Phill Matera

[carlyp]

Whats going to happen to Fido..will he go? Is there an investigation happening?

 

[anchor man]

Kennel

Go to the kennel for four weeks Fido you naughty dog.

 

[Voice of Reason]

Re: Kennel

Originally posted by anchor man
Go to the kennel for four weeks Fido you naughty dog.

Having seen it several times now, it's touch and go - clearly Lockyer went to shepherd and Phil protected himself - the question will be whether the tribunal thought that he protected himself legally or whether the elbow was raised. I do think Lockyer's a sook. Held up the game for 10 minutes to put a collar on, then two minutes later he's on the bench sooking to his mates.

BTW, Belly, (for it is he, saith the Suz), do you really come from a place called "Success WA" or is this some positive Dockers thinking?

 

[carlyp]

I think its touch and go to...all depends on whether They think Phill lifted his arm on purpose ( I dont think he did but I can see why some think he may have) His good record should count for something! If he gets some time then we still have Mark Merenda there who is capale of doing very well!

 

[anchor man]

Come come open thy eyes

You can not be serious surely.His right arm starts off around near his left shoulder.It was all touch and Lockyer went down.Four weeks Fido.
Had it been in reverse you would have been screaming for Lockyers blood.
Surely do come from Success.And that is just what the Dockers will have this season.

 

[Captain Random]

Re: Kennel

Originally posted by anchor man
Go to the kennel for four weeks Fido you naughty dog.

Precisely how was Matera's action one week worse than Farmer's?

 

[kuepper]

Re: Re: Kennel

Originally posted by carneagles
Precisely how was Matera's action one week worse than Farmer's?

Hardly the most relevant thing to bring up, my friend, but being on the otherside of a unde rone goal win, I do feel charitble this week.

The difference?

One word: Stretcher.

 

[Visro]

Re: Re: Re: Kennel

Originally posted by kuepper

Hardly the most relevant thing to bring up, my friend, but being on the otherside of a unde rone goal win, I do feel charitble this week.

The difference?

One word: Stretcher.

And only a few minutes later he was on the bench again having a private joke with a team mate. The guy is a pansy.

 

[Captain Random]

Re: Re: Re: Kennel

Originally posted by kuepper

Hardly the most relevant thing to bring up, my friend,

Good point. This is the AFL tribunal, after all - they have never let precedent get in the way of the decision-making process

but being on the otherside of a unde rone goal win, I do feel charitble this week.

The difference?

One word: Stretcher.

So, let me get this straight - purely because of the appearance of the ad wagon, Phil Matera will get a greater penalty than a guy who pleaded guilty to a charge of rough play on his 8th tribunal appearance?

 

[kuepper]

In all seriousness, if you think a elbow to the face, sniping style, is in any way similar to farmers head on tap - and it really as nothing more than that .. seriously you are deluded.

If Farmers first appearance, he would have got a week - BECAUSE it was his 8th, he got 3.

They are chalk and cheese squire.

 

[Voice of Reason]

Originally posted by kuepper
In all seriousness, if you think a elbow to the face, sniping style, is in any way similar to farmers head on tap - and it really as nothing more than that .. seriously you are deluded.

If Farmers first appearance, he would have got a week - BECAUSE it was his 8th, he got 3.

They are chalk and cheese squire.

Indeed they are chalk and cheese.

Matera braced himself to defend himself from a full-on shepherd, whereas Farmer launched a cowardly throat high chop on someone who was in mid-air and had already marked the ball.

Am I supposed to feel sorry for Farmer because he's got no discipline? It's his problem.

As for your ridiculous remark that because young Tarkyn got carried off on a stretcher then the penalty should be greater, that is illogical. There's a bloke this week called Chance Bateman who's been charged with attempting to trip (no contact made). People's careers (eg Brendan Krummel) have been finished completely through a perfectly fair bump. The extent of the injury is irrelevant - it is the nature of the act that matters.

And Tarkyn (is that a name) is a sook, a dobber and a ****ter, judging by his reappearance a couple of minutes later.

I can't believe I'm arguing with Bigfooty's "greatest sniper"! I guess you'd know!

 

[kuepper]

Originally posted by Voice of Reason
Indeed they are chalk and cheese.

Good start, we agree.

Matera braced himself to defend himself from a full-on shepherd, whereas Farmer launched a cowardly throat high chop on someone who was in mid-air and had already marked the ball.

Seriously - braced?

Please, show some objectivity, he cocked the arm, and let fly with an elbow - that aint bracing, thats sniping my friend, and yes - it does take one to know one, before you go that route.

As for farmer being cowardly, please, he at least did it front on, cowardly is when the guy has no idea the impact is coming, and when it does, it is head high, elbow first - sound familiar?

Am I supposed to feel sorry for Farmer because he's got no discipline? It's his problem.

No hardly, it is called relevancy, he used the 3 match analogy, I explained why the 3 matches were given, it wasnt severity of the action, it was prior history - of which you are well aware - add some rolleyes to the above, and you are dan ... and you are better than that old chap.

As for your ridiculous remark that because young Tarkyn got carried off on a stretcher then the penalty should be greater, that is illogical. There's a bloke this week called Chance Bateman who's been charged with attempting to trip (no contact made). People's careers (eg Brendan Krummel) have been finished completely through a perfectly fair bump. The extent of the injury is irrelevant - it is the nature of the act that matters.

If a serious injury is entailed, in a dangerous and cowardly act (ie head high, premediated head shot) of course the injury is relevant ... it isnt irrevelent, it is 100% releveant.

Of course careers are ended legally through injuries, but when someone is smashed, and I do mean shashed, head high, with an elboy, behind play - its illegal, at very best reckless, and worst gutless sniping - I took that round ... but dont try and justify his act as being legal, please.

