Tribunal Tonight...

[RadioShark]

MEDIA RELEASE FROM THE AUSTRALIAN FOOTBALL LEAGUE
The AFL wishes to advise that tonight's Tribunal hearing will now start at 5.30pm, to hear the two charges laid from the Grand Final.

The charges are as follows:

Scott Burns, Collingwood, reported on video evidence by umpire Brett Allen for striking Jonathan Brown, Brisbane Lions, during the second quarter of the Grand Final between Collingwood and the Brisbane Lions at the MCG on Saturday September 28, 2002.

Paul Licuria, Collingwood, reported on video evidence by umpire Brett Allen for misconduct in that he kneed Jason Akermanis, Brisbane Lions, during the third quarter of the Grand Final between Collingwood and the Brisbane Lions at the MCG on Saturday September 28, 2002.

Ends

Release by:
Patrick Keane
AFL Media Manager

 

[saiak]

Scott Burns should get 3 because it was worse than the Cloke case!
I am undecided on Licuria! He should get at least 3 (I couldn't believe what I saw on TV) and anywhere up to 6! It was disgraceful!

 

[snakebite01]

Originally posted by saiak
Scott Burns should get 3 because it was worse than the Cloke case!
I am undecided on Licuria! He should get at least 3 (I couldn't believe what I saw on TV) and anywhere up to 6! It was disgraceful!

I don't think it was worse than Cloke's. He broke someone's nose for crying out loud. Burns didn't hurt Brown at all, he was just very late. Having said that I wouldn't be surprised if he gets 3 and Licuria gets something worse because didn't they say they (the AFL) were going to be harsher in dishing out penalties because it was the GF.

 

[saiak]

Originally posted by snakebite01


I don't think it was worse than Cloke's. He broke someone's nose for crying out loud. Burns didn't hurt Brown at all, he was just very late. Having said that I wouldn't be surprised if he gets 3 and Licuria gets something worse because didn't they say they (the AFL) were going to be harsher in dishing out penalties because it was the GF.

We shouldn't look at the end result, look at the intent. Burns had intent to hit Brown. Cloke was accidental. Licuria really does deserve worse, I didn't mind him until he kneed Akermanis (although I hate Aker so I am glad it was Aker that he kneed!).

 

[NICK THE PIE MAN]

They will probably both get 2 but I don't give a sh*t.
In Grand Finals, your going for everything and stuff happens.

 

[saiak]

Originally posted by NICK THE PIE MAN
They will probably both get 2 but I don't give a sh*t.
In Grand Finals, your going for everything and stuff happens.

Honestly if I was a Carringbush supporter (dread the thought) I would be ecstatic with only 2 each!

 

[snakebite01]

Originally posted by saiak


We shouldn't look at the end result, look at the intent. Burns had intent to hit Brown. Cloke was accidental. Licuria really does deserve worse, I didn't mind him until he kneed Akermanis (although I hate Aker so I am glad it was Aker that he kneed!).

BS saiak. Cloke wasn't meaning to injure Edwards but once he knew he wouldn't get to the ball IMO his aim was to put some physical pressure on Edwards-but I know he certainly didn't mean to hurt Edwards. Other than that I agree with you about Licuria.

 

[peruka]

The only thing Licuria did wrong is that he didnt knee him hard enough. Acne didnt seem to like it too much, maybe he should ring up Daniel Kerr to compare notes!

 

[mic59]

Originally posted by NICK THE PIE MAN
They will probably both get 2 but I don't give a sh*t.
In Grand Finals, your going for everything and stuff happens.

Going for everything? The ball was out of bounds, they were both getting up and Licuria moved his leg so that he could squash Aker in the head! Maybe he could plead an accident if the ball was still in play but it had plainly stopped. He's got to go for 3 or 4 for a deliberate act like that.

 

[hotpie]

1 week for Burns - he might get off because it was an open hand.
2 for Licuria (should be 3 but his defence will be that he learned everything from Akers)

 

[JUBJUB]

Burns 2
Licuria 3
Mensch [VFL] cleared

 

[Stocka]

Originally posted by peruka
The only thing Licuria did wrong is that he didnt knee him hard enough. Acne didnt seem to like it too much, maybe he should ring up Daniel Kerr to compare notes!

Just like you can now compare notes with Collingwood fans regarding what it's like to lose a GF to the Lions, prat.

 

[Dogwatcher]

Originally posted by mic59


Going for everything? The ball was out of bounds, they were both getting up and Licuria moved his leg so that he could squash Aker in the head! Maybe he could plead an accident if the ball was still in play but it had plainly stopped. He's got to go for 3 or 4 for a deliberate act like that.

