Fair enough. It is hard to argue against that logic. Weird and random is a bad combination if you're at the wrong end of it.
-
Mobile App Discontinued
Due to a number of factors, support for the current BigFooty mobile app has been discontinued. Your BigFooty login will no longer work on the Tapatalk or the BigFooty App - which is based on Tapatalk.
Apologies for any inconvenience. We will try to find a replacement.
Steven Baker found guilty
- Thread starter Baroclinic instability
- Start date
- Tagged users None
🥰 Love BigFooty? Join now for free.
- Status
Fair enough. It is hard to argue against that logic. Weird and random is a bad combination if you're at the wrong end of it.
kahuna71
Club Legend
that's true, we did expose you for the pretenders you are and effectively ended your season...hey, I do feel better, thanks!
MRobbo
Norm Smith Medallist
If he is working as a trainer he has to be registered by the AFL. Therefore he is an AFL official.
LiterallyNobody
Cancelled due to poster being a Campaigner
30k Posts
10k Posts
Cake Connoisseur
SFA Daffodil Day Fund Raiser
Harry Potter Fan
Song Contest Winner - 5+ Rounds
Shiny Penny
- Jul 26, 2006
- 35,635
- 32,228
- AFL Club
- St Kilda
Log in to remove this Banner Ad
- Jun 25, 2006
- 11,478
- 9,246
- AFL Club
- Fremantle
No worries! If it means less crying from Saints fans im happy to help.
LiterallyNobody
Cancelled due to poster being a Campaigner
30k Posts
10k Posts
Cake Connoisseur
SFA Daffodil Day Fund Raiser
Harry Potter Fan
Song Contest Winner - 5+ Rounds
Shiny Penny
- Jul 26, 2006
- 35,635
- 32,228
- AFL Club
- St Kilda
Actually, we were on the right end of it with that horrible decision in tassie in rd 2 2005 when hammil won the game for us by a point....
kahuna71
Club Legend
cool, can you make sure Judd doesn't play this week? Bakes tears him a new one every time and no doubt there'll be bleating if we lose.
atomic beefcake
Rookie
- Apr 10, 2007
- 24
- 0
- AFL Club
- Port Adelaide
i don't know what all the fuss is about. I think the tribuneral finally got something right. Looking at the results of the incident (farmer's face) and it is plainly obvious that...
a) it was high contact
b) it was high impact
c) reckless
I'ts not the first time baker has been involved in a reckless striking incident behind the play or off the ball so he got what he finally deserved.
a) it was high contact
b) it was high impact
c) reckless
I'ts not the first time baker has been involved in a reckless striking incident behind the play or off the ball so he got what he finally deserved.
Tiger_Of_Old
THE_GUN:"Why don't you use your reg acc"7/9/24
Wrong.All the AFL stipulates is Trainer,s have to have First Aid.
- Banned
- #610
Are Player Managers AFL officials?
MRobbo
Norm Smith Medallist
I work as a time keeper for a vfl club we are classed as club officials and VFL officials doesn't matter whether you are a trainer, assistant coach,manager as long as your name is on the team sheet when it is handed in. This also applys for the AFL as well.
Tiger_Of_Old
THE_GUN:"Why don't you use your reg acc"7/9/24
Doubt it
Obviously St Kilda do not know the rules of the game. Rules clearly state you cannot apply a shepherd/block otside 5 metres of the ball. By admitting he did Baker has admitted he broke the rules which is reckless and therefore he is guilty.
Once he was guilty of a reckless act, the grading comes in:
1. High contact
2. Behind play
Therefore maximum points, plus a loading for his record and carried over points and you get to 7 pretty easy. St Kilda will lose the appeal as the facts are correct, after all Baker agreed to them, the Freo trainers evidence etc has nothing to do with the verdict.
Once he was guilty of a reckless act, the grading comes in:
1. High contact
2. Behind play
Therefore maximum points, plus a loading for his record and carried over points and you get to 7 pretty easy. St Kilda will lose the appeal as the facts are correct, after all Baker agreed to them, the Freo trainers evidence etc has nothing to do with the verdict.
JeffDunne
TheBrownDog
I don't know to be honest.
Imagine roles reversed; everyone would be screaming for Farmer to be sacked and Baker's not exactly squeaky clean himself.
The fact of the matter is that Farmer's deliberately left with a broken nose for no justifiable reason at all.
Forget footy; that's assault.
JeffDunne
TheBrownDog
So if a player pushes someone in the back, the player falls over and hurts himself, he should be suspended for it?
I thought suspending someone for a block was pretty stupid, but you are suggesting players should be suspended for a push in the back?
Let me guess . . . you also think the game's becoming soft?
JeffDunne
TheBrownDog
He ran into a bloke.
Assualt? Fair dinkum are you for real?
What Headland did was assult. He got off. A court would not accept "someone poking fun at my tat" as a reason to assult someone.
Of course the (W)AFL did.
Tiger_Of_Old
THE_GUN:"Why don't you use your reg acc"7/9/24
Not doubting you but there is a difference between a Paid official and a non paid Official when it comes to legal status.
He ran into a bloke.
Assualt? Fair dinkum are you for real?
What Headland did was assult. He got off. A court would not accept "someone poking fun at my tat" as a reason to assult someone.
Of course the (W)AFL did.
Give up JD.. it's like trying to explain economic rationalism to 5 yr olds.. no idea..
🥰 Love BigFooty? Join now for free.
JD
If the player is injured as a result of the action it is reckless and that is the problem in Bakers case. It is the same as it being made clear to players that smashing a player in a tackle when his arms are pinned is reckless.
Yes the game is soft, by then again when Rocca got outed for a perfect hip and shoulder where contact to the head was caused by the player slipping and Rocca being taller, it was pretty obvious that anything that results in injury to the head that is 'outside' the rules (Rocca did hit high) will result in suspension.
Shepherding off the ball is illegal, once he admitted that he was gone.
If the player is injured as a result of the action it is reckless and that is the problem in Bakers case. It is the same as it being made clear to players that smashing a player in a tackle when his arms are pinned is reckless.
Yes the game is soft, by then again when Rocca got outed for a perfect hip and shoulder where contact to the head was caused by the player slipping and Rocca being taller, it was pretty obvious that anything that results in injury to the head that is 'outside' the rules (Rocca did hit high) will result in suspension.
Shepherding off the ball is illegal, once he admitted that he was gone.
- Jun 25, 2006
- 11,478
- 9,246
- AFL Club
- Fremantle
I think Baker should have got a 14 week suspension. He king hit Farmer and then stepped on his head...dog act.
Stronzo
Hall of Famer
JeffDunne
TheBrownDog
Typical Freo scum.
Are you all pathological liars?
Surprised the Purple Rabble didn't present you as a 'credible' witness as Barry Kirkwood wasn't a good liar.
- Jun 25, 2006
- 11,478
- 9,246
- AFL Club
- Fremantle
I also believe that the Saints should have to change their nickname after this to "the dog acts". Also the match should be awarded to Fremantle.
possibly
In that case then i think the AFL and the tribunal better stop being so precious about lying before the tribunal.
Why wouldnt you lie ?...if u even admit there was contact seems they'll nail you if they feel like it...and evidence isnt required either.
Stick to the lies boys
...it must be what they want.- Status
