goodes off

[Banyo Bloods]

I don't think the decision was a disgrace. There are dubious decisions passed down every week by the MRP and Tribunal. On the weight of evidence and previous suspensions I thought he'd go. More suprised than anything, but certainly glad from our perspective that he's available. He's in damn fine form atm.

I also didn't think some players should have been suspended Borgoyne for instance.

I'm just not going to bend over because Goodes got the right decision and others don't think so. Their perogative.

I think we need a little one eyed loyalty whilst we're attacked as supporters for inconsistencies beyond a clubs or players or supporters control.

 

[halfback dasher]

yes dumb post

This result is fair I think most people as usual miss the point that he basically is charged for the offence only an early plea and no carry over points will allow him to play. Week in week out players get suspensions that are downgraded to lesser grades due to the early plea.

There are Swan fans on the main board joining in the chorus that the decision was a disgrace well sorry you won't get that out of me. I will loyally and happily support my team and the players through the good and the bad.

Good of the game ??? Needing to whinge at every opportunity against opposition teams isn't helping. I love the Swans first yes kill me. I love everything AFL second so far I have 11 of the 16 Jumpers framed around my bar and will have them all as I score them on ebay for the right price.

Get to grass roots footy and watch kids who arnt sure where to draw the line .THIS IS NOT A SHOT AT YOUR CLUB....its a shot at the afl.ps. I DO LOVE THE SWANS BECAUSE OF THERE ABILITY TO STAY AT THE TOP,which is hard to do in any comp.

 

[halfback dasher]

Are you captain coach?


I challenge you to tell me what the MRP ruling should have been. DO NOT tell me "3 weeks".

Go and find the classifications, look at the video and define it.

These people throwing around "X WEEKS X WEEKS" is rubbish. It serves no purpose because the system is structured.

You might look at it and think it is 'bad for the game', but the system does not account for your opinion, only the facts.

NO, just a coach ,oh and YOU CHALLANGE ME.......LOL

 

[Hooley McBoob]

Woah, I'm really surprised.

 

[tonk]

Ripper result but I am more confused than ever, I think?

 

[Banyo Bloods]

Get to grass roots footy and watch kids who arnt sure where to draw the line .THIS IS NOT A SHOT AT YOUR CLUB....its a shot at the afl.ps. I DO LOVE THE SWANS BECAUSE OF THERE ABILITY TO STAY AT THE TOP,which is hard to do in any comp.

If it's not a shot at our club then why post here let everyone know on the main board

The game is evolving but at grass roots which I'm fully involved in you have dads teaching them the way they played go in and get the ball son etc etc The game doesn't evolve at that level so much yet the umpires are instructed to umpire the games the way the top level plays. Dads should teach their kid to let someone else go get the ball and sweat off him until he has it and then get yourself a free kick.........of course that is ridiculous to even suggest but as much as the AFL want the game played a certain way grass roots footy is not played anything like the main game.

Last week I went to the funeral of my old coach Mick Nolan the galoping gasometer and I reflected on a few things he taught me which are no longer relevant in the game.

Wow I don't think I could have gotten any further off topic

 

[Neville Bartos]

I'm not trying to troll, but this has gone past ridiculous. Goodes isn't a dirty player but there is NO WAY he could only deserve a reprimand for that. Murphy, Burgoyne and many others would be shaking their heads at how inconsistent the AFL is, and it practically proves that the AFL are favouring the swans. Don't get upset at our accusations, just enjoy it while it lasts. I wish we got the same ride at Hawthorn.

 

[ssfc0203]

I'm not trying to troll, but this has gone past ridiculous. Goodes isn't a dirty player but there is NO WAY he could only deserve a reprimand for that. Murphy, Burgoyne and many others would be shaking their heads at how inconsistent the AFL is, and it practically proves that the AFL are favouring the swans. Don't get upset at our accusations, just enjoy it while it lasts. I wish we got the same ride at Hawthorn.

