MRP / Trib. Goodes Reported - GUILTY. Out 1 week

[mark121]

Re: Goodes Reported

Leg on leg contact is clearly an issue and needs to be stamped out.

Well done AFL.

Only just watched the incident and Goodes doesnt seem to see him until its too late. Wouldnt expect a player to get suspended for it unless they have a history of doing the same thing.

Goodes unfortunately kind of does after the pre season match but in my opinion both were different because Goodes appeared to have another choice and more time the first time around and he didnt use his knees the second time.

 

[reidfactor]

Re: Goodes Reported

ok so part one is complete....

GOODES IS CHALLENGING HIS SUSPENSION....


5PM TONIGHT THE CHARGE WILL BE CONTESTED...


WILL MY GUT FEEL COME OFF...

 

[The King!]

Re: Goodes Reported

leaping on top of someone's head could hurt someone, but if your trying to take a screamer thats OK. He was only doing exactly what the other guy was doing - trying to trap an unpredictably bouncing ball with his legs/body. Any lawyer worth his salt will get him off.

Im just guessing the afl stance not saying i agree with the actual rule.

They cant deny legs went in first i would think they want it downgraded to incidental and not negligent.

Its been graded negligant low impact and body contact.

 

[Jack Lord]

Re: Goodes Reported

ok so part one is complete....

GOODES IS CHALLENGING HIS SUSPENSION....


5PM TONIGHT THE CHARGE WILL BE CONTESTED...


WILL MY GUT FEEL COME OFF...

Go Goodesy!

 

[Syd]

Re: Goodes Reported - Challenge Accepted

I for one, look forward to BF going into meltdown if he gets off.

 

[Old Skool]

Re: Goodes Reported - Challenge Accepted

I for one, look forward to BF going into meltdown if he gets off.

He's had a good run over the years and that factor will play more of a role in any outbreaks of cynicism, than the actual circumstances relating to this report.

I can't see the negligent aspect getting thrown out, can he still get a reprieve without eliminating the negligent factor?

 

[The King!]

Re: Goodes Reported - Challenge Accepted

He's had a good run over the years and that factor will play more of a role in any outbreaks of cynicism, than the actual circumstances relating to this report.

I can't see the negligent aspect getting thrown out, can he still get a reprieve without eliminating the negligent factor?

Has he needed a good run? Just been a fair player

 

[reidfactor]

Re: Goodes Reported - Challenge Accepted

i can sense all north supporters shiting themselves right now, if goodes gets off, sunday will be massive...

he deserves to break the record in sydney in front of a packed house...

come on afl do the right thing by all us diehards ...


ps- love that the club is fighting this joke decision

 

[bedford]

Re: Goodes Reported - Challenge Accepted

He's had a good run over the years and that factor will play more of a role in any outbreaks of cynicism, than the actual circumstances relating to this report.

I can't see the negligent aspect getting thrown out, can he still get a reprieve without eliminating the negligent factor?

How has he had a great run ? A ball player first and only a ball player. Don't come on here with that baiting crap

 

[Old Skool]

Re: Goodes Reported - Challenge Accepted

i can sense all north supporters shiting themselves right now, if goodes gets off, sunday will be massive...

I can't speak for "all north supporters", but my view is that if we can't beat Sydney with Goodes in the side, then last sunday was a false dawn and we haven't improved that much at all.

A full strength Sydney is a test we need to have now.

he deserves to break the record in sydney in front of a packed house..

Yes, I have to admit that I didn't take that in to account. This would somewhat explain the outpouring of emotion.

 

[Syd]

Re: Goodes Reported - Challenge Accepted

He's had a good run over the years and that factor will play more of a role in any outbreaks of cynicism, than the actual circumstances relating to this report.

I can't see the negligent aspect getting thrown out, can he still get a reprieve without eliminating the negligent factor?

No more or less than a dozen other players and incidents I could name.

That being said, I do believe you are right in that they will want to send a message that it is Goodes and it has happened before, albeit the last one was a feet up\cleats out slide.

If he goes in to that contest standing up he gets Surjan high and cops weeks, he tries going in low with the feet tucked in and he's facing a week. You can't use the "he's got form argument either as when cited during the NAB Cup, neither had Goodes.

All I ask for is clear mandates of whats acceptabvle and consistent application by the AFL.

I know, dreaming....

Ironically, the hit that broke Parkers jaw in round 1 was to my eyes, a blatant attempt to line up a young man who was killing GWS no intent for the ball just to iron him out and put him off his game. The result? Just 1-week for McDonald.

