Remove this Banner Ad

Jason Cloke has no one to blame but himself

🥰 Love BigFooty? Join now for free.

Originally posted by napsyd


Let me ask you this. Do you think McLeod's "charge" on Lloyd earlier in the year was deliberate?

Either I haven't seen it or I can't remember it. (I'm not a member anymore so I don't watch as much footy....)
 
Originally posted by gPhonque


Either I haven't seen it or I can't remember it. (I'm not a member anymore so I don't watch as much footy....)

OK, well my opinion all bias aside on that one was that although it was not deliberate, it was reckless. McLeod got a week even though Lloyd dusted himself off and went on to single hendedly defeat the Crows. Them the rules. You take responsibility for your actions even if the decisions are split second stuff.
 
Originally posted by gPhonque


So it's "reckless" to make a mistake whilst going for the ball in a Preliminary Final?

What if you go in recklessly to yourself ? How would that be judged..what if in going recklessly to yourself, because your only object was the ball, you inadvertantly hurt someone else ?

Would you consider going in with a softer approach in ensuing games, or would you perhaps try and be less aggressive at the ball for fear that in your aggressive attack at the ball someone may deem it reckless ?

Who judges reckless?, what is the line between almost reckless and reckless, aggressive and recklessly agressive, reckless to oneself ( singleminded attack at the ball ) and adjudging that to also be reckless to someone else ?

The administrators are Di*ks...



PA1870

Let the Kid Play.

You barstards !


PA1870:mad:
 
Why is there always one rule for Magpie players and one rule for everyone else,.
If McCleod had done the right thing and not swung his head,Cloke would have missed,so dont tell me that Cloke deserved to get the suspension.
I bet that if it was Nerd or LLoyd,they would have been cleared to play?????
 

Log in to remove this Banner Ad

Interesting.

I haven't looked in this thread before, but there seems to be no-one of the opinion that Cloke had at least some intention of making serious physical contact with his opponent.

Having seen the incident from several different angles, and having seen Cloke do similar things on several occasions, it's my belief that while he was not necessarily trying to specifically smack Edwards in the moosh, he was undoubtedly seeking to make substantial physical contact to Edwards with his fist.

Reckless is the wrong word. As gPhonque points out, playing the game, flying for marks is reckless. What Cloke did certainly reckless, but that in itself shouldn't necessarily put him out. What should - and did - count against he was that he was negligent at best, and malicious at worst.

Two weeks is the correct penalty.
 
Hey Mocca....Mr Tribunal....what would you know,were you there,did you yet a smack in the moosh,well I guess that you are all experts...(ex.....unknown quantity,spurt.....a drip under pressure)
 
Originally posted by gPhonque
So you believe it's more reckless to miss the timing of a spoil than it is to drive a player into the ground and break his knee?

Absolutely.

Why is it that any high contact these days seems to result in a report/suspension? Isn't that what free kicks are for?

Because you can do a hell of lot of damage by hitting a bloke around the head. Players have got to be protected from getting their head knocked off.

Isn't the tribunal there to eliminate dirty play?

The tribunal is as much a mystery to me as anyone, but I am happy that they have done the right thing in this case. As others have mentioned due to Clokes actions another player missed on playing three quarters of a preliminary final, he suffered reasonably serious injuries and was lucky not to have suffered more serious injuries, and another team was placed at a disadvantage for the rest of the game.

Moomba
 
Originally posted by Mocca
Interesting.


Reckless is the wrong word. , playing the game, flying for marks is reckless. What Cloke did certainly reckless, but that in itself shouldn't necessarily put him out. What should - and did - count against he was that he was negligent at best, and malicious at worst.

Two weeks is the correct penalty.

He wasnt charged with negligence or malicious intent..You are right if that were the case his sentence would be correct.

he was charged with recklessness, which is what all AFL players do in pursuit of the ball.......

PA1870:mad:
 
Having seen the incident from several different angles, and having seen Cloke do similar things on several occasions, it's my belief that while he was not necessarily trying to specifically smack Edwards in the moosh, he was undoubtedly seeking to make substantial physical contact to Edwards with his fist.

Absolute crap, all of that.
 
Originally posted by Mocca
Beautifully constructed argument Lockyer24 - thanks for your valuable contribution to this debate.

having seen Cloke do similar things on several occasions

1. Cloke has not made serious contact with anyone's head from a spoiling attempt in the enitre 20 games that he has played. What games have you been watching?

it's my belief that while he was not necessarily trying to specifically smack Edwards in the moosh

2. His aim was always to hit the ball toward our goal not to physically impede Edwards from the marking contest. He would have tried to knock his arms, not go the punch if this was the case. You would know this is something he does about 5 times a game or more if you'd actually seen him play before.

I re-iterate, absolute crap.
 
Originally posted by moomba
Absolutely.

