Remove this Banner Ad

Steven Baker found guilty

🥰 Love BigFooty? Join now for free.

Status
Not open for further replies.
People may lay blocks 10 times a game, but they are usually as part of the play, this wasn't.
Nonsense.

All blocking is illegal if done more than 5m from the ball (in which case it's a shepard). Every player running to position is 'part of the play'.
 
I'd feel even worse if that hack Baker was one of my teams most important players. It'd be like Geelong relying on Matthew Spencer.
So a player that can win a best and fairest in a side that made the preliminary finals containing players like Nick Dal Santo, Luke Ball, Leigh Montagna, Robert Harvey, Matt Maguire, Nick Riewoldt, Fraser Gehrig, Jason Gram, Sam Fisher etc. is a hack... woah you Cats fans are really keeping a lid on it... I suppose you think any player can take on Chris Judd in full fitness?
 
IIf St Kilda take this to court they will win.

on what grounds do that have to appeal? much like tonight's appeal, they had no grounds and could find no fault with the tribunal process.

Stkilda just need to accept that baker was infact reckless.

If you want your perpetual sniper to lay 'blocks' off the ball, he better make sure that there isn't an 'accidental' head clash next time :thumbsu:
 

Log in to remove this Banner Ad

Ah irony, thy name is JeffDunne...

Oh look . . . there's another celebrating a loss.

I thought you guys were complete losers when you gave a standing ovation to a team that missed the 8, but I've never seen so much gloating and sour grapes from supporters of a team that got their arse kicked.

IMO the true definition of a loser is someone that celebrates a loss. Even more so when they're wearing purple. :eek:
 
great decision by the tribunal, justice prevails finally and hopefully the sniper will learn.

How can justice be served considering there was no evidence 1 man's word over a stadium of of people... real justice there.... As for Baker being a sniper do you even recall the things he has done to earn this bad record of his.... Nothing more than jumper punches and attempted strikes... toss
 
Geez, all 27 St.Kilda members are up in arms...

First of all, Baker wasn't suspended for 7 weeks for this incident alone; onyl 4 weeks were a result of the hit on farmer - the other 3 weeks were a result of a bad record and carry overpoints.

So lets say, hypothetically, the incident was caught on camera and he's offered perhaps 3 or 4 weeks; an early plea reduces the suspension by 1, and a good record by another 1 week, so we're looking at 2 or 3 weeks... a fair punishment for breaking someone's nose 50m, and then some, behind the play

However, the fact of the matter is he has a bad record and carry over points, thus a standard 4 week suspension becomes 7
 
Oh look . . . there's another celebrating a loss.

I thought you guys were complete losers when you gave a standing ovation to a team that missed the 8, but I've never seen so much gloating and sour grapes from supporters of a team that got their arse kicked.

IMO the true definition of a loser is someone that celebrates a loss. Even more so when they're wearing purple. :eek:

Celebrating your loss?

Nah just enjoying watching you, in particular, squeal like the whiny bitch queen froim whiny bitchville....

You make no sense and make foolish arguments...so suck it up on the way back to sookyla-la-land
 
Geez, all 27 St.Kilda members are up in arms...

First of all, Baker wasn't suspended for 7 weeks for this incident alone; onyl 4 weeks were a result of the hit on farmer - the other 3 weeks were a result of a bad record and carry overpoints.

So lets say, hypothetically, the incident was caught on camera and he's offered perhaps 3 or 4 weeks; an early plea reduces the suspension by 1, and a good record by another 1 week, so we're looking at 2 or 3 weeks... a fair punishment for breaking someone's nose 50m, and then some, behind the play

However, the fact of the matter is he has a bad record and carry over points, thus a standard 4 week suspension becomes 7

27 members? righto....
Baker shouldn't have got any weeks for this incident, there is no proof all Baker said was that he blocked him, that happens all the time just because Farmer didn't bother to change direction doesn't mean that Baker should miss out on the rest of the season...
 
on what grounds do that have to appeal? much like tonight's appeal, they had no grounds and could find no fault with the tribunal process.
Try sticking to subjects you know something about.

We would only appeal the court once they'd made a ruling.

As for finding no fault with the tribunal process, are you surprised that a body siting in judgement of itself would find their not at fault? It's why I knew the process would fail.

The initial decision was the (W)AFL saving face. This decision was imply more of the same.

Baker has been denied natural justice. There's a whole swag of reasons why this is so, but I suspect the basis of any action will be on the evidence given to lay the charge, collusion (Kirkwood getting a copy of Baker's statement before the hearing) and whether Baker could have been expected to forsee the consequences of his action (the duty of care argument).

I would be prepared to put plenty of hard earned on St Kilda winning this if they take it to court.
 
Oh look . . . there's another celebrating a loss.

I thought you guys were complete losers when you gave a standing ovation to a team that missed the 8, but I've never seen so much gloating and sour grapes from supporters of a team that got their arse kicked.

