Saints News steven king

[Persevering Saint]

Mark Robinson is doing a live blog now at the Hun site on the incident.

 

[DemonCambo]

Personally, I'm glad Steven King has finally been pinged. ThHe Quote from Wikipedia on one of his previous indescretions against Jeff White tells the story;

In 2005, he was involved in a horrific on-field incident with Geelong's Steven King. As King attempted to kick the ball out of mid-air, he missed and collected White's face at the height of his leg's swing, causing facial injuries that required extensive surgery, inserting five metal plates and 14 screws into White's jaw and face.[8] It was viewed as an accident by the AFL tribunal and no action was taken against King. As the incident took place in Melbourne's final match of the season—Geelong winning the match and knocking Melbourne out of the finals—White was able to recover during the off-season and did not miss a match, despite the severity of the injury.[3] White's wedding to his fiancée Stacy was postponed until later in the year due to the injury.

King recklessly attempted to kick the ball out of the air from a boundary throw in. Depsite crumblings Jeff White's face, the match review panel didnt find anything wrong with it. It was reckless, careless and stupid.

Anyway, 4-6 was probably harsh for what happened on the weekend.

 

[It Was A Good Day]

Personally, I'm glad Steven King has finally been pinged. ThHe Quote from Wikipedia on one of his previous indescretions against Jeff White tells the story;

In 2005, he was involved in a horrific on-field incident with Geelong's Steven King. As King attempted to kick the ball out of mid-air, he missed and collected White's face at the height of his leg's swing, causing facial injuries that required extensive surgery, inserting five metal plates and 14 screws into White's jaw and face.[8] It was viewed as an accident by the AFL tribunal and no action was taken against King. As the incident took place in Melbourne's final match of the season—Geelong winning the match and knocking Melbourne out of the finals—White was able to recover during the off-season and did not miss a match, despite the severity of the injury.[3] White's wedding to his fiancée Stacy was postponed until later in the year due to the injury.

King recklessly attempted to kick the ball out of the air from a boundary throw in. Depsite crumblings Jeff White's face, the match review panel didnt find anything wrong with it. It was reckless, careless and stupid.

Anyway, 4-6 was probably harsh for what happened on the weekend.

It was also an accident clown - nothing wrong with going for the ball to gain some distance. Maybe White should have got his big dumb head out of the way.

 

[krusden]

Personally, I'm glad Steven King has finally been pinged. ThHe Quote from Wikipedia on one of his previous indescretions against Jeff White tells the story;

In 2005, he was involved in a horrific on-field incident with Geelong's Steven King. As King attempted to kick the ball out of mid-air, he missed and collected White's face at the height of his leg's swing, causing facial injuries that required extensive surgery, inserting five metal plates and 14 screws into White's jaw and face.[8] It was viewed as an accident by the AFL tribunal and no action was taken against King. As the incident took place in Melbourne's final match of the season—Geelong winning the match and knocking Melbourne out of the finals—White was able to recover during the off-season and did not miss a match, despite the severity of the injury.[3] White's wedding to his fiancée Stacy was postponed until later in the year due to the injury.

King recklessly attempted to kick the ball out of the air from a boundary throw in. Depsite crumblings Jeff White's face, the match review panel didnt find anything wrong with it. It was reckless, careless and stupid.

Anyway, 4-6 was probably harsh for what happened on the weekend.

bear a grudge much? sheesh

 

[Armitage2Riewoldt]

He's accepted the 4 weeks.

Macca's in for a good run.

 

[domiroo]

Hello, I'm domiroo and I'm an ignorant troll

 

[Armitage2Riewoldt]

Are you asking for a red card?

 

[It Was A Good Day]

No he is asking for a rainbow card.. ****ing queen

 

[domiroo]

I'm still here and I'm still too stupid to understand what is unacceptable behaviour on an oppositions team board.

 

[TassieSaint]

He's accepted the 4 weeks.

Macca's in for a good run.

wtf? I came here to post how he should take it to the tribunal cause there's no way they'd hold it up. what a ****ing joke.

 

[CHBench]

He's accepted the 4 weeks.

Macca's in for a good run.

Sigh, weak.

 

[It Was A Good Day]

Who you calling a queen . I can have an opinion . it was a low act, face the facts mate he's a sniper it was done intetionaly off the ball . power is not the biggest guy out if you didnt notice so take it on the chin and get on with it guys .

Shut up clown. If Power was not so ****ing weak we wouldn't even be talking about it.

Worth 2 weeks at most. North Melbourne you are a weak breed.

 

[krusden]

wtf? I came here to post how he should take it to the tribunal cause there's no way they'd hold it up. what a ****ing joke.

tribunal are in a corner re: head high anythings. I reckon they would have upheld it on their OWN principles just to prove a point.

they woulda made a bigger example out of kingy than they already have IMO

 

[Plugger35]

wtf? I came here to post how he should take it to the tribunal cause there's no way they'd hold it up. what a ****ing joke.

