SA Footy • View topic

by **hawkseye** » Sun Aug 30, 2009 1:20 am

Courtney Fish wrote:After all that has happened this week is Mathew Lloyd the dumbest player going around or does he just hate the Hawks.

In tipping dumbest :lol:

by **gadj1976** » Sun Aug 30, 2009 8:21 am

Atkinson's will get thrown out. Birchall looked like he played for 50 but that's about it. It looks like there was hardly any contact from the side on vision.

by **gothebombers** » Sun Aug 30, 2009 5:54 pm

Courtney Fish wrote:After all that has happened this week is Mathew Lloyd the dumbest player going around or does he just hate the Hawks.

i really cannot see how you can compare the two reports...the ball was in dispute when the hawk player took his eye off it and spilled it..so lloyd couldnt tackle him he went in hard for it and the hawk player was hit...also as its shown in slo mo the hawk player behind lloyd clearly pushed him and helped him into the hawk player....so lloyd hasnt a case..itll get thrown out, it wasnt deliberate and no chance to stop as he was going for the ball that was in dispute as the hawks player was and unf for the hawk guy he came out second best...im more worried on ryders case.....its the dirty hawks players trying to king hit our players should be looked at ...two different reports.....like it or lump it

by **hawkseye** » Sun Aug 30, 2009 7:58 pm

gothebombers wrote:
Courtney Fish wrote:After all that has happened this week is Mathew Lloyd the dumbest player going around or does he just hate the Hawks.

i really cannot see how you can compare the two reports...the ball was in dispute when the hawk player took his eye off it and spilled it..so lloyd couldnt tackle him he went in hard for it and the hawk player was hit...also as its shown in slo mo the hawk player behind lloyd clearly pushed him and helped him into the hawk player....so lloyd hasnt a case..itll get thrown out, it wasnt deliberate and no chance to stop as he was going for the ball that was in dispute as the hawks player was and unf for the hawk guy he came out second best...im more worried on ryders case.....its the dirty hawks players trying to king hit our players should be looked at ...two different reports.....like it or lump it

You cant be serious? he run off the square and lined him up 80s style as for the push ive seen harder pushes in u/8s he had 1 thing in mind and that was smash Sewell.

by **gothebombers** » Sun Aug 30, 2009 8:58 pm

i honestly dont think lloyd is that sort of player.wouldnt think he d go out deliberately to hurt anyone.

by **Courtney Fish** » Mon Aug 31, 2009 12:54 am

Franklins was a split second decision to bump. Lloyds looked premeditated he should get at least 3 weeks. The fractures to Sewell's face won't help either. And the square up from Bateman on Lloyd will get a few too. Busy night at the tribunal.

by **interested observer** » Mon Aug 31, 2009 10:25 am

gothebombers wrote:
Courtney Fish wrote:After all that has happened this week is Mathew Lloyd the dumbest player going around or does he just hate the Hawks.

i really cannot see how you can compare the two reports...the ball was in dispute when the hawk player took his eye off it and spilled it..so lloyd couldnt tackle him he went in hard for it and the hawk player was hit...also as its shown in slo mo the hawk player behind lloyd clearly pushed him and helped him into the hawk player....so lloyd hasnt a case..itll get thrown out, it wasnt deliberate and no chance to stop as he was going for the ball that was in dispute as the hawks player was and unf for the hawk guy he came out second best...im more worried on ryders case.....its the dirty hawks players trying to king hit our players should be looked at ...two different reports.....like it or lump it

One thing being loyal to your team, but you are in absolute dream land my friend... :roll:

by **Booney** » Mon Aug 31, 2009 10:37 am

mal wrote:QUESTION for BOONEY
You are constantly defending the process saying its a rule Buddy got pinged and get on with it
My question to you
Do you agree with the rule ?

Do I agree the head of the ball winner should be protected? You bet, IMO we all should.

Do I agree with this decision? Under the current rules,yes.

Do I think the bump is gone? No, not at all, you just cant bump someone in the head.

For every poster who has brought the height difference of Franklin and COusins into it I dont see how it is valid. Franklin hit Cousins in the head, simple. Case over, and the match review panel and the appeals board agree.

by JK » Mon Aug 31, 2009 10:51 am

Booney wrote:
mal wrote:QUESTION for BOONEY
You are constantly defending the process saying its a rule Buddy got pinged and get on with it
My question to you
Do you agree with the rule ?

Do I agree the head of the ball winner should be protected? You bet, IMO we all should.

Do I agree with this decision? Under the current rules,yes.

Do I think the bump is gone? No, not at all, you just cant bump someone in the head.

For every poster who has brought the height difference of Franklin and COusins into it I dont see how it is valid. Franklin hit Cousins in the head, simple. Case over, and the match review panel and the appeals board agree.

Do you believe the tackler or bumper should be afforded some right of protection?

by **Choccies** » Mon Aug 31, 2009 11:10 am

gothebombers wrote:
Courtney Fish wrote:After all that has happened this week is Mathew Lloyd the dumbest player going around or does he just hate the Hawks.

i really cannot see how you can compare the two reports...the ball was in dispute when the hawk player took his eye off it and spilled it..so lloyd couldnt tackle him he went in hard for it and the hawk player was hit...also as its shown in slo mo the hawk player behind lloyd clearly pushed him and helped him into the hawk player....so lloyd hasnt a case..itll get thrown out, it wasnt deliberate and no chance to stop as he was going for the ball that was in dispute as the hawks player was and unf for the hawk guy he came out second best...im more worried on ryders case.....its the dirty hawks players trying to king hit our players should be looked at ...two different reports.....like it or lump it

Have you been drinking gtb ???

The Velvet Sledgehammer is in serious strife.... :shock:

by **silicone skyline** » Mon Aug 31, 2009 11:13 am

He was pushed? WTF??? Lol.

by **NO-MERCY** » Mon Aug 31, 2009 11:14 am

Franklin got 1 & decided to appeal which resulted in 2 fair call.
Lloyd should get 1 & not be stupid to appeal.

by **hawkseye** » Mon Aug 31, 2009 12:18 pm

NO-MERCY wrote:Franklin got 1 & decided to appeal which resulted in 2 fair call.
Lloyd should get 1 & not be stupid to appeal.

NM LLoyd had every intent on cleaning him up from 20 metres away which is a bit diferent to Buddys split second decision. He should get 2 or 3 minimum surely?

by **Bum Crack** » Mon Aug 31, 2009 12:23 pm

gothebombers wrote:
Courtney Fish wrote:After all that has happened this week is Mathew Lloyd the dumbest player going around or does he just hate the Hawks.

i really cannot see how you can compare the two reports...the ball was in dispute when the hawk player took his eye off it and spilled it..so lloyd couldnt tackle him he went in hard for it and the hawk player was hit...also as its shown in slo mo the hawk player behind lloyd clearly pushed him and helped him into the hawk player....so lloyd hasnt a case..itll get thrown out, it wasnt deliberate and no chance to stop as he was going for the ball that was in dispute as the hawks player was and unf for the hawk guy he came out second best...im more worried on ryders case.....its the dirty hawks players trying to king hit our players should be looked at ...two different reports.....like it or lump it