Jason Cloke has no one to blame but himself

[The Mailman]

I can't believe the Magpies are going to try and appeal. The verdict was a foregone conclusion from the start, and I think that Cloke really needs to sit back and realize the consequences of his actions, instead of playing the role of innocent victim. I think it's pathetic how we are all focusing on his devestation on missing the grand final, the fact is, he hit the player recklessly after the ball, the player got a broken nose and concussed as a result of what Cloke did, and frankly, he is lucky to only get 2 weeks. The tribunal would have looked like fools if they let him off scot free, after other players got robbed out in the past for similiar actions, in fact Chris Grant probably suffered the ultimate penality for whacking Leigh Colbert in a similiar fashion back in 1997 which cost him the Brownlow medal.
Anyway if it's any consolation for Cloke he wouldn't be part of a premiership side if he played anyway, most smart football people know the grand final is a forgone conclusion to Brisbane.
TYSON EDWARDS WAS THE VICTIM NOT CLOKE

 

[Leigh Roy]

Yes, you're absolutely right.

I don't hate the kid for what he did, I'm over it.

Just because it's Grand Final week, we're meant to pity him. heck that.

 

[Rohan_]

Short memory for a Carlton supporter. Remember Aaron Hamill???

 

[Crowaholic]

I agree with the first two posts. Thats what I've been trying to tell all of the losers in the bye bye cloke post. He did it he should face the consequences.

 

[MagpieJoel]

How in the hell could someone be knocked out from a attempted punch at the ball like that?

He was knocked out by the turf, it was made too look worse than it was by his landing.

 

[The Mailman]

Gee whiz Rohan what has Hamill got to do with this ?
The fact was, even if Edwards got knocked out when he hit the turf, it was as a result of him being whacked by Cloke in the first place.
You do the crime, you do the time.

 

[Crowaholic]

Originally posted by MagpieJoel
How in the hell could someone be knocked out from a attempted punch at the ball like that?

He was knocked out by the turf, it was made too look worse than it was by his landing.

Did you not watch the game or the replay. If he was knocked out by the turf then how come he didn't put his hands down to break his fall onto the turf?? The turf isn't in mid air dumb ass!! He got knocked out by the hit to the face.

 

[mic59]

It doesn't matter whether he was knocked out by falling to the ground or even whether he was given a drugged cup of tea in the changing rooms. The fact remains that he was whacked on the face as the video conclusively shows and that is worthy of a suspension. The result means basically nothing except that it may bring the original offence more to the attention of the umpire.

 

[Sammy Newman]

Talk about having a complete brain melt and forgetting where you are and who is watching you.

Jason Cloke - you idiot.

 

[Crowaholic]

Agree

 

[gPhonque]

....and once again, another player is suspended for what appears to be accidental contact.

Why don't we just cut to the chase and call the game Netball now?

Cloke has nobody to blame other than the f*ckwits on the tribunal who seem to have forgotten what the purpose of the tribunal actually is.

 

[SeinDude]

Originally posted by gPhonque
Cloke has nobody to blame other than the f*ckwits on the tribunal who seem to have forgotten what the purpose of the tribunal actually is.

So the fact that Tyson Edwards was taken out of the game unfairly and therefore robbing Adelaide of a quality midfielder for the rest of the game should be allowed to happen without being punnished??

Cheers!!
SeinDude

 

[NICK THE PIE MAN]

Couldn't you have done this post in the 50 000 other Cloke topics that there are on the board?

 

[dillo_09]

Originally posted by The Mailman
I can't believe the Magpies are going to try and appeal.

Don't you think that the Club owes it to Jason Cloke to exhaust all possible avenues of appeal? Just like any club would to any player. He has played his heart out all year and deserves to be given every opportunity to play. Imagine looking at him in the eye whilst telling him you are not going to appeal and support him???

As it stands he wont be playing on saturday, so what harm is it that they mount an appeal? Lose $10,000?? Who cares, money is irrelevant. You just never know the Tribunal may just continue on with its inconsistency displayed all year and over turn the decision and allowing the kid to play.

If they dont at the very least the kid knows that he was supported 100% by the club and they tried everything possible. That will be the biggest thing to come out of it all is the re-inforcement of the clubs commitment to the players which then gets returned by the players to the club and its supporters.

The whole incident, and the current feeling that is around because of what has happened ( and will happen) this week, will only make our club and the ties that bind all players, officials and supporters even stronger.

No matter what the result is on saturday, Collingwood is improving each week and will only get better because of this finals series.

If we win??? Opposition supporters dont even want to contemplate the shorft and longterm furture of the Collingwood Football Club.

GO PIES!!!!

 

[gPhonque]

Originally posted by SeinDude


So the fact that Tyson Edwards was taken out of the game unfairly and therefore robbing Adelaide of a quality midfielder for the rest of the game should be allowed to happen without being punnished??

What the f*ck does it have to do with whether Edwards was taken out of the game or not?

Why are tribunal decisions being based lately on the extent of the injury or contact?

I always thought the tribunal was there to eliminate, or minimize dirty play - not accidents!

It comes back to the same thing - we have a game with 36 players on the ground at any given time all chasing a ball and all are allowed to do this in a physical manner.

Should Cloke go unpunished?

Well, if it is accidental contact between two players going for the ball, then yes.