So if you break another players knee in a hard and deliberately tough (one could even say "reckless" :eek: ) tackle, it's ok.

But if you accidentally hit a player in the head when you try to spoil, you get 2 weeks.

There's something not quite right about that.
 

Remove this Banner Ad

Originally posted by Lockyer24
1. Cloke has not made serious contact with anyone's head from a spoiling attempt in the enitre 20 games that he has played. What games have you been watching?
Do you want specific incidents? Round 8 versus Brisbane, he did a similar thing to what happened on Saturday. I recall a Melbourne player getting severely contacted from behind when under the ball in Round 11, and I saw Campbell Brown sniped after a marking contest in Round 19.

2. His aim was always to hit the ball toward our goal not to physically impede Edwards from the marking contest. He would have tried to knock his arms, not go the punch if this was the case.
In the extremely unlikely event of his fist going anywhere near the ball in the Edwards incident (you know, the one where he missed by two feet), his round arm swing would have knocked the ball centrally, rather than towards Collingwood's goal.

You would know this is something he does about 5 times a game or more if you'd actually seen him play before.
I would agree he tries to 'spoil' in that manner quite regularly. Mick Martyn has made a career out of it.

I re-iterate, absolute crap.
Likewise dearie.
 
Originally posted by Port Adelaide 1870
I couldnt give a stuff if Quaduple Chins takes this to court for an Injunction...Good on Collingwood...

Take it to Court

PA1870

Isn't society judicial enough without bringing it into football? I know it's happened before, but why should it happen again?
 
Originally posted by gPhonque
So if you break another players knee in a hard and deliberately tough (one could even say "reckless" :eek: ) tackle, it's ok.

But if you accidentally hit a player in the head when you try to spoil, you get 2 weeks.

There's something not quite right about that.

Like I said before the first I dont believe is a reckless action, the second is. It is up to Cloke to either adjust his style of spoiling to avoid such "accidents" happening in the future, or suffer the consequences each time he mistimes a spoil.

Moomba
 
Originally posted by napsyd


Isn't society judicial enough without bringing it into football? I know it's happened before, but why should it happen again?

With our incompetent joke of a tribunal, it's a wonder it doesn't happen more often.
 
Originally posted by gPhonque


With our incompetent joke of a tribunal, it's a wonder it doesn't happen more often.

God forbid, we'd get our thirty week minor round but only 3 weeks of actual football!
 
I doubt Jason Cloke will win his appeal.
I doubt Collingwood will take any further action.

I HOPE Jason Cloke does not change his approach to the game. He is a hard goer and one of the gutsiest players in the AFL. He has been very good for Collingwood this year and his willingness to attack the ball and the man with the ball is something a light, young list needs. With Molloy out Jason Cloke was given responsility above his years but attacked it with enthusiasm. Hopefully for Cloke and Collingwood he does not heed the advice to modify his game.
 

🥰 Love BigFooty? Join now for free.

I'm happy he didn't win his appeal. Although you do feel sorry for him but hey he did it.

Also didn't his father make a fool of himself on the footy show by comparing all of those different incidents which were nothing like his sons?:p
 
Originally posted by Crowaholic
I'm happy he didn't win his appeal. Although you do feel sorry for him but hey he did it.

Also didn't his father make a fool of himself on the footy show by comparing all of those different incidents which were nothing like his sons?:p

Thank-you for finally seeing our point of view Crowaholic.
As for his father, you are right. He made a prize fool of himself last night.
 
Originally posted by Crowaholic
I'm happy he didn't win his appeal. Although you do feel sorry for him but hey he did it.

Also didn't his father make a fool of himself on the footy show by comparing all of those different incidents which were nothing like his sons?:p

You have to feel for this kid. Firstly his father says that he has watched the incident 200 to 300 times and he says he hasnt done anything wrong, then the kid goes along and thinks that he is going to get off. What an idiot his father is, and what a shame that he rears his ugly head everytime Jason has had to appear anywhere this week. Lets hope he can do some growing up over the summer break and not have to have his father do the talking for him. I swear that next time (if there is one) he goes to the tribunial that they will add on an extra week just because father Cloke is behind him. One for the kid and one for the big bruiser, even Crawfs and Hird looked a little scared of him last night.
 
Originally posted by gPhonque
Hypothetical situation: Edwards is tackled by Cloke, and as Cloke is bringing Edwards down to the ground as hard as he can (it's a Prelim Final after all...) Edwards' does his knee and he's out for a year.

Would Cloke's actions be "accidental" or "reckless"?

They can be both. If say, he'd stuck his leg out, that would be reckless. A normal, legal, tackle would not be.
 

Remove this Banner Ad

Jason Cloke has no one to blame but himself


Write your reply...

Remove this Banner Ad

🥰 Love BigFooty? Join now for free.

Back
Top