Pickett = Cheat

[crowie]

You believe that mate. Picketts act was stupid yes, but it can be compared to bickley. This is the first time hel be suspended in his career. ur saying he does this every other week. Thats far from the truth. He is a hard at the body and hard at the footy . All his physical work is done within the rules of the game... So get ur hand off ur knob ..

Bickleys act was more low and gutless, coz he stuk his bloody elbow out...

Yeah he goes hard a the body, but more offen than not he will sacrifice getting possesion of the ball in a 50/50 situation so he can take one of the opposition players out. He doesn't have to miss by much to severly injure someone.

I think you have have to get it through your thick head that we're not talking about a player being injured for a few weeks, but a person being confined to a wheelchair for the rest of their life. Something can be done about this now and prevent such a case or after someone gets does get a broken neck.

 

[WaynesWorld19]

Was it far more lenient, or is there now a ceiling that is far easier to get to, and thus all lumped in one basket.
That really has been my question all along.

Going back 15 years definately yes, things you definately wouldn't have been reported for then are in now, but this attempted charge is the only reportable offence that has gone the other way and been erased???

 

[Portia]

Here goes. Lynch

■ CONDUCT: was it intentional, reckless or negligent?
COMMENT Intentional
■ IMPACT: was it severe, high, medium or low?
COMMENT in the end there was next to no impact. Low
■ LOCATION: was contact made in play or behind play?
COMMENTBehind play
■ CONTACT: was it high contact (above the shoulders) or body contact?
COMMENT High
POTENTIAL OUTCOME
In this particular scenario, the charge would be graded as intentional, low, behind play, and high, resulting in?

Level 4 striking, 425 points. Pleading guilty brings it down to 318 (or three weeks suspension) - this sum doesn't include prior suspension.

Pickett is up for Level 5 rough conduct, 550 points (605 points with his prior one match suspension). Pleading guilty right now would theoretically bring it down to four weeks, but he has to go to tribunal anyway because Schwab decided it to be so, so he can't do that.

 

[Stiffy_18]

Here's a question then:

You have said 4 weeks is a fairer penalty?

What do you think a fair penalty is if Begley was seriously injured - lets say a cracked vertabrae.?

Would your penalty change, and are the penalties for illegal acts affected by the outcomes of those acts - and is that a fair condition

Its simple. If Begley had a cracked vertabre as a result fo the bump then Pickett should cop as many weeks as Begley is expected to miss with his injury. This has always been the case if the player has been found guilty. I got no problem with this what so ever.

 

[brucetiki]

IMO, what Pickett did was absolute thuggery, but that's his style of play.

On the way home last night, I asked my friend (a Port supporter) how he could defend a player like Pickett, and he said that he honestly could not defend Picketts actions.

If the AFL has deemed his contact to be so dangerous that it's going straight to the tribunal, then it's really bad. He deserves everything he gets. It looks like about 6 matches (don't worry about guilty discounts, the way Williams was defending him at the press conference, I can't see that happening)

 

[WaynesWorld19]

Its simple. If Begley had a cracked vertabre as a result fo the bump then Pickett should cop as many weeks as Begley is expected to miss with his injury. This has always been the case if the player has been found guilty. I got no problem with this what so ever.

Footy is back on - time to disagree again

And no it hasn't alawys been the case with reports - this line of thinking was fuelled by talkback radio and is a recent thing.

So if Begley were forced to retire then your thinking is so does Pickett? - don't think so.

No min-max penalties are the answer, but as stated can't come to terms with the penalty being harsher if the player connects V missing

 

[WaynesWorld19]

If the AFL has deemed his contact to be so dangerous that it's going straight to the tribunal, then it's really bad. He deserves everything he gets. It looks like about 6 matches (don't worry about guilty discounts, the way Williams was defending him at the press conference, I can't see that happening)

If the tribunal is consitent then they will set a tone for the season and be harsher than they would otherwise be mid season - expect the worse.

 

[crowie]

IMO, what Pickett did was absolute thuggery, but that's his style of play.

On the way home last night, I asked my friend (a Port supporter) how he could defend a player like Pickett, and he said that he honestly could not defend Picketts actions.

If the AFL has deemed his contact to be so dangerous that it's going straight to the tribunal, then it's really bad. He deserves everything he gets. It looks like about 6 matches (don't worry about guilty discounts, the way Williams was defending him at the press conference, I can't see that happening)

Williams is as arrogant as they come, he will want to try and take th AFL on, which will of course go against them.

