the high contact,
-See photo above

Didak's action was viewed as a legitimate attempt to bump.
-Coming from behind the player and causing head high contact??

Therefore, the contact to the head was considered accidental and the action was not considered to be a reportable offence.
-An accident? But he was running toward him from behind (and the side!) braced for contact which was made to the head causing malace harm to the player.... again, see photo above.



My conclusion?

+

=

Your conclusion is affected by your bias as evidenced by your putting “and the side” in brackets as if it was of little importance. What they actually said was from the side and SLIGHTLY behind
Quote: “from the side and slightly behind”
In other words it wasn’t from behind. Regardless he collected him in the side which is all that really matters anyway.

 

[ShepBoy]

These idiots complaining about the decision should try reading the review panel's rules before mouthing off. How dumb can you be?


And for the Blues fans comoplaining about the umps, I reckon COllingwood didnt deserve on free kick all day so you should be really mad.

Deal with your mediocrity.

 

[jerry springer]

Re: SEN - Didak Cleared

Was probably better when it was first done

please explain?

 

[de_LICA_ish18]

I love that all you other supporters hate him passionately, this makes Dids my new favorite player

...plus he's a freakin star!!

 

[cs61]

These idiots complaining about the decision should try reading the review panel's rules before mouthing off. How dumb can you be?


And for the Blues fans comoplaining about the umps, I reckon COllingwood didnt deserve on free kick all day so you should be really mad.

Deal with your mediocrity.

Come off it. Some of the suspensions this year have been for much less than that. I was watching the game with 2 collingwood flat-mates and both said that 2 was about fair, and had no doubt he'd get weeks for that.

 

[lenny&carl]

My conclusion?

+

=

Three of my favourite things! Good work.

 

[keano]

One less excuse for the bunch of pretenders from the colliwobbles to churn out when they are found out in september.

 

[deck]

No we have to outlaw the bump.

Didn't Caracella cop accidental contact to the head? It happens.

That was OK because the injured player played for Collingwood.

 

[lenny&carl]

If you hip & shoulder someone "from behind" and manage to break their nose, then you must be pretty bloody good.

 

[demoniac]

Time for Schwabby and co to quit or be sacked. Schwabby is the ultimate 'yeah nah' man - unimpressive as a coach and perhaps even more unimpressive in his match review panel role. The head must be protected, no ifs, no buts, no 'yeah nahs'. The brilliant logic of Schwabby and co has just made it ok to make contact with a players head using your shoulder that is severe enough to cause concusiion.

 

[MarkT]

If you hip & shoulder someone "from behind" and manage to break their nose, then you must be pretty bloody good.

What was that chick’s name from The Exorcist?