No Oppo Supporters Tom Stewart's targeted KO'ing of Prestia - 4 week ban

How many weeks for the dog act

  • 2

    Votes: 13 4.6%
  • 3

    Votes: 14 4.9%
  • 4

    Votes: 85 30.0%
  • 5

    Votes: 57 20.1%
  • 6

    Votes: 69 24.4%
  • 7+

    Votes: 45 15.9%

  • Total voters
    283

Remove this Banner Ad

Some of you need to chill out, be better than geelong supporters.

We dont need to wish injuries on anyone or hope someone evens it up.

Just be content in the fact we win when it really matters.

Also the thread is about Stewart and Prestia
 
Chris Scott saying that Stewart admitted to choosing to bump. Then contradicts himself by saying that the act was not deliberate



Since when is a making conscious choice has not been a deliberate act?
 

Log in to remove this ad.

Chris Scott saying that Stewart admitted to choosing to bump. Then contradicts himself by saying that the act was not deliberate



Since when is a making conscious choice has not been a deliberate act?

Scott is a flog. Imagine what Dimmer would say if it was one of our players on report.
 
Who would you entrust the power to send a player of with?

the umpires? They can’t adjudicate rules, we would finish the game with twelve players

the video guys? Inconclusive we would finish the game with twelve players

sending off would open the game to more corruption than it already has, has everyone forgotten dangerous tackles being adjudicated?

how was there no high on baker in the third? That’s almost a week in the afl jargon but nothing from the umps, they ignored head high tackles on us all night
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

I disagree with the opinion that Stewart intentionally tried to injure Prestia. I think Intention to injure looks different. Intention to injure to me looks like what Gaff did to Andrew Brayshaw in 2018.

This one looked like a mistimed bump that unfortunately ended up concussing Prestia. The bump and contact looked deliberate as he went past the ball to bump Prestia, so I think it still will be around 3-4 weeks as it was not low impact. But not enough evidence to show that the intention to injure was deliberate in my opinion.
 
Who would you entrust the power to send a player of with?

the umpires? They can’t adjudicate rules, we would finish the game with twelve players

the video guys? Inconclusive we would finish the game with twelve players

sending off would open the game to more corruption than it already has, has everyone forgotten dangerous tackles being adjudicated?

how was there no high on baker in the third? That’s almost a week in the afl jargon but nothing from the umps, they ignored head high tackles on us all night

Would need to be an additional umpire/official who can watch the footage and make the call. Obviously, it would have to be for exceptional circumstances (deliberate act which ends with the victim seriously concussed/hurt or not able to play out the game) for example Stewart/Prestia, Gaff/Brayshaw or the Vickery/Cox etc all very deliberate acts which took a player out of the game and effectively gave an advantage to the offending team.

Unless there were blokes knocking each other out on purpose left right and centre then I don’t see how a team could finish a game with 12 players.
 
im still filthy

red card 100%
think about it, replay it from 5 angles like a goal review. if doctors or players act unethical to milk it....throw the book at them.

afl want to reduce acts of thuggery they need to act now before it costs a team a flag.

do the sums, prestia unfairly taken out cost tiges a couple of goals

stewart not subbed out and plays a great game but not subbed out on the spot with prestia, advantages cats a couple of goals....

richmond playing one down for 2 minutes with umpire neglect cost tigers 1 goal....

now factor in stewart missing games, it advantages other teams vying for finals spots too..... except richmond again.
 
Would need to be an additional umpire/official who can watch the footage and make the call. Obviously, it would have to be for exceptional circumstances (deliberate act which ends with the victim seriously concussed/hurt or not able to play out the game) for example Stewart/Prestia, Gaff/Brayshaw or the Vickery/Cox etc all very deliberate acts which took a player out of the game and effectively gave an advantage to the offending team.

Unless there were blokes knocking each other out on purpose left right and centre then I don’t see how a team could finish a game with 12 players.
Who would you trust to make that decision?
 
The thing that brings me great comfort this season - when we are getting reamed basically every week in one way or another - is knowing that at least 2 of Carlton, Geelong or Melbourne are not going to win the flag.


Sent from my iPhone using BigFooty.com
 
That hit was sickening. What I found even worse was Selwood running up to Stewart and laughing, slapping him on the back like he had done a really good thing.

Both dog acts. It is a shame Selwood can't be suspended for being a flog of a person.

If you ask me, this hit deserves as bad a penalty as the Gaff hit on Brayshaw. Both shocking acts that need maximum punishment.

As for the Cats - they are a s**t stain club. Everything about them stinks, from the coach down.

If the media cared enough to highlight Selwood's behaviour there, he should rightly be up for bringing the game into disrepute. But it's Selwood, not Cotchin or Riewoldt or Lynch or Pickett or Grimes or Nank or etc down the Richmond list.
 
Now that we now have an increased understanding about CTE and its devastating effects on the human brain, I believe any deliberate hit that results in concussion should have a premium (1-2 weeks) added to the suspension time. . Case in point is of course Shane Tuck and Danny Frawley. While you recover from the hit in the short term, of course the unseen long term affects can impact a player's quality of life in their retirement.
 
Back
Top