I'm not surprised they didn't challenge it myself. I'm not saying I agree with the penalty, but there was probably more to lose than to gain by going to the tribunal.

There was always the risk that any challenge would fail and he would get the extra two weeks. Even on the off chance it was successful, it would probably only reduce the penalty by a week or two and there would be all the off field distractions that go with it.

I don't think Lyon would be too worried about losing King for 4 weeks anyway. He hasn't been playing that great lately and this will give him a chance to freshen up for the rest of the season. It also gives them the chance to give McEvoy a decent run in the side. The only problem might be if we lose Gardiner in the next 4 weeks as well.

 

[StFly]

StFly, you need to read the rules.

http://aflpa.com.au/sites/all/files/AFL Tribunal Booklet 2009.pdf

read impact and contact on pg3. they are the rules for this yr, they may not have been the rules last yr.

I'm well aware of the rules thank you very much, fact remains that concussion came from an unintentional head clash and not the bump and thus it was not then intentional contact which caused the impact in question. The vision is not conclusive that anything but a head clash concussed him or else he would have braced his landing and it's clear at point of impact that his head effectively bounces into Kingy's.

Contact was to the body - not the head (downgraded)
The offence was reckless - not intentional (downgraded)

In determining the level of impact one takes into account the injury, the potential for and the force applied.

The force is debatable since he was unsuspecting and you can nudge a person and they'll topple over, King was effectively jogging and not running full stick at him, thus it's not the highest level and should have been downgraded. The potential for injury happened because of the accidental head clash & being Ko'd before he hit the ground, this has nothing to do with the bump which was reported as headbutting is a separate offence.

Thus they should have challenged to reduce it to Reckless Conduct, High Impact, Body Contact, 6 activiation point level 3 offence, which would have been about 391 points and a 3 week suspension.

 

[TassieSaint]

Yeah I'm not too bothered about it seeing as with Gardiner back we can probably afford for King to have a nice rest, but just on principal that's a shockingly harsh suspension.

 

[seanoff]

I'm well aware of the rules thank you very much, fact remains that concussion came from an unintentional head clash and not the bump and thus it was not then intentional contact which caused the impact in question. The vision is not conclusive that anything but a head clash concussed him or else he would have braced his landing and it's clear at point of impact that his head effectively bounces into Kingy's.

Contact was to the body - not the head (downgraded)
The offence was reckless - not intentional (downgraded)

In determining the level of impact one takes into account the injury, the potential for and the force applied.

The force is debatable since he was unsuspecting and you can nudge a person and they'll topple over, King was effectively jogging and not running full stick at him, thus it's not the highest level and should have been downgraded. The potential for injury happened because of the accidental head clash & being Ko'd before he hit the ground, this has nothing to do with the bump which was reported as headbutting is a separate offence.

Thus they should have challenged to reduce it to Reckless Conduct, High Impact, Body Contact, 6 activiation point level 3 offence, which would have been about 391 points and a 3 week suspension.

i don't know if you are serious with this argument or just being obtuse for fun

the bump caused the head clash, if that what it was, or the hit on the ground therefore it is deemed high. It's very clear.

Contact shall be classified as high or to the groin where a
player's head or groin makes contact with another player or
object such as the fence or the ground as a result of the actions
of the offending player. pg3

the only argument they had any hope on was the intent/reckless one and that wasn't worth the risk. seriously.

don't snipe players 30 - 40m off the ball and this goes away.

 

[It Was A Good Day]

i don't know if you are serious with this argument or just being obtuse for fun

the bump caused the head clash, if that what it was, or the hit on the ground therefore it is deemed high. It's very clear.

Contact shall be classified as high or to the groin where a
player's head or groin makes contact with another player or
object such as the fence or the ground as a result of the actions
of the offending player. pg3

the only argument they had any hope on was the intent/reckless one and that wasn't worth the risk. seriously.

don't snipe players 30 - 40m off the ball and this goes away.

Go away pest. We do not need your hocus pocus

 

[Ketchup]

I'm astounded you think it was a dog hit - pretty dumb comment when if they hadn't of clashed heads Power would have been winded and no-one would have been commenting on the incident.

Last week the much bigger Jamar cleaned up Geary well off the ball, and there I was saying that it was to be expected i.e. he's a big unit who would would be expected to use his body for the team's advantage.

But if North supporters can't see that it was a 1-2 week job - and only because there was an unfortunate and unintended head clash - then this is not the place to post a comment.

I have lost count of the number of times there is contact off the ball - particularly cheap shots to the kidneys from behind - but it seems unless an injury is sustained it doesn't count?

I like Scott Thompson as a player, but his elbows never left Kosi's body. Seems the pirates (with their single eye) abound on BigFooty when incidents happen.