I'm all for rubbing this sliding out if the AFL deem it dangerous, but shouldn't both Goodes and Surjan be missing out as the intent\manner at the was the same.

 

[S120]

Re: Goodes Reported - Challenge Accepted

Lol at the new title of the thread.

Given our record with getting players off at the tribunal, I have found a sense of optimism since I heard Goodes was challenging the ruling.

 

[Old Skool]

Re: Goodes Reported - Challenge Accepted

I'm all for rubbing this sliding out if the AFL deem it dangerous, but shouldn't both Goodes and Surjan be missing out as the intent\manner at the was the same.

I don't think there's any simple solution to this sliding stuff. There's no doubt in my mind that Goodes did not have any intent to harm anyone, but if the AFL don't act on this stuff, then how long before some coach promotes it as a tactic?

Is it negligent? Yes, it's negligent all day long. Otherwise, what is Adam doing on his knees in the first place? He knew the opposing player was coming and chose to attack the contest in the manner in which it occurred. There's just no getting around that.

If I had the power to rule on this matter I would give Goodes a pass and release a statement during the week that the scenario is being overhauled with a view to stiffening up future scrutiny and penalties.

Besides, it would be great for my club to be a part of the history of an historical swans record breaking match and Arch's 250th is a reminder that we go alright in SCG tribute matches.

 

[TRAWP]

Re: Goodes Reported - Challenge Accepted

***********, if your intent is to slide into a contest without connecting your knees into your opponents head than I have no issue with it. Hows it any different then sliding in shoulder first into someones ribs. Lets just hear it Old Skool, you dont want Goodes playing this week so your little team of plodders have a chance.

 

[TheGoatBaron]

Re: Goodes Reported

Sliding in knee first could hurt someone he wont get off they will make an example of him.

Whitecross' head high tackle, could have potentially paralyzed Joel Selwood and he got off and people want Goodes banned for going in knee first, because they fear, the opposition players leg maybe hurt? Rightio....

 

[spuzzlord]

Re: Goodes Reported

Whitecross' head high tackle, could have potentially paralyzed Joel Selwood and he got off and people want Goodes banned for going in knee first, because they fear, the opposition players leg maybe hurt? Rightio....

hey, dead-legs really hurt....

 

[Sanecow]

Re: Goodes Reported - Challenge Accepted

All I ask for is clear mandates of whats acceptable and consistent application by the AFL.

I know, dreaming....

This is what I would like too. But I know that if Goodes gets rubbed out on this one, I will go mental for the rest of the season watching players slide in on their knees without the whistle even being blown.

 

[bungee]

Re: Goodes Reported - Challenge Accepted

See how many players slide in this weekend in the wet. It's a common enough technique for contesting the ground ball. If the AFL wants it banned then sure, ban it, but make the ruling clear before picking out one of the game's finest players as an example.

 

[Dangas]

Re: Goodes Reported - Challenge Accepted

He's had a good run over the years and that factor will play more of a role in any outbreaks of cynicism, than the actual circumstances relating to this report.

I can't see the negligent aspect getting thrown out, can he still get a reprieve without eliminating the negligent factor?

Seems unlikely

 

[dipper86]

Re: Goodes Reported - Challenge Accepted

Last time I checked Surjan also slid in with his Knees, What was Goodes supposed to do, slide in chest first and get a knee to the face. They were both going for the ball, Surjan just got there first by a milli second.....should be thrown out.

 

[CAS79]

Re: Goodes Reported - Challenge Accepted

What is ironic about Goodes being labelled dirty.. No one can name a single player who missed anymore than 5 minutes of game time for something that he did to them.

 

[Mcveigh]

Re: Goodes Reported - Challenge Accepted

after watching the footage again... they should both be rubbed out for a week or it should be thrown out as this is a goddamn CONTACT sport.

surjan went studs first tor protect him self from goodes, goodes went shins first so he can one day still have babies.

 

[Ed_Gein]

Re: Goodes Reported - Challenge Accepted

love the title of the thread.

"you want to suspend me for contesting a 50/50?"

 

[Membling]

Re: Goodes Reported - Challenge Accepted

What we've decided to do
[YOUTUBE]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Nepysk5rOf4[/YOUTUBE]




What we need to do beforehand
[YOUTUBE]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TT_vf5ioXXk[/YOUTUBE]




Should be interesting to see what the result is. Hopefully goodes doesn't do a repeat

 

[The King!]

Re: Goodes Reported - Challenge Accepted

What is ironic about Goodes being labelled dirty.. No one can name a single player who missed anymore than 5 minutes of game time for something that he did to them.

think hirdy got some dirt in his hair when he shoved him