The Association Football AFL Thread

Remove this Banner Ad

Status
Not open for further replies.

Log in to remove this ad.

Yeah Fyfe got off too but all the craze is just about Ablett it seems.

More booooooooooooo's.

The craze about Ablett is because he did the same thing last week.
 
I guess the AFL is just waiting for him to break someones jaw before doing anything.

Absolutely, I agree with you. He should have gone last well, he didn’t and this weeks incident was actually worse and he’s been cleared again. It’s pretty pathetic.
 
Absolutely, I agree with you. He should have gone last well, he didn’t and this weeks incident was actually worse and he’s been cleared again. It’s pretty pathetic.
I think the AFL painted themselves into a corner this week by stuffing up last week. I guess they are waiting for a broken jaw or concussion to do anything.
 
The wrong was last week when it was cited by Christian. He corrected his error this week.

Glad Fyfe got off too.

Imo they stuffed up last week and didnt have any choice this week. That's just me.

Fyfe can sweep kick players and get off so im not surprised by him either.
 
Imo they stuffed up last week and didnt have any choice this week. That's just me.

Fyfe can sweep kick players and get off so im not surprised by him either.
Ablett was cited and sanctioned last week. It was deemed an illegal act. Just not intentional.

This week was deemed insufficient force, hard to argue otherwise.
 
Ablett was cited and sanctioned last week. It was deemed an illegal act. Just not intentional.

This week was deemed insufficient force, hard to argue otherwise.

So they were different. How then are you arguing that they were the same and neither should have been cited?
 
The AFL have had this s**t coming there way for a while. They're more focused on the outcome of the action rather than the act itself. Gaff and Fyfe/Ablett had the same low level of intent to break someones jaw. But the margin for error is so small so one guy misses 8 weeks and 2 don't miss a thing. Durdin's thing is the same, if the outcome was as low as the other two he'd get off.

Doesn't make it right but this is how it's been for a long time
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

Should be retiring a norm smith medalist. Who knows maybe that could have lead to a different future for him. Good investment by the Dogs nonetheless
 
Should be retiring a norm smith medalist. Who knows maybe that could have lead to a different future for him. Good investment by the Dogs nonetheless

He did pay for himself. He(well him and Dale) also provided me with probably my favourite ever bulldog momemt.
 
Won’t they have to include his salary until the contract ends? Or is that just a Buddy Franklin rule that the Afl brought in to piss off the swans?
 
Won’t they have to include his salary until the contract ends? Or is that just a Buddy Franklin rule that the Afl brought in to ******** the swans?
No because Boyd was a trade.
 
Hes walking away from the contract though and forfeiting the last 2 years salary.
I don’t see how or why it’s any different to if buddy walked away from his final couple of years. I get one is FA and one is a trade. But both got new long contracts on huge $$
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top