Tribunal discussion/views/debate

All discussions to do with the SANFL

Re: Tribunal discussion/views/debate

Postby story of my life » Tue Sep 20, 2011 3:34 pm

I still reckon the worst thing about this incident was the fact that no one really squared up.
hate to sound like a dinosaur here people, but if one of mine went down like that ....
I'm not talking about a king hit 100 metres off the ball but there are plenty of ways to kill a cat without f****ing it
story of my life
Under 18s
 
 
Posts: 539
Joined: Wed Aug 17, 2011 12:05 pm
Has liked: 0 time
Been liked: 0 time
Grassroots Team: Mitchell Park

Re: Tribunal discussion/views/debate

Postby southee » Tue Sep 20, 2011 3:48 pm

blueandwhite wrote:Cowardly -probably
Crude- definitely
Thoughtless-definitely
Suspension for 2 wks -definitely
Did the Bay player deserve it- from what I saw ,definitely.


Yep ...the little snipper, loud mouth got what he asked for !!!!
Is out of change.....thanks Cambridge Clarrie!!!
User avatar
southee
Assistant Coach
 
 
Posts: 4961
Joined: Wed May 17, 2006 2:00 am
Location: Somewhere in the jungle!!!
Has liked: 870 times
Been liked: 124 times

Re: Tribunal discussion/views/debate

Postby story of my life » Tue Sep 20, 2011 3:53 pm

southee wrote:
blueandwhite wrote:Cowardly -probably
Crude- definitely
Thoughtless-definitely
Suspension for 2 wks -definitely
Did the Bay player deserve it- from what I saw ,definitely.


Yep ...the little snipper, loud mouth got what he asked for !!!!


Chris Kane was doing more snipping and mouthing off.... oh thats right he's not a kid
story of my life
Under 18s
 
 
Posts: 539
Joined: Wed Aug 17, 2011 12:05 pm
Has liked: 0 time
Been liked: 0 time
Grassroots Team: Mitchell Park

Re: Tribunal discussion/views/debate

Postby Big Phil » Mon Sep 26, 2011 5:13 pm

Haven't seen anything official but have spoken to a few people and read elsewhere that the Sutherland report was thrown out this morning and Andrew Hayes will face the tribunal.
User avatar
Big Phil
Coach
 
Posts: 20297
Joined: Wed Feb 20, 2008 11:56 pm
Has liked: 121 times
Been liked: 284 times

Re: Tribunal discussion/views/debate

Postby nwdfanparade » Mon Sep 26, 2011 9:20 pm

Big Phil wrote:Haven't seen anything official but have spoken to a few people and read elsewhere that the Sutherland report was thrown out this morning and Andrew Hayes will face the tribunal.


That sucks. At no time did Sutherland look towards the flight of the ball. At no time did his hand/s go in the direction of the ball as Zorzi was going for the mark. He was hunched over with the point of contact under Zorzi's arm and on his (zorzi's) side. Sutherland was in no way attempting to mark or spoil the marking contest. Sutherland aimed for Zorzi, and made no attempt to mark or spoil the ball in the marking contest.

No wonder he had a smile on is face after being reported because he knew that as a Doggie player it would more than likely be dropped or end up as 'not guilty'. How many doggie players have had reports dropped before going to the tribunal this year? Of the 7 doggie reports that have gone to the tribunal, 5 have been found not guilt (including 1 appeal upheld) and only 2 resulted in 1 match suspension each.
User avatar
nwdfanparade
Reserves
 
 
Posts: 820
Joined: Tue Nov 18, 2008 9:07 pm
Has liked: 13 times
Been liked: 173 times

Re: Tribunal discussion/views/debate

Postby Brucetiki » Mon Sep 26, 2011 9:27 pm

nwdfanparade wrote:No wonder he had a smile on is face after being reported because he knew that as a Doggie player it would more than likely be dropped or end up as 'not guilty'. How many doggie players have had reports dropped before going to the tribunal this year? Of the 7 doggie reports that have gone to the tribunal, 5 have been found not guilt (including 1 appeal upheld) and only 2 resulted in 1 match suspension each.


Says more about the umpires laying frivolous reports and wasting clubs valuable time than anything else. Been a lot of reports and a lot of not guilty/withdrawn decisions across the board this season.
They don't keep me here because I'm gorgeous and 5'10
Brucetiki
Assistant Coach
 
 
Posts: 4621
Joined: Thu Dec 01, 2005 9:23 pm
Has liked: 242 times
Been liked: 37 times

Re: Tribunal discussion/views/debate

Postby bulldog2004 » Mon Sep 26, 2011 11:56 pm

nwdfanparade wrote:
Big Phil wrote:Haven't seen anything official but have spoken to a few people and read elsewhere that the Sutherland report was thrown out this morning and Andrew Hayes will face the tribunal.


