SA Footy

Port Adelaide magpie Jeremy Clayton was suspended for 2 matches at the tribunal last night.

for the hit on d caire?

scottroo wrote:for the hit on d caire?

Yes, there was video evidence that assisted in the conviction and of course, Jeremy doesn't have the best record going around.

It was a pretty cheap shot, behind the play.

The video shows Caire was probably out to it before he hit the ground.

So where was all the hysteria over this one? Obviously a couple a "fans" didn't witness this incident. I'm sure if they did, they would of called for Jezza to get LIFE.

caire to miss this weeks game too!

scottroo wrote:caire to miss this weeks game too!

because of his ankle though not concussion.

The Sleeping Giant wrote:So where was all the hysteria over this one? Obviously a couple a "fans" didn't witness this incident. I'm sure if they did, they would of called for Jezza to get LIFE.

I mentioned it in my write-up soon after the game. You get used to it with Clayton.

Good try.

The Sleeping Giant wrote:So where was all the hysteria over this one? Obviously a couple a "fans" didn't witness this incident. I'm sure if they did, they would of called for Jezza to get LIFE.

What's your point? That some West fans overreacted in protesting about one of their players being drilled head-first into the ground? Or that they should have seen an incident that happened behind the play? Or that Clayton's actions were worse than Shirley's?

Every time I've seen the Bays play Port and Jezza has been playing, I can't recall a game without him being a dirty little sniper and giving someone a whack.

Good player - yes.

Dirty little sniper - you betcha.

I think the Sleeping Giant was having more of a go at Mal and bayman rather than Westies fans guys.

(And a fair point too IMHO)

Wedgie wrote:I think the Sleeping Giant was having more of a go at Mal and bayman rather than Westies fans guys.

(And a fair point too IMHO)

Oh no, we're not revisiting that old chestnut again ... pleeeeeeeeaaaaaaaaaasssssssee!

The Sleeping Giant wrote:So where was all the hysteria over this one? Obviously a couple a "fans" didn't witness this incident. I'm sure if they did, they would of called for Jezza to get LIFE.

SHIRLEY made a crude tackle in general play, which I saw, and I could pass judgement.
CLAYTON made a tackle behind the general play and I didnt see it, so no comments from me.

Just for the record, when Im at a nuetral game I try and post what I see, there is no bias
I dont have a vendetta against Robert Shirley, the hysteria was over the tackle

Sleeping Giant
I have no MALice towards your comments, your post does make sense , The non viewing of the Clayton clobber exempts me from commenting
PS
Bayman/Mal are not ''fans'' [of West Adelaide]as u may have suggested, we barrack for GL+ NW

mal wrote:

The Sleeping Giant wrote:So where was all the hysteria over this one? Obviously a couple a "fans" didn't witness this incident. I'm sure if they did, they would of called for Jezza to get LIFE.

SHIRLEY made a crude tackle in general play, which I saw, and I could pass judgement.
CLAYTON made a tackle behind the general play and I didnt see it, so no comments from me.

Just for the record, when Im at a nuetral game I try and post what I see, there is no bias
I dont have a vendetta against Robert Shirley, the hysteria was over the tackle

Sleeping Giant
I have no MALice towards your comments, your post does make sense , The non viewing of the Clayton clobber exempts me from commenting
PS
Bayman/Mal are not ''fans'' [of West Adelaide]as u may have suggested, we barrack for GL+ NW

He didn't say you were fans of West nor did he suggest it, he just sugested you were "fans".
A subtle but noticable difference that I picked up on.

And I'm sure you'd agree that Bayman and youself are fans of the game (even if you don't know what a spear tackle is )

PS Good to see you refer to it now just as a crude tackle and not a spear tackle. Who said you can't teach old dogs new tricks!

justice at last for the thug clayton.

Wedgie wrote:

mal wrote:

The Sleeping Giant wrote:So where was all the hysteria over this one? Obviously a couple a "fans" didn't witness this incident. I'm sure if they did, they would of called for Jezza to get LIFE.

SHIRLEY made a crude tackle in general play, which I saw, and I could pass judgement.
CLAYTON made a tackle behind the general play and I didnt see it, so no comments from me.

Just for the record, when Im at a nuetral game I try and post what I see, there is no bias
I dont have a vendetta against Robert Shirley, the hysteria was over the tackle

Sleeping Giant
I have no MALice towards your comments, your post does make sense , The non viewing of the Clayton clobber exempts me from commenting
PS
Bayman/Mal are not ''fans'' [of West Adelaide]as u may have suggested, we barrack for GL+ NW

He didn't say you were fans of West nor did he suggest it, he just sugested you were "fans".
A subtle but noticable difference that I picked up on.

And I'm sure you'd agree that Bayman and youself are fans of the game (even if you don't know what a spear tackle is )

PS Good to see you refer to it now just as a crude tackle and not a spear tackle. Who said you can't teach old dogs new tricks!

i can't comment on it because i was at woodville oval.....i only call them as i see them....although i doubt claytons 'hit' could have put the player in a wheel chair where the other 'illegal tackle' could have

bayman wrote:i can't comment on it because i was at woodville oval.....i only call them as i see them....although i doubt claytons 'hit' could have put the player in a wheel chair where the other 'illegal tackle' could have

2 games for an illegal tackle, with a clean record. 2 games for a striking behind play, with a scratchy record.

Surely you would outraged bayman.

kookas wrote:justice at last for the thug clayton.

Once a sniper.............................always a gutless sniper.

Carma Klayton

The Sleeping Giant wrote:

bayman wrote:i can't comment on it because i was at woodville oval.....i only call them as i see them....although i doubt claytons 'hit' could have put the player in a wheel chair where the other 'illegal tackle' could have

2 games for an illegal tackle, with a clean record. 2 games for a striking behind play, with a scratchy record.

Surely you would outraged bayman.

as i said i didn't see it, infact i was at another match at least i comment on what i see

bayman wrote:

The Sleeping Giant wrote:

bayman wrote:i can't comment on it because i was at woodville oval.....i only call them as i see them....although i doubt claytons 'hit' could have put the player in a wheel chair where the other 'illegal tackle' could have

2 games for an illegal tackle, with a clean record. 2 games for a striking behind play, with a scratchy record.

Surely you would outraged bayman.

as i said i didn't see it, infact i was at another match at least i comment on what i see

Its just that we'd all prefer if your view was through two eyes, not just one