Remove this Banner Ad

Rocca Unsuccessful

🥰 Love BigFooty? Join now for free.

Thommo 42 said:
Given that Hawks aren't exactly sporting a bunch of seasoned big blokes in their backline, of all sides they would be one of the better ones to give Reid a game against.

Croad I assume will now take Trav Cloke.
Click to expand...
totally agree, you probaly wouldn't want to debut him vs Brisbane or Geelong, but this is a perfect opportunity. Great step in the devt philosophy, see how he goes. Great experience for him to get a taste of the quick stuff, even if he doesn't do too well, should help fast-track his devt. OTOH might do well and go on next week, he is a v hard match-up on paper.
one thing that will probably tip the scales is that he beat Grant last week.

Could be a blessing in disguise as far as overall season goes, since they have 2 games to learn how to play without Rocca.
 

Log in to remove this Banner Ad

Timmy from Thomastown said:
Pretty stupid of the Pies to contest it really. Should have taken the pragmatic approach and accepted the week.

Bryan wont come in. Medhurst or Reid will, or maybe both.
Click to expand...
I doubt you'd be saying that if they'd won. "Pies stood firm and justice prevailed" might be the alternative anthem.
 
nick_savo said:
So we will be without him for 2 weeks?
Click to expand...
Collingwood have until midday today (Wednesday) to take it to the Appeals Board. Considering the tribunal completely rejected everything that umpire Vozzo had to say, I expect them to do so. It can't hurt because the penalty cannot be stretched further this time.
 
Somebody said:
I doubt you'd be saying that if they'd won. "Pies stood firm and justice prevailed" might be the alternative anthem.
Click to expand...

No, I said it at the time. It was a marginal at best, it was not clear cut that he was absolutely not guilty. For the sake of an extra week I felt it wasnt worth the risk.
 
NEWS FLASH
(from highly reliable sources at an un-named public hotel)

"Sydney and West Coast players had been instructed to "Head Butt" Rocca in the elbow at every opportunity in a bold bid to have him cited for "Rough Play"..."

The AFL, who forwarded the "instruction" to the Swans and the Eagles, had planned to cite Rocca at the first available opportunity offering him a 1 Week suspension which, if accepted as expected, would leave a total of 168 accrued points hanging over his head for the next twelve months.
This would allow the "tribunal" to oust Rocca for a minor charge should Collingwood make this years Grand Final.
In a master stroke Collingwood wiser heads foiled this devious plot, fighting the "trumped up" charge. This strategy could only end in a win/win for the Pies as if Rocca was convicted he would serve his time in Rounds 13 & 14 and still be available for the Big One and if not the Club and Rocca would be vindicated and free to go on their merry way towards September Glory.
The Minor charges to be used to ensure another "Rocca-less" Grand Final would have been the new "Looking Nastily at a Player", "Running Too Fast in the Pursuit of a Player", "Standing Still for Too Long" or "Thinking Bad things about Andrew Dimetriou" Rules. The points allocated to the Minor charge when added to his outstanding points from last nights charge would be enough for the AFL to orchestrate another "Desirable Result" for the national competition.
When approached on this subject AFL supremo and "Rule Tinkerer" Andrew Dimetriou said "What?"

His comment can only increase speculation that the tribunal is "Lopsided, out of touch and Autocratic"

ps. this is just my opinion.
 

Remove this Banner Ad

Pie eyed said:
I am meeting my "source" again tonight.
He or She says they have some interesting insights into why Bucks is taking so long to get back on the paddock.
Click to expand...
Hmm.. based on your previous information, i imagine we'll find that the AFL have a lot to answer for!!
 
This is a football forum....nuh...
We're talking about Collingwood are we not...

If you think you can let facts get in the way of a good, well constructed conspiracy theory then you are delusional.

The very title of this thread was planted by forces opposed to the Collingwood Football Club in the hope that Anthony Rocca may read and sub-consciously take on board the false assumption that he is in some way not up to the task which is his destiny..."To play well in a Grand Final win".
 
Pie eyed said:
NEWS FLASH
(from highly reliable sources at an un-named public hotel)

"Sydney and West Coast players had been instructed to "Head Butt" Rocca in the elbow at every opportunity in a bold bid to have him cited for "Rough Play"..."

The AFL, who forwarded the "instruction" to the Swans and the Eagles, had planned to cite Rocca at the first available opportunity offering him a 1 Week suspension which, if accepted as expected, would leave a total of 168 accrued points hanging over his head for the next twelve months.
This would allow the "tribunal" to oust Rocca for a minor charge should Collingwood make this years Grand Final.
In a master stroke Collingwood wiser heads foiled this devious plot, fighting the "trumped up" charge. This strategy could only end in a win/win for the Pies as if Rocca was convicted he would serve his time in Rounds 13 & 14 and still be available for the Big One and if not the Club and Rocca would be vindicated and free to go on their merry way towards September Glory.
The Minor charges to be used to ensure another "Rocca-less" Grand Final would have been the new "Looking Nastily at a Player", "Running Too Fast in the Pursuit of a Player", "Standing Still for Too Long" or "Thinking Bad things about Andrew Dimetriou" Rules. The points allocated to the Minor charge when added to his outstanding points from last nights charge would be enough for the AFL to orchestrate another "Desirable Result" for the national competition.
When approached on this subject AFL supremo and "Rule Tinkerer" Andrew Dimetriou said "What?"

His comment can only increase speculation that the tribunal is "Lopsided, out of touch and Autocratic"

ps. this is just my opinion.
Click to expand...
That is definitely a good angle - avoids the points hanging over his head. the "one game offer" is really a bit of a crock when you consider the "probation" points that come with it.
 
Timmy from Thomastown said:
No, I said it at the time. It was a marginal at best, it was not clear cut that he was absolutely not guilty. For the sake of an extra week I felt it wasnt worth the risk.
Click to expand...
I don't see in any of yoru posts where you actually called for it to not be contested. Now if you'd said something like what this poster said:

quote: "Well I haven't seen the other incidents, Milne and the other one - butin roccas case I hate to say it but he was probably lucky to only get1. He's gotta learn to do a "normal" shepherd in a situation like that,it would have been at least as effective - you block with your body andyour outstretched arms.

Unfortunately it's part of the game to try to hurt blokes, they'regoing to do it to you so you're a sucker if you don't do it to themtoo. But you have to be a lot more subtle about it than Rocca was.

Not a good bet to contest it - stakes are even (double or nothing), andthe odds are worse than that, probably about 2 to 1 of failing." unquote


then that would be fair enough. Now who was that poster again?... oh yeah it was me!
 

🥰 Love BigFooty? Join now for free.

Remove this Banner Ad

Remove this Banner Ad

🥰 Love BigFooty? Join now for free.

Back
Top Bottom