The tribunal is ridiculously inconsistant with these, but the difference between Goodes' and Burgoyne's hit, I think, was the extent of the intent, the effect and the early plea. Stills taken from the footage show that Goodes was aiming for the shoulder but then his ass (sorry for that ) slid forward to Selwood's neck. Selwood was left un-hurt and for the most part unaffected, and the early plea says it for itself.

He did get 93 or so points, so the recklessness of the act because of him going for Selwood when he had his head over the ball was duly noted.

 

[.Shotties.]

Murphy, Burgoyne and many others would be shaking their heads at how inconsistent the AFL is, and it practically proves that the AFL are favouring the swans.

So is it inconsistancy or a deliberate ploy?

 

[liz]

I'm not trying to troll, but this has gone past ridiculous. Goodes isn't a dirty player but there is NO WAY he could only deserve a reprimand for that. Murphy, Burgoyne and many others would be shaking their heads at how inconsistent the AFL is, and it practically proves that the AFL are favouring the swans. Don't get upset at our accusations, just enjoy it while it lasts. I wish we got the same ride at Hawthorn.

Firstly, I'll start by saying I'm surprised at the outcome, not because I think someone should be suspended for such soft contact but because others have been suspended for not much worse.

But I hadn't sat and added up the MRP points that he might get (and also hadn't realised that his carry over points had expired).

To make a proper comparison to other recent incidents, were any of them graded as reckless, rather than negligent? I can't recall. I think that is the classification that maybe he is lucky on. The force of impact of Goodes bump was clearly significantly lower than others (he hit him with his bum, not his hip or shoulder), so I don't see how that point of difference can be argued. But if other recent cases have been graded as reckless, I agree that some inconsistency has come into play.

 

[J-swan]

yes dumb post

You are as entitled to your opinion as I am to mine and our opinions just happen to differ.

 

[Hooley McBoob]

I'm with you J-Swan! Everybody is entitled to their own opinion.

 

[Swanstar]

I'm not trying to troll, but this has gone past ridiculous. Goodes isn't a dirty player but there is NO WAY he could only deserve a reprimand for that. Murphy, Burgoyne and many others would be shaking their heads at how inconsistent the AFL is, and it practically proves that the AFL are favouring the swans. Don't get upset at our accusations, just enjoy it while it lasts. I wish we got the same ride at Hawthorn.

Yes Thats exactly what i mean Supporters should be Angry at the MRP, but instead they direct their angry at the Swans being labeled as protected species etc etc when its the MRP that it's at fault, of course we would try to get one of our players off every club would be the same, but if the MRP was consistent then Goodes would of went for 1-2 weeks regardless of what our supposed QC and lawyers can do.

 

[bedford]

WHY IS IT A DUMB POST?J SWAN IS RIGHT ,or are you to young to understand the dvd you prob havent even seen?As an unders coach i have .and this is a poor result.So bedford,GET THE FAXS you one eyed twit.............. WELL DONE TO YOU JSWAN

i do coach underage footy buddy ,have a good look at the bump TO THE SHOULDER
its not up to me who comes on here there are rules but please go back to your own board to save any futher crap

 

[Sanecow]

It's not like Goodes actually did any damage but I wasn't sure if that would make a difference. Happy with the result.

 

[bedford]

You are as entitled to your opinion as I am to mine and our opinions just happen to differ.

Fair enough,it wasn't mean't in anyway as a go at your opinion but a play on words of your post and thank you to Hooley for her support,wonderfull stuff.
Now all us SWANS need to move on and smash another enemy.

 

[BIGBEZ]

i do coach underage footy buddy ,have a good look at the bump TO THE SHOULDER
its not up to me who comes on here there are rules but please go back to your own board to save any futher crap

Ive only seen game day angle, it did look like head contact to me, but I havent seen another angle yet, so Ill take your word for it if you have seen different footage or if you were there!

 

[Hooley McBoob]

Fair enough,it wasn't mean't in anyway as a go at your opinion but a play on words of your post and thank you to Hooley for her support,wonderfull stuff.
Now all us SWANS need to move on and smash another enemy.