That sucks. At no time did Sutherland look towards the flight of the ball. At no time did his hand/s go in the direction of the ball as Zorzi was going for the mark. He was hunched over with the point of contact under Zorzi's arm and on his (zorzi's) side. Sutherland was in no way attempting to mark or spoil the marking contest. Sutherland aimed for Zorzi, and made no attempt to mark or spoil the ball in the marking contest.

Looked similar to the Taylor Walker incident earlier in the year. That's right he got let off.
bulldog2004
League Bench Warmer
 
 
Posts: 1019
Joined: Sun Oct 01, 2006 9:58 pm
Has liked: 45 times
Been liked: 12 times

Re: Tribunal discussion/views/debate

Postby Grahaml » Tue Sep 27, 2011 12:49 am

nwdfanparade wrote:
Big Phil wrote:Haven't seen anything official but have spoken to a few people and read elsewhere that the Sutherland report was thrown out this morning and Andrew Hayes will face the tribunal.


That sucks. At no time did Sutherland look towards the flight of the ball. At no time did his hand/s go in the direction of the ball as Zorzi was going for the mark. He was hunched over with the point of contact under Zorzi's arm and on his (zorzi's) side. Sutherland was in no way attempting to mark or spoil the marking contest. Sutherland aimed for Zorzi, and made no attempt to mark or spoil the ball in the marking contest.


Wow, which incident were you watching. Sutherland started off desperate to get the the contest but when he realised he wasn't going to make it instead he turned his attention to avoiding really taking someone out. The way to do that is almost like a tackle and requires actually looking at the player so you don't hit them in the head with an elbow or a knee. He was in the air, contact was going to happen and he did everything he could to minimise impact. The fact Zorzi got up quickly without remonstrating probably shows a 100kg man running at full speed DIDN'T make anywhere near the impact he could have.
Grahaml
Assistant Coach
 
 
Posts: 4812
Joined: Fri Feb 09, 2007 11:59 am
Has liked: 3 times
Been liked: 169 times

Re: Tribunal discussion/views/debate

Postby Jim05 » Tue Sep 27, 2011 6:24 am

Sutherland didnt deserve a game for that. Probably a free kick at worst, play on. Would hate to see a guy miss a GF for that
Jim05
Coach
 
 
Posts: 48099
Joined: Wed Sep 22, 2010 9:03 pm
Has liked: 1130 times
Been liked: 3789 times
Grassroots Team: South Gawler

Re: Tribunal discussion/views/debate

Postby jockey » Tue Sep 27, 2011 7:33 am

nwdfanparade wrote:
Big Phil wrote:Haven't seen anything official but have spoken to a few people and read elsewhere that the Sutherland report was thrown out this morning and Andrew Hayes will face the tribunal.


That sucks. At no time did Sutherland look towards the flight of the ball. At no time did his hand/s go in the direction of the ball as Zorzi was going for the mark. He was hunched over with the point of contact under Zorzi's arm and on his (zorzi's) side. Sutherland was in no way attempting to mark or spoil the marking contest. Sutherland aimed for Zorzi, and made no attempt to mark or spoil the ball in the marking contest.

No wonder he had a smile on is face after being reported because he knew that as a Doggie player it would more than likely be dropped or end up as 'not guilty'. How many doggie players have had reports dropped before going to the tribunal this year? Of the 7 doggie reports that have gone to the tribunal, 5 have been found not guilt (including 1 appeal upheld) and only 2 resulted in 1 match suspension each.

Sour grapes ??
jockey
Rookie
 
 
Posts: 124
Joined: Sat May 03, 2008 6:55 am
Has liked: 6 times
Been liked: 1 time
Grassroots Team: Salisbury West

Re: Tribunal discussion/views/debate

Postby CENTURION » Tue Sep 27, 2011 8:22 am

Unfortunately, Hayes will even it up, He will get a game.
Member No. 988 & PROUD to sponsor The CDFC!!
User avatar
CENTURION
Coach
 
 
Posts: 11101
Joined: Sun Nov 13, 2005 3:11 am
Location: Campbelltown, 5074
Has liked: 204 times
Been liked: 112 times
Grassroots Team: Salisbury

Re: Tribunal discussion/views/debate

Postby redwhiteandblueblooded » Tue Sep 27, 2011 8:43 am

jockey wrote:
nwdfanparade wrote:
Big Phil wrote:Haven't seen anything official but have spoken to a few people and read elsewhere that the Sutherland report was thrown out this morning and Andrew Hayes will face the tribunal.


That sucks. At no time did Sutherland look towards the flight of the ball. At no time did his hand/s go in the direction of the ball as Zorzi was going for the mark. He was hunched over with the point of contact under Zorzi's arm and on his (zorzi's) side. Sutherland was in no way attempting to mark or spoil the marking contest. Sutherland aimed for Zorzi, and made no attempt to mark or spoil the ball in the marking contest.

