Goodes 1 Week

[bedford]

Goodes 1 week carn't be reduced,if he contests it he will get 2,all those toothless ferals will be happy.It is a joke

 

[grimlock]

Suspected as much, he got a big reprieve from the Selwood incident and still didn't learn. Let's hope he learns from this one.

Sadly, the streak comes to an end.

 

[natlovestheswans]

NOOO!

This is crap.

 

[phonepopeye]

Flawed rule. It was glancing contact at best. Netball is more physical. Still, a rest will be beneficial.

 

[hammo_cheersquad]

poor goodesy
though i cant say he doesnt deserve it
purely to learn if anything else, there was nothing in the actual hit itself
he always runs straight through the middle of the ruck and knocks peoples heads off or comes bloody close to it

 

[MF]

Is this a joke?

He deserved a week or two for the Selwood incident and maybe 1 for the Petterd incident but there was nothing in this at all. What a load of Bollocks!

 

[hammo_cheersquad]

yeah i know he doesnt deserve anything for this one
roosy said that the selwood hit was rubbish and deserved suspension
and then he came out today saying that this one doesnt worry him, doesnt deserve any suspension at all

but i guess that the universe sorta levels itself out now
it also satisfies all melbournians

 

[Costanza_]

From afl.com.au

Adam Goodes, Sydney Swans, has been charged with a Level One engaging in rough conduct offence against Clint Bartram, Melbourne, during the second quarter of the Round 13 match between the Sydney Swans and Melbourne, played at Manuka Oval on Sunday June 22, 2008.


In summary, his existing carry-over points from within the last 12 months means that his penalty cannot be reduced from a one-match sanction, even with an early plea.


The incident was assessed as negligent conduct (one point), low impact (one point) and high contact (two points). This is a total of four activation points, resulting in a classification of a Level One offence, drawing 125 demerit points and a one-match sanction. He has 93.75 points carried over from within the last 12 months, increasing the penalty to 218.75 points and a two-match sanction. An early plea reduces the penalty by 25 per cent to 164.06 points and a one-match sanction.

 

[ssfc0203]

Soft, inconsistent and a disgrace.*


*The AFL, not Goodes.

Right now, I'm hoping the Pies game won't be a bath. What a crock of shit for him to be going now.

 

[SOPH_CROSS]

Your ____ing kidding me right
load of crap if u ask me
the sh*t has hit the fan

Great no Goodes against the pies

 

[Costanza_]

Right now, I'm hoping the Pies game won't be a bath. What a crock of shit for him to be going now.

Couldn't have come at a worse time, other than September. I still haven't seen a replay so can't comment on the incident itself, but Goodes really needs to change whatever it is that keeps landing him in these predicaments. We're gonna miss him sorely against the Pies

 

[ssfc0203]

Couldn't have come at a worse time, other than September. I still haven't seen a replay so can't comment on the incident itself, but Goodes really needs to change whatever it is that keeps landing him in these predicaments. We're gonna miss him sorely against the Pies

It was a glancing blow by the shoulder to the Melbourne guy's head, wasn't worth anything but the free that was paid. He even looked around to see how the guy was ..

 

[Banyo Bloods]

No reason for this to go further than a free kick.

The risk if challenged is quite big in getting two matches. I can't make up my mind if I want them to challenge or not, my opinion that it is soft wont get him off the two week ban but more so how they look at the incident being high etc oh brother. Losing him for the next match could be vital to the Swans eventual ladder position. The difference between top four or bottom four of the eight usually means a Premiership grrrrrrrrrrrrrrr


If he gets suspended bring in Davis

 

[Dudley]

Not sure where the original points criticising Goddes went ? isnt this a discussion forum ? but anyway.

Goodes was dumb and got what he deserved in the current environment.

Once is unlucky, twice is dumb, three times is stupid, dumb and selfish.

I hope Roos and the playing group give him a decent bake, he deserves it.

 

[BIGBEZ]

Not sure where the original points criticising Goddes went ? isnt this a discussion forum ? but anyway.

Goodes was dumb and got what he deserved in the current environment.

Once is unlucky, twice is dumb, three times is stupid, dumb and selfish.

I hope Roos and the playing group give him a decent bake, he deserves it.

He wasnt dumb mate, the changed rules are, Goodes plays on pure football instinct, thats how footy has been played all his life, I dont want him to change, I want the laws to change, or just ease up a bit!

 

[Dudley]

He wasnt dumb mate, the changed rules are, Goodes plays on pure football instinct, thats how footy has been played all his life, I dont want him to change, I want the laws to change, or just ease up a bit!

I never argued the rules are good at the moment,

But

Goodes knows the rules, he plays under them.

He does the same stupid thing 3 times, therefore he is dumb & selfish.

he lets himself and the team down, End of story

 

[Corpuscles]

I wouldn't say this on the main board but this might be a blessing in disguise! Especially if some of these apply

-His carry over points are eliminated or reduced ?
-He now has reason to seriously reconsider and learn to be careful
-If Swans can beat a depleted Wobblers... better measure and test!
-No reason not to miss if better to rest injury

It was super soft!!!!! but when you have 90+ pts hanging over your head... then any doubtful has to go ... and we all know he has been super lucky!

