MRP / Trib. Tom Stewart bump on Prestia - 4 weeks to freshen up

[feelinfeline]

It's not entirely their fault see they have been brought up in a toxic environment grandparents parents kids all living in those poxy little houses in the city right on the street sucking in Lead all their lives from leaded fuel and although it's ban now it's still there in the roofs and walls and the affects still present.SEE BELOW.

Lead poisoning causes immense societal harm: brain damage, chronic illness, lowered IQ, elevated mortality. Lead exposure in childhood has been linked with violent crime rates decades later.

Good joke but most Richmond supporters wouldn't be able to afford to actually live in Richmond. Only multimillionaires can afford to own a house there and rents are astronomical.

Just like Collingwood supporters don't live in Collingwood and so on.

 

[you pick one]

Bring it in just to see the Richmond conspiracy theorists lose it! lol

In all honesty, you're always going to have stagers. How good would it be if a Grimes or whoever could be sent off for taking a dive? Soccer referees have to deal with a lot worse and the game doesn't fall apart.

Yellow cards I think would help umpires stamp out the kind of behind the play stuff that people like Crowley used to get away with.

Bring in the send off and the next thing we will be behind the wire * that.

 

[StonedCat]

I have no idea if this is a joke or not but tell me deep frying peanut butter "jelly" sandwiches isn't a thing.

Anything is possible over in the good ole US of A, I've had a deep fried battered bacon and cheese sandwich drowned in that stuff they call cheese sauce.
Oh and a pickle... but we digress back to the topic at hand...Should've got 3 weeks

 

[Drunkcat]

How the hell did Elvis get into the Stewart bump page lol

 

[Strange Cat]

Bring it in just to see the Richmond conspiracy theorists lose it! lol

In all honesty, you're always going to have stagers. How good would it be if a Grimes or whoever could be sent off for taking a dive? Soccer referees have to deal with a lot worse and the game doesn't fall apart.

Yellow cards I think would help umpires stamp out the kind of behind the play stuff that people like Crowley used to get away with.

It would be abused pretty quickly , what happens if a player is “knocked out” but can still play out the game and the other player is sent off

There’s far too much room for it to be exploited …we have enough trouble with players diving as it is .

 

[Farmer2Goggin]

Three would be fair.

"Sickening impact" has been thrown around a lot but it could have been much more severe.

Stewart and team argued it was similar to previous three match bans in their defense opportunity and I'm glad they did because it demonstrates the outcome is not aligned with previous incidents nor the players view, but rather the AFLs agenda based on the optics.

So Prestia didn't run off the ground as you described after all ?
I'm disturbed at some of the partisan views expressed on here to be honest - we are not being targetted or treated unfairly - the Club and Stewart have accepted the consequences and severity of the act and moved on - as professionals do.
In this case the AFL Agenda is to preserve player safety and protect long term health by strongly discouraging contact to the head.
The 4 weeks is entirely consistent with the prescribed penalty table , the Club argued for 3 weeks but will not appeal.

 

[Strange Cat]

So Prestia didn't run off the ground as you described after all ?
I'm disturbed at some of the partisan views expressed on here to be honest - we are not being targetted or treated unfairly -the Club and Stewart have accepted the consequences and severity of the act and moved on - as professionals do.
In this case the AFL Agenda is to preserve player safety and protect long term health by strongly discouraging contact to the head.
The 4 weeks is entirely consistent with the prescribed penalty table , the Club argued for 3 weeks but will not appeal.

I agree for this incident …yet let me know when a player has been suspended like Hawkins has for touching an umpire or jumper punching ect

 

[Jhye Clark 13]

I agree for this incident …yet let me know when a player has been suspended like Hawkins has for touching an umpire or jumper punching ect

Greene got 6 weeks for umpire contact.

 

[Strange Cat]

Greene got 6 weeks for umpire contact.

Yes but I’m talking about all the other players getting off with the same similar contact as Hawkins

Greene had to shoulder bump the umpire to get a suspension

 

[Cattery]

Hopefully it does deter him from doing stupid s**t. There was nothing to be gained from what he did and he has put in jeopardy a whole campaign.