No wonder he had a smile on is face after being reported because he knew that as a Doggie player it would more than likely be dropped or end up as 'not guilty'. How many doggie players have had reports dropped before going to the tribunal this year? Of the 7 doggie reports that have gone to the tribunal, 5 have been found not guilt (including 1 appeal upheld) and only 2 resulted in 1 match suspension each.

Sour grapes ??


The sourest!
redwhiteandblueblooded
Reserves
 
 
Posts: 942
Joined: Sun Aug 20, 2006 11:58 am
Location: Gawler South
Has liked: 106 times
Been liked: 12 times
Grassroots Team: Gawler Central

Re: Tribunal discussion/views/debate

Postby westcoastpanther » Tue Sep 27, 2011 9:59 am

What about Peter Rolfe's, he has his hands in the air, trying to sidestep the on coming player, doing absolutely everything he can to avoid contact and he goes in the book. Unbelievable to think where our game is heading
Hi, My name is Ron 'Bluey' Dunn. Did you know I played in the 61 & 62 Tasman Premiership sides....
User avatar
westcoastpanther
Coach
 
 
Posts: 5489
Joined: Mon Nov 07, 2005 4:27 pm
Location: Weipa
Has liked: 66 times
Been liked: 150 times
Grassroots Team: Boston

Re: Tribunal discussion/views/debate

Postby HOORAY PUNT » Tue Sep 27, 2011 10:27 am

Yes that was ridiculous that one. What else could he do ?
HOORAY PUNT
 

Re: Tribunal discussion/views/debate

Postby geppscrossrams » Tue Sep 27, 2011 11:14 am

HOORAY PUNT wrote:Yes that was ridiculous that one. What else could he do ?

They also need to factor in that the Eagles player was actually pushed into him as well.
geppscrossrams
Under 16s
 
 
Posts: 366
Joined: Mon Jul 13, 2009 1:58 pm
Has liked: 2 times
Been liked: 4 times
Grassroots Team: Gepps Cross

Re: Tribunal discussion/views/debate

Postby Grahaml » Tue Sep 27, 2011 1:51 pm

geppscrossrams wrote:
HOORAY PUNT wrote:Yes that was ridiculous that one. What else could he do ?

They also need to factor in that the Eagles player was actually pushed into him as well.


Being reported is a far cry from being suspended. Let's not get too upset until someone actually gets rubbed out.
Grahaml
Assistant Coach
 
 
Posts: 4812
Joined: Fri Feb 09, 2007 11:59 am
Has liked: 3 times
Been liked: 169 times

Re: Tribunal discussion/views/debate

Postby smac » Tue Sep 27, 2011 8:24 pm

Hayes free to play.
smac
Coach
 
 
Posts: 13089
Joined: Thu Oct 27, 2005 10:19 am
Location: Golden Grove
Has liked: 165 times
Been liked: 233 times
Grassroots Team: Salisbury

Re: Tribunal discussion/views/debate

Postby Big Phil » Tue Sep 27, 2011 8:27 pm

smac wrote:Hayes free to play.


Yes, given a reprimand which is all it should have been. The correct decision there.
User avatar
Big Phil
Coach
 
Posts: 20297
Joined: Wed Feb 20, 2008 11:56 pm
Has liked: 121 times
Been liked: 284 times

Re: Tribunal discussion/views/debate

Postby fish » Tue Sep 27, 2011 8:38 pm

Big Phil wrote:
smac wrote:Hayes free to play.
Yes, given a reprimand which is all it should have been. The correct decision there.
Was never in doubt! #:-s

Can now play for his fifth Premiership Medallion.
User avatar
fish
Coach
 
 
Posts: 6908
Joined: Sun Jan 01, 2006 10:28 pm
Has liked: 190 times
Been liked: 48 times

Re: Tribunal discussion/views/debate

Postby CENTURION » Tue Sep 27, 2011 9:06 pm

fish wrote:
Big Phil wrote:
smac wrote:Hayes free to play.
Yes, given a reprimand which is all it should have been. The correct decision there.
Was never in doubt! #:-s

Can now play for his fifth Premiership Medallion.

If He gets a game, it looked like He was struggling a bit, The Twins look faster than Haysey at the moment! ;)
Member No. 988 & PROUD to sponsor The CDFC!!
User avatar
CENTURION
Coach
 
 
Posts: 11101
Joined: Sun Nov 13, 2005 3:11 am
Location: Campbelltown, 5074
Has liked: 204 times
Been liked: 112 times
Grassroots Team: Salisbury

PreviousNext

Board index   Football  SANFL

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 52 guests

Around the place

Competitions   SANFL Official Site | Country Footy SA | Southern Football League | VFL Footy
Club Forums   Snouts Louts | The Roost | Redlegs Forum |