No suspensions so far

[Papa G]

Whelan should not go
Sinclair should not go
Pavich should not go

None were malicious. All were within 5 metres of the ball. If any go the game is in trouble.

 

[Papa G]

Whelan should not go
Sinclair should not go
Pavich should not go

None were malicious. All were within 5 metres of the ball. If any go the game is in trouble.

This should be on the main board but I'm drunk.

 

[Ron]

I reckon Pav might be in a bit of trouble.
He shouldn't go but i reckon they might give him a week or two.

 

[Frizzo]

Give the Pav 2 please.

 

[Drunken Bum]

Whelan definately should not go- probably will
Sinclair maybe should go, worst of the three- will go
Pav maybe should go hope not cause in my DT & SC- probably wont go

 

[shibz_1989]

Pav will go coz he wears purple. However, in reality, he had his eyes on the ball and because of his clean record, should not get suspended.

 

[rick James]

I don't se the issue with Whelan's hit - he's done the same thing a hundred times, famously on james hird, almost identically, in a final.

FFS - we were winning before that, and St Kilda used it as inspiration to finally beat their bogey side and get a win against their rightful owners.

But the hit itself was awesome and one of the thing I like about AFL (seeing Saints players get injured)

 

[Alphanumeric]

Whelan should not go
Sinclair should not go
Pavich should not go

None were malicious. All were within 5 metres of the ball. If any go the game is in trouble.

I reckon all the bumps were fine.

But I reckon the AFL will see it a different way.

Whelan will get 4.
Sinclair will get 4.
Pavlich 1.