 

[BIGBEZ]

I never argued the rules are good at the moment,

But

Goodes knows the rules, he plays under them.

He does the same stupid thing 3 times, therefore he is dumb & selfish.

he lets himself and the team down, End of story

When you play footy mate, especially at a high level, you play on instinct, and reflex, the contact he gave, he cops every week, without a single protest, to expect him to change is selfish by you, if he has to cop a week here and there under the new rules, so be it, I want to see him play footy the way he always has!

 

[Costanza_]

He wasnt dumb mate, the changed rules are, Goodes plays on pure football instinct, thats how footy has been played all his life, I dont want him to change, I want the laws to change, or just ease up a bit!

Yes there was (prob) no malice in it. Yes the rules seem to be heading in a very soft direction - but thats the way it is, and players need to adapt accordingly. We can complain day and night about the current rules, but it didn't help Port when Burgoyne went, and it didn't help Goodes or the Swans in this case [not saying the incidents were necessarily comparable]. Players need to be ultra-careful at the moment, and Goodes wasn't.

Anyone think he should fight the charge and risk missing the Hawthorn game? Or settle for one week?

 

[Dudley]

When you play footy mate, especially at a high level, you play on instinct, and reflex, the contact he gave, he cops every week, without a single protest, to expect him to change is selfish by you, if he has to cop a week here and there under the new rules, so be it, I want to see him play footy the way he always has!

That is a ridiculous argument.

I am sure Peter Filandia bit the players scrotum on 'instinct' and did not pre-meditate his actions.

Does this mean he should be allowed to do it in every game ?

Goodes knows the rules and did the same stupid thing twice and was liucky to escape punishment.

He then does it again, and misses a week

Dumb and selfish action, and will be seen that way by both management and leadership group.

 

[Bloods_33]

I wouldn't say this on the main board but this might be a blessing in disguise! Especially if some of these apply

-His carry over points are eliminated or reduced ?
-He now has reason to seriously reconsider and learn to be careful
-If Swans can beat a depleted Wobblers... better measure and test!
-No reason not to miss if better to rest injury

It was super soft!!!!! but when you have 90+ pts hanging over your head... then any doubtful has to go ... and we all know he has been super lucky!

to me it looked like he was avoiding the oncoming bump and in the process collected batram but the umpire was right there surely he thought the impact was low enough not to report, mrp is there for incidents when umpires are in bad positions to make the call, furthermore i think goodsey extra height compared to other midfielders means that if he does lay a bump almost always it'll be high, so i don't personally think he was careless or selfish and if they contested it they could win but all other afl supporters would have a heart attack if it got overturned so best to cop it sweet

 

[is2SWaNz]

ARGH!!! *BANGS HEAD ON THE WALL* Wtf is wrong with Goodes? AND WTF IS WRONG WITH THE TRIBUNAL??

It's oh so obvious that the Selwood bump was much more dangerous than his "high head contact" on the Dees opponent. There is no consistency in this decision.

____!

 

[BIGBEZ]

That is a ridiculous argument.

I am sure Peter Filandia bit the players scrotum on 'instinct' and did not pre-meditate his actions.

Does this mean he should be allowed to do it in every game ?

Goodes knows the rules and did the same stupid thing twice and was liucky to escape punishment.

He then does it again, and misses a week

Dumb and selfish action, and will be seen that way by both management and leadership group.

I think youve been biting too many scrotums!

 

[BIGBEZ]

to me it looked like he was avoiding the oncoming bump and in the process collected batram but the umpire was right there surely he thought the impact was low enough not to report, mrp is there for incidents when umpires are in bad positions to make the call, furthermore i think goodsey extra height compared to other midfielders means that if he does lay a bump almost always it'll be high, so i don't personally think he was careless or selfish and if they contested it they could win but all other afl supporters would have a heart attack if it got overturned so best to cop it sweet

agree, it wasnt a 'bump' as such, it was high contact with his arm, not his fist, not his elbow, but his arm, whats he supposed to do ffs, run into packs with his hands behind his back?

 

[4TH GEN SWAN]

Has anybody seen a replay of what actually happened????????

Goodes ran at the ball, with 2 Melbourne players coming at him from both sides. The ball bounced side ways out of the path of Goodes into Battram and Goodes braces himself for contact on both sides of himself......

Anyone who wants to dispute this, needs to watch the replay with the front on angle..... The MRP are only trying to stop criticism of themselves, by applying this ridiculous ruling..... Stop making the game as soft as butter, or I'm going to fully switch my energies to Melbourne Storm. At least the NRL allow for bumps and bruises. It use to take courage to play AFL, but the boofheads running the modern game makes me sick with their lack of physical contests.....

Why not come clean and say that they want to turn the game into what the Irish play, so we have another country to play against.....

As Reg Regan says "Bring back the BIFF"......