I try

Still can't believe he got off though!

Is there any way of banning myself from BigFooty until 4pm tomorrow when my massive assignment which I am only a third of the way through is due? Hmmm?

 

[seshak08]

He's a protected species
Obviously all you sydney supporters are gonna say that he isnt
It's clear that he is
twice this year, now 3 times, he's gotten off with dubious decisions
last week three players got done and goodes this week was far worse then murphy's....
goodes didnt even go for the ball

i dont care what you all say, you're going to be biased towards him which is fair enough
but thats my opinion

 

[Banyo Bloods]

i dont care what you all say

Wow I don't care what you say either how cool

 

[Swanstar]

He's a protected species
Obviously all you sydney supporters are gonna say that he isnt
It's clear that he is
twice this year, now 3 times, he's gotten off with dubious decisions
last week three players got done and goodes this week was far worse then murphy's....
goodes didnt even go for the ball

i dont care what you all say, you're going to be biased towards him which is fair enough
but thats my opinion

Seriously it has nothing to do with Goodes, why can't ppl see this if its the MRP that loves him it isn't Goodes fault, obviously he isn't gonna go in and say please rub me out for 2 weeks. I really wish ppl would start to open their eyes and realise it has nothing to do with Sydney, but rather the inconsistency of the MRP.

 

[Hooley McBoob]

He's a protected species
Obviously all you sydney supporters are gonna say that he isnt
It's clear that he is
twice this year, now 3 times, he's gotten off with dubious decisions
last week three players got done and goodes this week was far worse then murphy's....
goodes didnt even go for the ball

i dont care what you all say, you're going to be biased towards him which is fair enough
but thats my opinion

I wouldn't say we're biased. Some of us thought it was worth nothing, some of us thought he should have been suspended. Did you bother to read the other threads about this matter or did you just come in here to have your little rant and then leave again?

The difference is that most of us Swans supporters can disagree and not turn feral on each other.

There are a heap of people posting on the main boards that don't support Sydney who think he shouldn't have even been reported, let alone suspended. Can you explain that, perhaps by accusing them of bias? No.

Swanstar also raises a good point about the MRP. They have a difficult job and they are inconsistent. And they certainly can't please every player, coach, journalist and fan every week. Officially, Goodes had a clean record, and the MRP should reward good behaviour.

 

[Dudley]

Firstly, I'll start by saying I'm surprised at the outcome, not because I think someone should be suspended for such soft contact but because others have been suspended for not much worse.

But I hadn't sat and added up the MRP points that he might get (and also hadn't realised that his carry over points had expired).

To make a proper comparison to other recent incidents, were any of them graded as reckless, rather than negligent? I can't recall. I think that is the classification that maybe he is lucky on. The force of impact of Goodes bump was clearly significantly lower than others (he hit him with his bum, not his hip or shoulder), so I don't see how that point of difference can be argued. But if other recent cases have been graded as reckless, I agree that some inconsistency has come into play.

I am very suprised also.

But that is crap Liz, burgoyne was outed for hitting Mitchell with his back !!!

I assure you Liz you can really do damage with your 'bum' as you call it.

Your 'bum' is your pelvis and associated muscles, effectively your core, it was what you use to move blokes off the footy so you can get it. it is half the problem with the rule.

However, to say the 'bum' is lesser impact than hip and shoulder is silly and shows no understanding of actually playing, rather than looking at the game.

IMHO

 

[Dudley]

Very happy he is off though, but he is lucky.

Matthews now has a case !!!

 

[liz]

But it was a glancing blow with his buttock, not a sharp jab with a bony hip or a solid shoulder. I know which I'd rather be hit with.

I thought Burgoyne was desperately unlucky to get any weeks, let alone 3, but mostly because I thought the contact was accidental and he did what he could to lessen the impact. He was treated harshly because Mitchell went down and was taken off on a stretcher. Had Selwood stayed down Goodes might be looking at a different outcome but the evidence of Selwood's reaction suggests that the contact was very light.