 

[*PAF]

Level 4 striking, 425 points. Pleading guilty brings it down to 318 (or three weeks suspension) - this sum doesn't include prior suspension.

Pickett is up for Level 5 rough conduct, 550 points (605 points with his prior one match suspension). Pleading guilty right now would theoretically bring it down to four weeks, but he has to go to tribunal anyway because Schwab decided it to be so, so he can't do that.

Thanks Porthos.
Hmmm. New system is crap in that case.

 

[Paralowiepower]

Hey guys...im just having a 'discussion' on Picketts hit on Begley on the 'Message to Pickett Defenders' thread on the AFL board. All the Port clowns are talking him up and acting as if he is the most courageous bloke to have ever played the game...Feel free to come along and throw your 20 cents into the hat.

You idiot, most Port fans are saying he will get weeks. Who said he is the most courageous bloke to have ever played the game? What has it to do with you anyway?

 

[Mitch Power]

Hmmm. New system is crap in that case.

What else will clowns like Dimitriou and Anderson come up with next? Its a shame Bucky wasn't successful in his application for Anderson's job.

 

[Macca19]

I love it the way some Port supporters are bringing up Roo and Bicks. I would like to compare the amount of times Bickley and Roo have put their head over the ball regardless of the oncoming traffic as opposed to Pickett. Cowardly effort.

He may send out some bumps that many people disagree with but get real. He goes in and gets the ball as much as at least half the AFL does.

 

[NikkiNoo]

He may send out some bumps that many people disagree with but get real. He goes in and gets the ball as much as at least half the AFL does.

and imagine the amount of possesions and damage he could cause if he concentrated on going for the ball all the time and not the man most of the time?

 

[blighty]

Seriously crows fans we sit here and complain about how our club lacks mongrel and how we need to scrap for the ball more and blah blah blah and then a perfect example of a player going in hard is shown to you (albeit by a player from another team) and we scream bloody murder!

The bump was most definitely reportable it WAS NOT in my opinion suspendable however. It was a late bump yes but we are playing football here, not netball. It is a contact sport and you are allowed to bump into other players. The AFL should review it, look at it, make a few jokes about Pickett hitting him harder than a Pt Lincoln stobie pole and then chuck it out.

Montgomery's would be the bump that would result in a suspension if i had my way, there was much more malice in that bump than there was in Pickett's.

Toughen up Crows and Crowettes, if Begley had done it to Pickett we'd be applauding him right now (I would anyway)

What are you.... the village clown?
Perhaps before you start posting the most ridiculous post on this subject you might decide to read an AFL rule book....head high tackles are not legal & are a definite report.....
But I'm wasting my precious time replying to an idiot....you're defence of Pickett who amongst players is seen as the biggest sniper in the game...proves you are as pathetic as he is.....do us all a favour, take yourself off the crows board & spread your fanciful crap on the port board where you are bound to get a good hearing along with all the other morons who back this thugs actions....

 

[blighty]

I hope he gets 3-5.

If he had got there a fraction earlier or later then Begley would be in hospital.

Never had too many bad words to say about Pickett but what he done last night was the act of a coward.

I love a hip & shoulder as much as the next guy but after last night the words of Robert Walls in how he described Pickett do make a bit of sense, he rarely puts his body on the line & prefers to circle on the outside like a vulture waiting for an easy opportunity to line someone up to deliver a hit that at most times is within the rules of the game.
The cowardly hit on Begley was just that, Pickett lined him up as Begleys head & shoulders were down in an attempt to pick up a moving ball some 1-2 meters away & Pickett had no thought on the ball & was just intent to do as much damage to an opposition players body as he could while that player was in a very vulnerable & defenseless position.


& yes i am a bit ********ed off we lost the game but if Pickett doesn't change his attitude on how he plays the game then someone could end up in a wheel chair or even worse.

Could not agree more ...Parkin is also on record saying there are a lot of blokes still playing in Melbourne, waiting for him. He said at the time Pickett had better not lose a yard of pace....the point Walls made some time ago is that he avoids packs & stays on the outside waiting to 'pick off' a player....last night he was hellbent of softening up a couple of Crows players ...his tackle on Burton was a case in point & with better quality umpires would have resulted in a FOD....
This action is up there with Wallis' charge on Hanna, Long's charge on Simmonds,Picketts charge on Krummell,[which should have gone to the tribunal]...the player with head down over the ball must be protected....Picketts action was gutless, & aimed to take the player out..he took his eyes off the ball & went for the player....
The AFL has a massive obligation to those parents who see this needless act & the possible disabling medical ramifications as a danger to there kids playing the game.Every year we hear of fatalities in league & union...how soon will it be before it happens in AFL. Picketts actions over a longtime now have been not been in the best interests of the game...Finally now he's been called before the tribunal...he should get 6 games...

