SA Footy

whufc wrote:Personally I would rather see a bloke who gets done for belting someone out the game quicker vs someone who is maybe treading a fine line with say a dubious dangerous tackle decision.

Like deadset if you go a belt someone on two seperate occasions, piss off, go join your local boxing or mma club.

As has been pointed out earlier - different classifications of "striking". Let's be serious, in this day and age blokes don't (rather rarely) go around sniping blokes or dog shotting them behind the play.

People aren't going out intentionally with the mindset of trying to knock someone's teeth out their head - and if they are, more often than not they're weeded out of clubs and the game well before suspensions kick in.

I'm not saying I condone people acting up, I just think sometimes the punishment doesn't necessarily fit the crime - and there is no mechanism to recognise prolonged good behavior or accept that an action may well be out of character for the person involved.

Having said that, you'll always get some incidents its invariable given the number of participants and different skills / fitness levels that take the field each week. Add into that, it can be a highly emotive sport, and for some people it's probably their whole life,

You'd understand if you played more than 20 games..

I'd be happy with a level of 'good behaviour' coming into play to diminish 'old' suspensions, but I think what some people consider to be a long enough period is no where near long enough.

In general society, you'd want 10 years of nothing on your record before you started to say to a court you've been well behaved.
So lets compare that to footy, roughly 90 minutes per game in AdFL. So after 300 games you've played footy for less than 20 days.
People saying not belting someone in a 10 year career is a great effort. Pfft. If I belt someone in society every month no one is going to say I have a good record.

If you can't go 500 hours of footy without hitting someone you don't deserve to play the game, IMO.

Trader wrote:I'd be happy with a level of 'good behaviour' coming into play to diminish 'old' suspensions, but I think what some people consider to be a long enough period is no where near long enough..

10yrs is ample.. how you think / behave at 18 is different to 28 and different again to 38.

Are junior suspensions included in your history once you step up to AdFL or do you start "fresh"?

Dutchy wrote:Are junior suspensions included in your history once you step up to AdFL or do you start "fresh"?

16yo + count.

Also, U18's used to be run by the AdFL

Why should you get rewarded for good behaviour for a period of time if you don’t belt someone?
Don’t be a dickhead to start with and you’ll have no problems.

Vote #1 The Bedge

amber_fluid wrote:Why should you get rewarded for good behaviour for a period of time if you don’t belt someone?
Don’t be a dickhead to start with and you’ll have no problems.

Not every suspension is the results of someone deliberately belting another player.
Not every player suspended is a dickhead out to start trouble.

I also don't see it as being rewarded - I see it as recognition that people make mistakes, and equally people change for the better, and over time that should be reflected, not forever judged for something you did 10yrs ago.

The Bedge wrote:

Trader wrote:I'd be happy with a level of 'good behaviour' coming into play to diminish 'old' suspensions, but I think what some people consider to be a long enough period is no where near long enough..

10yrs is ample.. how you think / behave at 18 is different to 28 and different again to 38.

Some of the worst offences, I've seen, are committed by players over 30 and especially 35+
Tolerance levels start diminishing over 30

The Bedge wrote:

amber_fluid wrote:Why should you get rewarded for good behaviour for a period of time if you don’t belt someone?
Don’t be a dickhead to start with and you’ll have no problems.

Not every suspension is the results of someone deliberately belting another player.
Not every player suspended is a dickhead out to start trouble.

I also don't see it as being rewarded - I see it as recognition that people make mistakes, and equally people change for the better, and over time that should be reflected, not forever judged for something you did 10yrs ago.

Learn and grow from the mistake but don’t expect a reward/recognition for it.
If you get rubbed out for a football act then take the suspension and move on.
If you get rubbed out for life there’s good reason for it also.

The Bedge wrote:

amber_fluid wrote:Why should you get rewarded for good behaviour for a period of time if you don’t belt someone?
Don’t be a dickhead to start with and you’ll have no problems.

Not every suspension is the results of someone deliberately belting another player.
Not every player suspended is a dickhead out to start trouble.

I also don't see it as being rewarded - I see it as recognition that people make mistakes, and equally people change for the better, and over time that should be reflected, not forever judged for something you did 10yrs ago.

That sort of thing is considered in the Tribunal when handing out a sentence

not forever judged for something you did 10yrs ago

How many years between Tyson Creek's adventures?

The reward for not belting a bloke a second time in 10 years is you're still playing footy 10 years later. Deliberate striking should be rubbed out for life immediately in my opinion. Not hard to not punch someone.

In terms of dangerous tackles etc, league definitely cracking down but it will balance out. Look at the AFL and moving on the mark, was way over the top officiated in its first year but its found its balance. Same will happen with tackles.

Out early today

gif hosting

Hefty suspension for the Ingle Farm bloke.

[quote="Brodlach"]Hefty suspension for the Ingle Farm bloke.
either im missing something or that says that all matches were suspended?

Footy Chick wrote:

Brodlach wrote:Hefty suspension for the Ingle Farm bloke.
either im missing something or that says that all matches were suspended?

Yeah that's confusing.

Is 14 games a life ban or is it 15? I always forget what the threshold is.

Sticks28 wrote:

Footy Chick wrote:

Brodlach wrote:Hefty suspension for the Ingle Farm bloke.
either im missing something or that says that all matches were suspended?

Yeah that's confusing.

Is 14 games a life ban or is it 15? I always forget what the threshold is.

12 for ADFL, 16 Australia wide

Sticks28 wrote:

Footy Chick wrote:

Brodlach wrote:Hefty suspension for the Ingle Farm bloke.
either im missing something or that says that all matches were suspended?

Yeah that's confusing.

Is 14 games a life ban or is it 15? I always forget what the threshold is.

He's gone, it's clearly an error, matches are in the wrong column

Not a good way to finish your playing career.