But I'd expect somebody like you who is unable to decide things for himself to follow the sheep and crucify him anyway.

SeinDude - let me tell you that you wouldn't have a clue if Cloke was going for the ball or not. You were not there. You were not the person jumping a few feet into the air during the marking contest with an oposition player in front of you also going for the ball. So what exactly are you basing your 'decision' on?

The video? lol

Get a clue.

That fact is, Cloke (depending on the appeal) is going to miss a Grand Final for an incident that was arguably completely accidental.

It is decisions like these that are ruining our game.

I mean, we condone hard tough play, yet condemn accidental contact?

Am I the only person who sees the obvious problem here?

As I said - let's just name the game Netball now. That way, players won't have to worry about missing a Grand Final for simply doing what their coaches have told them to do since they were kids.

 

[BomberGal]

Originally posted by gPhonque



As I said - let's just name the game Netball now. That way, players won't have to worry about missing a Grand Final for simply doing what their coaches have told them to do since they were kids.

What are you saying about netball?


I agree with the original topic. He did it, so he should pay for it. Of course Collingwood are going to appeal though. It's the grand final, I think anyone would try anything to get their players on the field.

 

[gPhonque]

Originally posted by BomberGal


What are you saying about netball?

I'm saying that netball is a non-contact sport. If we are going to start suspending players for accidental contact, then we may as well rename the game netball as to avoid any confusion in the future.

 

[Port Adelaide 1870]

Let the kid play.......

PA1870

 

[Dogwatcher]

Not even I would agree with that PA1870. Thanks for the nice sentiments though.

 

[Crowaholic]

It has much to do with Edwards being taken out of the game. If a player has to be taken out then the injury inflicted by the other player must be great and there is your recklessnes already.

Number 2 they did eliminate dirty play which was of that Jason cloke.

I'd love to see how it could be accidental contact when the ball was actually well away from both of the players when it happened. Tyson didn't have the ball it was after he had got rid of the ball or after he had posession of it that it happened. He must have jumped very very late if it was an accident. To me and everyone watching it with me it looked deliberate and a heat of the moment thing, in which he should be punished.

 

[napsyd]

Umm, mate it was in the marking contest and was clearly accidental. Let it go now.

 

[cjwalkley]

You definitely can't blame Collingwood for appealing, however if they do lose the appeal then they shouldn't try and take it to court. It is a shame that a young player, who has had a great season misses the Grand Final, yet he did take a player out of the game (...either recklessly or carelessly). If it was a Lions player who committed this act I would expect him to get weeks, the references to netball in regards to this incident are absolutely ridiculous. All that said if he gets off on appeal, good luck to him and Collingwood, however if they try and take it to court I think that is extremely unsportsmanlike. A rule should have been instigated after the Dunkley incident, that if a club gets an injunction to allow a suspended player to play in a Grand Final, if the suspension is subsequently upheld, then that club forfeits the premiership, regardless of the result. It would stop a club taking out an injunction when the player is obviously guilty.

 

[Stocka]

Originally posted by The Mailman
Gee whiz Rohan what has Hamill got to do with this ?

I think we've discovered Wayne Jackson's BigFooty alias . . .

 

[jefffff34]

Crowaholic - give it up, you have been on your High Horse all ****ing week, it is giving everyone the ****s. Give us another excuse why Adelaide aren't in the Grand Final this week why don't you. Jesus Christ enough is enough. You got beaten by a better team on the day, that is why you are out. ENOUGH.

As for the incident, GPhonque is dead set right. He was sooooo going for the ball, you just know that when you are AT the game and not watching on TV. You get a feel for things when you are AT the game. Edwards broke his nose because he hit his nose on the ground, Cloke can't stop him falling can he? It's a ****ing contact sport, it has been for 150 odd years. Leave it that way. Incident's like Jonathon Brown against Essendon in round 18 are different because he was just going out there to hit people, eg. When he took someone out with a forearm seconds after he marked (can't remember who). And do you know how many weeks he got for his escapades that night? 1 ****ING WEEK.

Brian Collis is a joke.

 

[SeinDude]

Originally posted by gPhonque
SeinDude - let me tell you that you wouldn't have a clue if Cloke was going for the ball or not. You were not there. You were not the person jumping a few feet into the air during the marking contest with an oposition player in front of you also going for the ball. So what exactly are you basing your 'decision' on?

The video? lol

Get a clue.

That fact is, Cloke (depending on the appeal) is going to miss a Grand Final for an incident that was arguably completely accidental.

It is decisions like these that are ruining our game.

I mean, we condone hard tough play, yet condemn accidental contact?

Am I the only person who sees the obvious problem here?

As I said - let's just name the game Netball now. That way, players won't have to worry about missing a Grand Final for simply doing what their coaches have told them to do since they were kids.

gPhonque,

A mate of mine here at work who is a die-hard Collingwood supporter reckons Jason Cloke's actions were wreckless and that he deserved to get rubbed out.

What's stopping someone deliberately striking a player and then claiming he was just going for the ball or making it look like he was??? You know how hard that would be to prove either way based on a video and a player's word?? So in that regard I agree with you... I'd like to see the AFL relax this rule more, but from where I sit, I don't see it happening, especially with the players association looking out for player safety more these days.

Cheers!!
SeinDude