First time in 119 games he's done anything of that nature, and as he apparently said to Scott afterwards, "I've just made a horrible mistake" so don't think we have to worry about him doing "stupid s**t" like that in future.
Your second point is much more pertinent (unfortunately) in that he may have scuttled our chance of a top four finish, without him on Saturday we don't get the four points against Richmond, so there's one game where his absence would have cost us already.

 

[Farmer2Goggin]

I agree for this incident …yet let me know when a player has been suspended like Hawkins has for touching an umpire or jumper punching ect

Cheers mate , yes I was referring to the Stewart incident.
I was ropeable with the Davis jumper punch but the umpire contact by Hawk was stupid and a tad aggressive so I can live with that one.

 

[standupand]

So Prestia didn't run off the ground as you described after all ?
I'm disturbed at some of the partisan views expressed on here to be honest - we are not being targetted or treated unfairly - the Club and Stewart have accepted the consequences and severity of the act and moved on - as professionals do.
In this case the AFL Agenda is to preserve player safety and protect long term health by strongly discouraging contact to the head.
The 4 weeks is entirely consistent with the prescribed penalty table , the Club argued for 3 weeks but will not appeal.

I'd have a bit more trust in the AFL's agenda on player safety if it were applied a bit more consistently. Couldn't understand why they threw out the Z.Jones one for instance.

 

[you pick one]

First time in 119 games he's done anything of that nature, and as he apparently said to Scott afterwards, "I've just made a horrible mistake" so don't think we have to worry about him doing "stupid s**t" like that in future.
Your second point is much more pertinent (unfortunately) in that he may have scuttled our chance of a top four finish, without him on Saturday we don't get the four points against Richmond, so there's one game where his absence would have cost us already.

On the bolded we however got the 4points against Richmond and the next 4 games are yet to be played.Have some faith in the rest of the group all sides have set backs the good ones overcome them.

 

[Nickoo]

Yes but I’m talking about all the other players getting off with the same similar contact as Hawkins

Greene had to shoulder bump the umpire to get a suspension

It’s laughable to compare Tom’s incident with Greene’s. Absolutely laughable. An umpire sticks his finger rudely in players face which is suitable pushed away to Greene going after an umpire. Please. That v.season May pushed an umpire in the chest at the Suns and nothing happened.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

 

[Nickoo]

I'd have a bit more trust in the AFL's agenda on player safety if it were applied a bit more consistently. Couldn't understand why they threw out the Z.Jones one for instance.

Exactly. That is the whole problem. When it comes to the Cats it’s letter of law type of stuff but other crap goes missing.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

 

[Seeds]

For me, the need for a send-off rule has nothing to do with 'compensation'. That's where I totally disagree with Scott's suggestion which is akin to what you're saying here that the penalty, or a part of it, could be served when the same teams next meet.

Apart from the obvious difficulties, like when a player is traded to another team (or even joins the 'aggrieved' team itself in the off-season) before the teams play each other again - the idea of 'compensation' or 'benefit' to the aggrieved team just misses the point.

The main thing for me is that serious indiscretions on the field have immediate consequences for the player in question.

It should have nothing to do with whether the opposition have a player down because of the injury or whatever. It has to do with knowing, when you step on the field, that you're only allowed to stay and compete on that field if you play fairly and that call is made by no-one other than the umpire.

Why do we say in AFL that "oh well, but umpires make mistakes... they can't be trusted to make the right call.." etc etc, when in virtually every other sport on the globe, umpires or referees have the power to send a player off and those decisions are simply accepted?

We have a big problem in AFL with head injuries, yes. We also have a big problem - Chris Scott I would say more than most - with just accepting umpires decisions.

A yellow-card and red-card system in AFL is far overdue.

It should have heaps to do with whether a team is a player down. The whole point of suspending someone and banning it is because it results in unfair outcomes that lead to disadvantsges. You are just wrong on this point.