I do agree its way too much and should be 3 weeks max but it is beside the point weather it is "accidental" or not, the point is it was done, and the "accidental" head clash is caused by a hit from king, so that has to be taken into account, i don't remember who it was im sure you do but was it gilbee? When he bumped kozi 2 years ago or whatever it was do you think he meant to fracture kozi's skull? But because he did he got weeks weather he meant it or not. It is the same thing here just not to that extreame. King hit a player half his size 30 meters of the ball NOTHING to do with the current play and didn't clear room like some have been saying ball went to opposite wing you wouldn't of brang it back in without a turnover anyway, and he got knocked out regardless. Its a bitter pill to swallow but you win some and you lose some. This is a loss just move on.

 

[Look2Me4Guidance]

2

i find it strange that you are all defending king after the squealing about X last yr. the AFL got that one wrong, thus the change this yr. you got the change, but when one of your guys takes a cheap shot, it's suddenly tough, he should have expected it (from 30+m no less) etc.

grow up a bit. he did the wrong thing, he's getting whacked for it. don't want to get suspended, don't play tough by taking out people way off the play. If he'd done it as a shepherd in play or if power had the ball, fair enough. this incident, cheap and cowardly.

Ahhh an "unlisted" person telling us the rights and wrongs of the AFL world. So you're accusing us of "squealing" about Xavier Clarke and yet you're condeming King for exactly the same action. Top work.

Take your opinions elsewhere hypocrite.

 

[TassieSaint]

i don't know if you are serious with this argument or just being obtuse for fun

the bump caused the head clash, if that what it was, or the hit on the ground therefore it is deemed high. It's very clear.

Contact shall be classified as high or to the groin where a
player's head or groin makes contact with another player or
object such as the fence or the ground as a result of the actions
of the offending player. pg3

the only argument they had any hope on was the intent/reckless one and that wasn't worth the risk. seriously.

don't snipe players 30 - 40m off the ball and this goes away.

Even if that's in the rules, you can't see that it's ****ing stupid? Surely some discretion must be used.

Say when Warnock made late contact with Ball last year and he got concussed from hitting his own knee, you're saying it should be deemed negligent, body contact but also high since it resulted in his head hitting something and thus Warnock should have got 4 activation points and what a 2 week suspension? What a joke.

The only thing wrong with the bump was that it was behind play, wasn't high wasn't to the head, was a last minute decision not to avoid contact when they're running toward each other (you don't honestly think King planned it pre-match and lined him up from 100 m away do you?) 2 weeks with an early guilty plea would have been fair.

 

[Look2Me4Guidance]

6 weeks would seem harsh but I think 4 is appropriate. It was a really dog hit I'm astounded at the reaction by some Saints supporters.

How do you want us to act when exactly the same thing happened to one of your players, said player was carried off on a stretcher and the offender had no charge to answer. Are we supposed to celebrate?

 

[Look2Me4Guidance]

I'm not surprised they didn't challenge it myself. I'm not saying I agree with the penalty, but there was probably more to lose than to gain by going to the tribunal.

There was always the risk that any challenge would fail and he would get the extra two weeks. Even on the off chance it was successful, it would probably only reduce the penalty by a week or two and there would be all the off field distractions that go with it.

I don't think Lyon would be too worried about losing King for 4 weeks anyway. He hasn't been playing that great lately and this will give him a chance to freshen up for the rest of the season. It also gives them the chance to give McEvoy a decent run in the side. The only problem might be if we lose Gardiner in the next 4 weeks as well.

I'm with you plugger. Accept a bad beat (bit of poker parlance there) and move on with it. At least his carry over points are removed now.

I'll be devestated however if something happens to Gardy or Macca over the next 4 weeks. That would simply compound the terrible decision by the MRP.

It gives a Macca a great chance and I believe he has improved every game from the one previously.

 

[goodie23]

I do agree its way too much and should be 3 weeks max but it is beside the point weather it is "accidental" or not, the point is it was done, and the "accidental" head clash is caused by a hit from king, so that has to be taken into account, i don't remember who it was im sure you do but was it gilbee? When he bumped kozi 2 years ago or whatever it was do you think he meant to fracture kozi's skull? But because he did he got weeks weather he meant it or not. It is the same thing here just not to that extreame. King hit a player half his size 30 meters of the ball NOTHING to do with the current play and didn't clear room like some have been saying ball went to opposite wing you wouldn't of brang it back in without a turnover anyway, and he got knocked out regardless. Its a bitter pill to swallow but you win some and you lose some. This is a loss just move on.

Giansiracusa didn't get anything, tribunal decided he had no case to answer. Do your homework before you come in here to preach

 

[TassieSaint]

I'll be devestated however if something happens to Gardy or Macca over the next 4 weeks. That would simply compound the terrible decision by the MRP.

If it was Macca though, would that be so bad considering Stanley's VFL form?

Must the best ruck stocks at St Kilda for a long time