 

[Toots Hibbert]

Could not agree more ...Parkin is also on record saying there are a lot of blokes still playing in Melbourne, waiting for him. He said at the time Pickett had better not lose a yard of pace....the point Walls made some time ago is that he avoids packs & stays on the outside waiting to 'pick off' a player....last night he was hellbent of softening up a couple of Crows players ...his tackle on Burton was a case in point & with better quality umpires would have resulted in a FOD....
This action is up there with Wallis' charge on Hanna, Long's charge on Simmonds,Picketts charge on Krummell,[which should have gone to the tribunal]...the player with head down over the ball must be protected....Picketts action was gutless, & aimed to take the player out..he took his eyes off the ball & went for the player....
The AFL has a massive obligation to those parents who see this needless act & the possible disabling medical ramifications as a danger to there kids playing the game.Every year we hear of fatalities in league & union...how soon will it be before it happens in AFL. Picketts actions over a longtime now have been not been in the best interests of the game...Finally now he's been called before the tribunal...he should get 6 games...

Curiously no mention of Mark Bickley.

 

[Blue Red and Gold]

Having said all that, this new tribunal system is frightening. 6 matches for this offence?? That's far too rich. IMO it was worth a minimum of 2 and a maximum of 4, with 4 being on the harsh side. That puts it about 3 as a compromise.

I would vomit if we lost a player for 6 weeks for a similar offence. It's too much.

Although this new system is going to produce consistency in penalties, it looks like it will also reduce the physicality of the game even further, and IMO it is aklready too sanitized.

I disagree with this.

I think 6 weeks is spot on, and I would accept the decision if a Crows player had done the same thing.
The AFL have to erradicate stuff like this from our game, it was a very ugly scene and one alot of Mothers would not like to see when they have kids wanting to take up the game.
More than ever the AFL is fighting for numbers at grass roots levels and if Pickett is given even a slightly lenient sentence then IMO it will be a smear on the game.

 

[Blue Red and Gold]

It has plenty of relevance.

Just like when we talk about our 2004 premiership and the best reply you have got is 2>1.

Relevance???

Yawn...next please!

 

[Ozzie]

Young Van Berlo (7) was the player who grabbed Begley. He needs to be told no touching them , leave it to the training staff.

 

[macca23]

Curiously no mention of Mark Bickley.

What did he do on Sunday??

Burp during the call?

 

[Stiffy_18]

Young Van Berlo (7) was the player who grabbed Begley. He needs to be told no touching them , leave it to the training staff.

Yeah my bad. I realised later that it was the Count. When a player is down motionless then you just don't touch him. Just try to take out his mouthguard carefully and make sure he hasn't swallowed his tounge. Leave the rest to the trainers.

 

[Stiffy_18]

Curiously no mention of Mark Bickley.

Oh FFS what has Bickley got to do with this incident??????

NOTHING. Get over it. It happened, he copped a suspension, he served it and thats the end of the story. Some of your arguments are really turning into childish banter. My daddy is meaner than your daddy crap

And another pearler I read on your board, why isn't Johncock charged for shirtfronting Kane it because he is a crow and choppy is a power player. Some people need to grow a brain.

 

[DSL64]

Nice nick, good to see you look up to another low life. The normal port supporters think of David Granger as a total disgrace for what he did.

Good to see what an honest law obiding citizen he has become. Funny for such a hero that Port were very quick to wash their hands of him and have treated him like he deserves. I had to laugh when he was crying about Port not doing anything for him well what do you expect when you kick players deliberately in the head and cause them permanent brain damage.

Who did he kick 'deliberately in the head and cause them permanent brain damage'?

Mate, U R a waste of good oxygen.
Talk about permanent brain damage...

 

[Stiffy_18]

Who did he kick 'deliberately in the head and cause them permanent brain damage'?

Graham Cornes

 

[DSL64]

Do us a favour, and stick to commenting on the issue at hand.

Stick to commenting on the issue at hand!!!
Mate, read some of the posts...
U've got a moron in here bringing up David Granger!

Now that's really commenting on the issue at hand.