IMO the true definition of a loser is someone that celebrates a loss. Even more so when they're wearing purple. :eek:

Give it up J.Dunnee. You are just digging yourself deeper and deeper. You have been on here all day sooking. Go outside and take a breath of fresh air or punch a light post or something.

Still wont charge the correct decision though.:D
 
Give it up J.Dunnee. You are just digging yourself deeper and deeper. You have been on here all day sooking. Go outside and take a breath of fresh air or punch a light post or something.

Still wont charge the correct decision though.:D
The AFL have proven tonight that there is no place for the right desicion when it comes to the tribuneral...
 

Remove this Banner Ad

Thanks for confirming that you are a brain dead moron, how can justice be served considering there was no evidence 1 man's word over a stadium of of people... real justice there.... As for Baker being a sniper do you even recall the things he has done to earn this bad record of his.... Nothing more than jumper punches and attempted strikes... toss

Baker admited he initiated contact 50m off the ball which left Farmer concussed with a broken nose, that's enough evidence for me and obviously the tribunal :)
 
Baker admited he initiated contact 50m off the ball which left Farmer concussed with a broken nose, that's enough evidence for me and obviously the tribunal :)
By stepping back to apply the block, it is Jeff Farmer that needed to watch where he was going...
 
Baker is a thug - deserved his 4 weeks. 3 weeks extra for his crappy record. I don't mind thugs who can back it up with playing good footy. Baker can't play footy...enjoy the holiday!

How can a bloke come off the ground with his nose touching his ear & more blood pouring out his nostril than a tap...all from just running in the back of a player who stopped suddenly.

Smell the coffee
 
27 members? righto....
Baker shouldn't have got any weeks for this incident, there is no proof all Baker said was that he blocked him, that happens all the time just because Farmer didn't bother to change direction doesn't mean that Baker should miss out on the rest of the season...

so there's no proof that contact was made... except for Baker (the man in question) admitting he blocked him... hmm... interesting:rolleyes:

and i guess if this happens all the time, as you suggest, then there is a countless number of afl footballers that suffer broken noses and severe concussion each week... yeh that makes sense!
 
Try sticking to subjects you know something about.

We would only appeal the court once they'd made a ruling.

As for finding no fault with the tribunal process, are you surprised that a body siting in judgement of itself would find their not at fault? It's why I knew the process would fail.

The initial decision was the (W)AFL saving face. This decision was imply more of the same.

Baker has been denied natural justice. There's a whole swag of reasons why this is so, but I suspect the basis of any action will be on the evidence given to lay the charge, collusion (Kirkwood getting a copy of Baker's statement before the hearing) and whether Baker could have been expected to forsee the consequences of his action (the duty of care argument).

I would be prepared to put plenty of hard earned on St Kilda winning this if they take it to court.


court action not out of the question and I agree wed be a very good chance...bring it on.
 

🥰 Love BigFooty? Join now for free.

Celebrating your loss?
Our loss?

I think you better check the scoreboard (& ladder) again.

Oh that's right, Purple Rabble supporters rate off-field victories more than those on the field.

Like I said - poor bitter losers.

You make no sense and make foolish arguments...so suck it up on the way back to sookyla-la-land
Maybe for once in you sorry life you might want to disprove my arguments rather than resorting to name calling?

Nah . . . didn't think so. You'd prefer to pass yourself off as intelligent by posting comments like "sookyla-la-land". :eek:
 
One suspects that sadly, "Lach" isn't too unusual for a Fremantle supporter.

You reckon?

I argued to let the tribunal decide, but hey, yeah I must be a gloating extremist...

Unfortunately some people run off at the mouth whilst saying nothing and don't like it when it comes back.

So you go tiger and lump me in with the rest of them.
 
Our loss?

I think you better check the scoreboard (& ladder) again.

Oh that's right, Purple Rabble supporters rate off-field victories more than those on the field.

Like I said - poor bitter losers.


Maybe for once in you sorry life you might want to disprove my arguments rather than resorting to name calling?

Nah . . . didn't think so. You'd prefer to pass yourself off as intelligent by posting comments like "sookyla-la-land". :eek:


After siren gate & now this...I think maybe St Kilda should look @ their lawyers or the men in charge of the representing the players. Baker admitting that he initiated contact, certainly didn't help your cause.

I say again....let it go...get over it...
 
Our loss?

I think you better check the scoreboard (& ladder) again.

Oh that's right, Purple Rabble supporters rate off-field victories more than those on the field.

Like I said - poor bitter losers.


Maybe for once in you sorry life you might want to disprove my arguments rather than resorting to name calling?

Nah . . . didn't think so. You'd prefer to pass yourself off as intelligent by posting comments like "sookyla-la-land". :eek:


Geebus on a high horse....I'm crying here...
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Remove this Banner Ad

🥰 Love BigFooty? Join now for free.

Back
Top