Didak Cleared

[ShepBoy]

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.

Your flat mates are idiots too.

WHat about Houlihan's hit on the WCE guy this year?

And that pig Notting on Caracella?

It doesnt work that way.

 

[deck]

Re: SEN - Didak Cleared

So accidental head high contact is not grounds for suspension? Tell that to players rubbed out for attempting a spoil and getting the head. And while you are at it, give Chris Grant back his ****ing Brownlow.

Didn't see you complaining when Hollihan got off.

 

[captain amazo]

That's absolutely unbelievable. **** the AFL and **** Collingwood.

 

[lenny&carl]

What was that chick’s name from The Exorcist?

Linda Something... Linda Scotland?

 

[Ari]

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.

That's fair.

Interesting though that the vast majority of supporters of 15 other clubs agree that it was a suspendable offence.

Are you going to respond to any other of my comments? Or just going to pick that part of my post to respond to?

 

[Stumpy Pete]

That's absolutely unbelievable. **** the AFL and **** Collingwood.

Wow - the auto censor is blocking out "God-bless" these days.

Regards

S. Pete

 

[FuManchu]

That's absolutely unbelievable. **** the AFL and **** Collingwood.

you have a player in a coma and all you are worried about is Didak delivering a hip and shoulder?

 

[deck]

Re: SEN - Didak Cleared

Amen to that.

Poor decision had this been Pickett or Guerra they would have been looking at a 4 match ban minimum.

But the good news is that now every other player that does something similar to this has a case and shouldn't be suspended for it.

Hollihan and Hodge both got off on similar incidents. Beau Waters got off when a bloke had his head over the ball. So no Didak is not the first to get off for that kind of incident.

 

[jimmy35]

Doesn't suprise me , as I've said before Scotland stopped otherwise Didaks hit would have been right down the side .
Common sense prevails.

 

[Drummond]

In what is the most controversial match review decision of the 2006 season so far, the panel ruled that Didak's contact on Scotland was accidental.

Is this some kind of sick joke?

 

[eddiesmith]

That's fair.

Interesting though that the vast majority of supporters of 15 other clubs agree that it was a suspendable offence.

Are you going to respond to any other of my comments? Or just going to pick that part of my post to respond to?

The vast majority of supporters from the other 15 clubs always want our players rubbed out, whats new?

 

[MarkT]

Interesting though that the vast majority of supporters of 15 other clubs agree that it was a suspendable offence.

What's new. Some say it was an elbow. Do you agree?

Are you going to respond to any other of my comments? Or just going to pick that part of my post to respond to?

Which comments? I reckon I've covered what's relevant in the replies I've made in this tread. Give me something specific.

 

[BigLance]

just trying to figure out how many weeks byron picket would have got for the same incident ???
absolute joke, the way the tribunal system is run these days wouldnt've been suprised me if scotland was suspended for having his head in the way.

 

[Ari]

What's new. Some say it was an elbow. Do you agree?

The elbow for mine, was tucked in at the last moment. It wasnt so much the elbow itself as it was head high contact for mine.

Which comments? I reckon I've covered what's relevant in the replies I've made in this tread. Give me something specific.

Specifically id love to hear your thoughts on the following "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."

If a player makes head high contact then it's a free kick. Furthermore if it's deemed to be reckless, which it was, then it becomes a reportable offence. MMM went through it on the radio and came up with the same as me, 3-4 weeks down to 1-2 weeks.

What are your thoughts on some of my comments below?

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. 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 the side and behind 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.
-But he caught him high and did severe damage! Isnt that reckless at least??

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 the side and behind braced for contact which was made to the head causing harm to the player.... again, see photo above.

 

[Timmy from Thomastown]

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?

Listen to the basic facts.

1, Bumping is permitted in AFL football
2. There is no offside rule, you can approach the player from behind,
3. Didaks arm was tucked perfectly at the point of impact - photos of the "follow through" are irrelevant.
4. Didaks feet were on the ground
5. Incidental and accidental contact happens every week. Just because its a free kick doesnt make it reportable.
6. Scotland had the ball and was fair game.
7. The presence of blood does not make an accident reportable.

Every time somebody gets suspended for soemething 50/50, everybody cries poor about the game going soft, turning into netball etc etc. Yet as soon as somebody executes the perfect hip and shoulder, where are these people who should be applauding it??? NOWHERE - the hypocrites change teams!!!

 

[Kade Simps]

The vast majority of supporters from the other 15 clubs always want our players rubbed out, whats new?

Who gives a **** wat club he is from, what he did was absolutely disgusting and deserved to be rubbed out for atleast 2. it is an absolute disgrace that he got cleared of anything, he almost killed scotland and they deemed it accidental IS THE MATCH REVIEW PANEL F****** BLIND. Bannister's crappy little jumper punch added up to a 3 match ban but because of clean record got taken down to 1 and didak got nothing. I am absolutely appalled with that descision. Ofcourse Collingwodd player gets off with nothing!

 

[Kade Simps]

Listen to the basic facts.

perfect hip and shoulder, where are these people who should be applauding it??? NOWHERE - the hypocrites change teams!!!

You call that a perfect hip and shoulder. You call that a fair bump and not head high. How the hell was he concussed and bleading from the fore head. Scotland looked like he had been belted by a raging bull.

 

[Timmy from Thomastown]

You call that a perfect hip and shoulder. You call that a fair bump and not head high. How the hell was he concussed and bleading from the fore head. Scotland looked like he had been belted by a raging bull.

It was too high and therefore a free kick. Apart from that it was totally legitimate.

 

[buddha]

Re: SEN - Didak Cleared

collingwood supporters wanted to hang jamie charman with his hit on rocca earlier in the year and now try to defend didak for doing the same if not worse.

 

[Greatness23]

If that was Riccuito, 5 weeks.

 

[Murray]

If that was Riccuito, 5 weeks.

Rightly so, he is a thug and doesn't play for Collingwood

 

[Timmy from Thomastown]

Re: SEN - Didak Cleared

collingwood supporters wanted to hang jamie charman with his hit on rocca earlier in the year and now try to defend didak for doing the same if not worse.

But Charman wasnt charged. The tribunal set the precedence with Charman, Notting, and Giasuracusa. Those cases are exactly why Didak should have got off.

 

[harmesy 37]

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.

Agree- why is it ok for fullbacks to hold fevola? it happens every week and there was a ridiculous one near the goal post in the second quarter. I had to laugh when they didn't pay that one - even blind freddy could see it. It was easily the worst umpired match i have seen for at least 3 years.


Didak is collingwood's most important player. forget Buckley - didak is more important, but he did the crime, so he does the time. 3 weeks penalty minimum in the real world. In the afl's wacky world he will probably get a pay rise. Typical collingwood tactic. go the biff.

 

[Corrosion]

Re: SEN - Didak Cleared

But Charman wasnt charged. The tribunal set the precedence with Charman, Notting, and Giasuracusa

Charman got 1 week.

Get Notting's name out of there, both were going for the ball.

 

[Greatness23]

Rightly so, he is a thug and doesn't play for Collingwood

No, he isn't a thug, and your definately right about the Collingwood thing...