Licuria will go, but I hope they look at why it happened. The pair had had a wrestle on the sideline, Licuria was trying to get up and go when Akermanis pulled him down again. Licuria made the decision to knee Aker, but it was out of frustration that Aker wouldn't let go of him and was attempting to continue the wrestle. I don't think the intent was to injure Aker, it was gesture to say f uc k off and leave me alone.

 

[JohnD]

Originally posted by RadioShark
MEDIA RELEASE FROM THE AUSTRALIAN FOOTBALL LEAGUE
The AFL wishes to advise that tonight's Tribunal hearing will now start at 5.30pm, to hear the two charges laid from the Grand Final.
[...]

I'm surprised there is only two. There was one particular incident that has not been mentioned at all ... which surprises me. I can't recall the players involved but there was an "attempted trip by foot" which looked in the same league as Fletcher except for the lack of contact.

Is "attempting to trip by foot" an offence or does a player actually have to make contact for it to be a problem ?

Does anyone recall also seeing the incident ? Would have been 3rd or 4th quarter IIRC.


John

 

[Stocka]

Originally posted by Dogwatcher



Licuria will go, but I hope they look at why it happened. The pair had had a wrestle on the sideline, Licuria was trying to get up and go when Akermanis pulled him down again. Licuria made the decision to knee Aker, but it was out of frustration that Aker wouldn't let go of him and was attempting to continue the wrestle. I don't think the intent was to injure Aker, it was gesture to say f uc k off and leave me alone.

That line of defense didn't save Lockett for his indiscretion on McKenna . . .

At any rate, he could have done any number of other things, in the sitaution. Kneeing someone in the head tends to be one of the more drastic choices, I would have thought.

 

[saiak]

Originally posted by Stocka

At any rate, he could have done any number of other things, in the sitaution. Kneeing someone in the head tends to be one of the more drastic choices, I would have thought.

I agree, and I think he deserves more than 3... Put it in perspective, Cloke got 2 for accidental contact....Licuria was clearly intentional and he kneed someone in the head!

 

[Dogwatcher]

Now how did I know Stocka and Saiak would be in total agreeance?

 

[saiak]

Originally posted by Dogwatcher
Now how did I know Stocka and Saiak would be in total agreeance?

Dunno, fill us in!

 

[ozzult]

During a normal home and away game, I'd expect a player to get three weeks for that.

Akermanis did the exact same thing and got two weeks, if I recall correctly, and in the head is even more vicious, so three wouldn't be too unreasonable, if the tribunal was using common sense and logic, but we know that's not possible.

The thing is, the AFL said during grand final week suspensions would be more severe because it was a grand final, so considering that, I reckon he will get anywhere between 3-5 weeks.

But the AFL could have just been bluffing when saying that to prevent something from happening.

 

[peruka]

Good one stocka, pity I'll never see a little boy burying my club's trophies into an open grave (remember that ad, that was youre club getting killed!). At the end of the day, youre nothing but a merged side that has depended on hand outs to survive! At least my club made $1 million profit from our grand final, how much did you guys make?

 

[Dogwatcher]

Originally posted by peruka
Good one stocka, pity I'll never see a little boy burying my club's trophies into an open grave (remember that ad, that was youre club getting killed!). At the end of the day, youre nothing but a merged side that has depended on hand outs to survive! At least my club made $1 million profit from our grand final, how much did you guys make?

Woh there. Peruka Salt!
Calm down.
BTW, who the hell is Peruka? This is the first time I've seen a post?

 

[cjwalkley]

Originally posted by peruka
Good one stocka, pity I'll never see a little boy burying my club's trophies into an open grave (remember that ad, that was youre club getting killed!). At the end of the day, youre nothing but a merged side that has depended on hand outs to survive! At least my club made $1 million profit from our grand final, how much did you guys make?

What a shame, we only get the premiership out of the Grand Final.

I think Pikey sums up my thoughts for you perfectly!

 

[Richmondfan#1]

Phroar! Thought there was going to be a new tribunal news show called "Tribunal Tonight".

 

[Stocka]

Originally posted by peruka
Good one stocka, pity I'll never see a little boy burying my club's trophies into an open grave (remember that ad, that was youre club getting killed!). At the end of the day, youre nothing but a merged side that has depended on hand outs to survive! At least my club made $1 million profit from our grand final, how much did you guys make?

You seem to be quite fond of opening your mouth . . . perhaps we should meet up sometime . . . I'd gladly shut it permanently for you.

 

[Stocka]

Originally posted by Dogwatcher
Now how did I know Stocka and Saiak would be in total agreeance?

Not sure about that one?

From what I have seen over the past few days, there have been very few points in which I have agreed with the person in question (not saying that they're not entitled to their opinion, of course).