 

[Cattery]

On the bolded we however got the 4points against Richmond and the next 4 games are yet to be played.Have come faith in the rest of the group all sides have set backs the good ones overcome them.

True, however my point was that we wouldn't have gotten the points without him playing (IMO) I still have faith and certainly haven't written off our chances, however the games against Melbourne, Carlton and Port (we should account for North) were always going to be hard, and without Stewart will obviously now be even more so.

 

[Drunkcat]

So Prestia didn't run off the ground as you described after all ?
I'm disturbed at some of the partisan views expressed on here to be honest - we are not being targetted or treated unfairly - the Club and Stewart have accepted the consequences and severity of the act and moved on - as professionals do.
In this case the AFL Agenda is to preserve player safety and protect long term health by strongly discouraging contact to the head.
The 4 weeks is entirely consistent with the prescribed penalty table , the Club argued for 3 weeks but will not appeal.

Just shows every club has moron fans.......just look at game day lol

 

[standupand]

It should have heaps to do with whether a team is a player down. The whole point of suspending someone and banning it is because it results in unfair outcomes that lead to disadvantsges. You are just wrong on this point.

What about a player striking an umpire?

 

[Woz]

Yes but I’m talking about all the other players getting off with the same similar contact as Hawkins

Greene had to shoulder bump the umpire to get a suspension

Nat Fy... wait, nevermind. Sorry.

 

[jim boy]

without him on Saturday we don't get the four points against Richmond, so there's one game where his absence would have cost us already.

And there is a very good argument to say that if it were not for this incident on Saturday we would have lost, so its a bit rich to say his absence would have cost us four points. If we lose one match out of the next four that we would have won if he was playing, then at worst, as a club, we come out evens.

 

[catstragic]

For me, the need for a send-off rule has nothing to do with 'compensation'. That's where I totally disagree with Scott's suggestion which is akin to what you're saying here that the penalty, or a part of it, could be served when the same teams next meet.

Apart from the obvious difficulties, like when a player is traded to another team (or even joins the 'aggrieved' team itself in the off-season) before the teams play each other again - the idea of 'compensation' or 'benefit' to the aggrieved team just misses the point.

The main thing for me is that serious indiscretions on the field have immediate consequences for the player in question.

It should have nothing to do with whether the opposition have a player down because of the injury or whatever. It has to do with knowing, when you step on the field, that you're only allowed to stay and compete on that field if you play fairly and that call is made by no-one other than the umpire.

Why do we say in AFL that "oh well, but umpires make mistakes... they can't be trusted to make the right call.." etc etc, when in virtually every other sport on the globe, umpires or referees have the power to send a player off and those decisions are simply accepted?

We have a big problem in AFL with head injuries, yes. We also have a big problem - Chris Scott I would say more than most - with just accepting umpires decisions.

A yellow-card and red-card system in AFL is far overdue.

Your not going to be able to umpire head injuries out of the game without totally changing the game itself. In reality hits like Stewarts are rare, players already make a conscious effort not to hit the head. bringing in a red card system wouldn't stop the concussions, it would just a meaningless gesture.

 

[standupand]

Your not going to be able to umpire head injuries out of the game without totally changing the game itself. In reality hits like Stewarts are rare, players already make a conscious effort not to hit the head. bringing in a red card system wouldn't stop the concussions, it would just a meaningless gesture.

I disagree. Don't we already have it at junior/local footy level?
A system where a player can theoretically do violence to another player, official, fan etc and still get to share the same field with them for the remainder of the game is simply idiotic.

 

[Drunkcat]

I miss the days it happen every week, but i know times change so i don't think there is a need to do anything he got 4 weeks we move on....stop trying to fix things that don't need fixing

 

[jim boy]

What about a player striking an umpire?

Then that player - as his final act in football - should be dragged by his coach from the field. If the coach doesn't, then given the seriousness of the offense, the coach could find themselves with a 'bringing the game into disrepute' charge for continuing to let the thug play on.