I am also 100% sure, swap the jumpers around in the incident, and you'd all be screaming blue muder, and rightly so - it was a gutless act, period.

I can't believe I'm arguing with Bigfooty's "greatest sniper"! I guess you'd know!

Don't see it is an arguement, see it is an eduction process for you, you'll get there in the end, I'm sure.

 

[Captain Random]

Originally posted by kuepper
In all seriousness, if you think a elbow to the face, sniping style, is in any way similar to farmers head on tap - and it really as nothing more than that .. seriously you are deluded.

Geez, you make the Farmer incident sound like it was a friendly cuddle. Well, delusion is in the eye of the beholder, isn't it. Head on tap or sniping? Propect or dud? Fit or fat? We've all got an opinion, haven't we.

If Farmers first appearance, he would have got a week - BECAUSE it was his 8th, he got 3.

Exactly my point. A guy with several suspensions under his belt clouts a player and gets three weeks. But Phil Matera (who, if charged with anything, will be charged with rough play) will get a harsher penalty, purely because the meatcart came out? That's your argument, is it?

They are chalk and cheese squire.

See above

 

[jod23]

Why are we even talking about it....there has been no appointment made with the Tribunal as yet so why dont we worry about it when and if he does get the call. Even if he does he wont get suspended. He was protecting himself, elbow slipped hight, bad luck Tarkyn.

 

[Goldenblue]

Originally posted by jod23
Why are we even talking about it.....

The same reason why the Victorian Media and opposition supporters wanna talk about it.....to make an issue out of it so the AFL tribunal do look closely, and very closely......

This has been happening for years.....

I don't think it was a deliberate act and Tarkyn was no worse the wear for it.......stretcher should not make a difference.

 

[Frodo]

It seems VOR, the AFL and myself have one thing in common. We all watched rthe incident on video a number of times and could not see Matera use an elbow, raise an elbow or do anything repoerable !!! The AFL has done a mandatory investigation by speaking to each player. This is always done after a stretcher case, although IMO the stretcher was an overplay as Lockyer was only in the rooms for 30 seconds then out on th bench.

So for all the trolls who wanted to see Matera suspended but in reality saw 'nothing' to warrant it. Tough luck.

 

[Uncle Tony]

From what I heard/read, the umps had a look at the video and because of the angle deemed it inconclusive. I think they're reviewing it only because Lockyer came off on the cart.

I reckon it could be 50-50 if it will go before the tribunal.

 

[GoEagles]

Matera's defence will be, the sun was coming into his eyes, hence the reason why he raised his elbow to protect the glare of the sun coming into his eyes.

 

[Uncle Tony]

"Matera and Zantuck to face tribunal
April 9 2002


West Coast forward Phillip Matera has been reported by AFL investigations officer Rick Lewis and will front the tribunal tonight.

Matera was booked for striking Collingwood's Tarkyn Locker during Saturday's match at the MCG." - The Age Website.


Looks official.

 

[kuepper]

Originally posted by Frodo
So for all the trolls who wanted to see Matera suspended but in reality saw 'nothing' to warrant it. Tough luck.

Yes, that's it - I have been lying awake at night dreaming of his suspension ... how ever did you know?

Just because someone doesnt agree with you, doesnt mean it is a troll, and it seems the AFL doesnt agree with you at all, and hes up against a charge tonight.

Does that make the AFL a troll now as well?

 

[Frodo]

Originally posted by kuepper

Yes, that's it - I have been lying awake at night dreaming of his suspension ... how ever did you know?

Just because someone doesnt agree with you, doesnt mean it is a troll, and it seems the AFL doesnt agree with you at all, and hes up against a charge tonight.

Does that make the AFL a troll now as well?

No, the AFL has a duty to investigate stretcher incidents and if they have found other evidence than the umpire report or video of the incident then fair enough.

My point is that according to todays west Australian there was no video evidence the umpires could find to sustain a charge and that's exactly how it looks on my tape. So given that the tv footage is all that anyone has seen other than those at the game it is impossible for anyone to claim they saw a high, deliberate elbow hit and that Joey should get 2-3 weeks for it.
For WCE fans on this board it is a fair discussion point and maybe for Pies supporters coming here too. But for Freoites it's only a troll.
Funny how some people post more on the Eagles forum than their own, Freo forum. Does that not tell you something ?

 

[kuepper]

Originally posted by Frodo
Funny how some people post more on the Eagles forum than their own, Freo forum. Does that not tell you something ?

Yep, thats it is alot of fun seeing you try and justify your pettyness, I lhave never had so much fun to be honest, and for that I thank you - I am sure it probably isnt intentional, but I still enjoy it ... that said, what my posting habits are, are really none of your concern, so thanks anyway.

As an aside, I rue the day I actually explained to you what a troll was, no anyone and everything is a troll to you isn't it?

 

[Mead]

Well he goes before the tribunal tonight.. I'm fairly undecided on the incident- it could have been reckless, it could have been just protecting himself- as a WC fan i hope he gets off, but Kuepps is basically correct- can you honestly say had the incident been reversed, we wouldn't all be screaming for action?
I'm guessing 1-2weeks max, because of the indeterminate nature of the incident. Look at the silver lining though, it might give sampi a chance of a game!

 

[FreoDocker]

In my opinion I think matera should get 2 weeks.
Whether he meant to do it or not, the contact was still there and very high. But seeing as matera has a pretty good record, it could help him when he comes up to face the music.

 

[TheRealBuzz]

Can we stop using the word 'Troll' so much.
We sound like a pack of computer nerds.

We're all trolls.
Kuep's a troll, Frodo's a troll and I'm a huge bloody troll.