2012 Reports & Tribunal Discussion

All discussions to do with the SANFL

Re: 2012 Reports & Tribunal Discussion

Postby CENTURION » Tue Jul 10, 2012 6:52 pm

robranisgod wrote:Jason Sutherland has accepted a one match ban for rough contact.

It appears as though Mitchell Grigg's report has been thrown out. There is no mention of it on the SANFL site

1 match for pushing someone? Is that what happened?
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: 2012 Reports & Tribunal Discussion

Postby whufc » Tue Jul 10, 2012 7:03 pm

Would it have been rough conduct if the brick wall wasnt there.

Stupid yes, dangerous yes, reckless definatly, rough conduct debatable.
RIP PH408 63notoutforever
User avatar
whufc
Coach
 
 
Posts: 28763
Joined: Tue Aug 01, 2006 10:56 am
Location: Blakeview
Has liked: 5962 times
Been liked: 2846 times
Grassroots Team: BSR

Re: 2012 Reports & Tribunal Discussion

Postby smac » Tue Jul 10, 2012 7:15 pm

Can still be reported for shoving someone into the fence.

I don't think the wall should be there in the safe and careful world we live in, but it is. So players need to ensure they don't injure an opponent with it.
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: 2012 Reports & Tribunal Discussion

Postby whufc » Tue Jul 10, 2012 7:21 pm

smac wrote:Can still be reported for shoving someone into the fence.

I don't think the wall should be there in the safe and careful world we live in, but it is. So players need to ensure they don't injure an opponent with it.


Yeah i just wonder if the club thought about appealing on basis of the charge being 'rough conduct'. Is pushing in the back really 'rough conduct' i thought it would have been more of a 'reckless charge'

I dont have a big issue with him getting a game, would be interesting though in the same situation if the player had been pushed into the standard fence whether he still would have been reported.
RIP PH408 63notoutforever
User avatar
whufc
Coach
 
 
Posts: 28763
Joined: Tue Aug 01, 2006 10:56 am
Location: Blakeview
Has liked: 5962 times
Been liked: 2846 times
Grassroots Team: BSR

Re: 2012 Reports & Tribunal Discussion

Postby JK » Tue Jul 10, 2012 7:22 pm

whufc wrote:
smac wrote:Can still be reported for shoving someone into the fence.

I don't think the wall should be there in the safe and careful world we live in, but it is. So players need to ensure they don't injure an opponent with it.


Yeah i just wonder if the club thought about appealing on basis of the charge being 'rough conduct'. Is pushing in the back really 'rough conduct' i thought it would have been more of a 'reckless charge'

I dont have a big issue with him getting a game, would be interesting though in the same situation if the player had been pushed into the standard fence whether he still would have been reported.


Or a goal post for example
FUSC
User avatar
JK
Coach
 
 
Posts: 37460
Joined: Thu Oct 27, 2005 10:11 am
Location: Coopers Hill
Has liked: 4485 times
Been liked: 3024 times
Grassroots Team: SMOSH West Lakes

Re: 2012 Reports & Tribunal Discussion

Postby The Sleeping Giant » Tue Jul 10, 2012 7:29 pm

smac wrote:Can still be reported for shoving someone into the fence.

I don't think the wall should be there in the safe and careful world we live in, but it is. So players need to ensure they don't injure an opponent with it.


At least spectators can't break their legs on the wall.
Cannabis is safer than alcohol
User avatar
The Sleeping Giant
Coach
 
Posts: 13693
Joined: Sat Apr 04, 2009 7:49 pm
Location: Not dying alone
Has liked: 69 times
Been liked: 193 times

Re: 2012 Reports & Tribunal Discussion

Postby CENTURION » Tue Jul 10, 2012 8:10 pm

The Sleeping Giant wrote:
smac wrote:Can still be reported for shoving someone into the fence.

I don't think the wall should be there in the safe and careful world we live in, but it is. So players need to ensure they don't injure an opponent with it.


At least spectators can't break their legs on the wall.

or have globes fall on them.
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: 2012 Reports & Tribunal Discussion

Postby whufc » Tue Jul 10, 2012 8:29 pm

JK wrote:
whufc wrote:
smac wrote:Can still be reported for shoving someone into the fence.

I don't think the wall should be there in the safe and careful world we live in, but it is. So players need to ensure they don't injure an opponent with it.


Yeah i just wonder if the club thought about appealing on basis of the charge being 'rough conduct'. Is pushing in the back really 'rough conduct' i thought it would have been more of a 'reckless charge'

I dont have a big issue with him getting a game, would be interesting though in the same situation if the player had been pushed into the standard fence whether he still would have been reported.


Or a goal post for example


Exactly if he had pushed him and he had hit the padded goal post what chance is there he would have been reported.
RIP PH408 63notoutforever
User avatar
whufc
Coach
 
 
Posts: 28763
Joined: Tue Aug 01, 2006 10:56 am
Location: Blakeview
Has liked: 5962 times
Been liked: 2846 times
Grassroots Team: BSR

Re: 2012 Reports & Tribunal Discussion

Postby CENTURION » Tue Jul 10, 2012 11:19 pm

or pushed him into the fence & then he broke his leg. Would the game have stopped for 1/2 an hour?
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: 2012 Reports & Tribunal Discussion

Postby Go Legs » Wed Jul 11, 2012 1:21 pm

CENTURION wrote:
The Sleeping Giant wrote:
smac wrote:Can still be reported for shoving someone into the fence.

I don't think the wall should be there in the safe and careful world we live in, but it is. So players need to ensure they don't injure an opponent with it.


At least spectators can't break their legs on the wall.

or have globes fall on them.


At least we can afford to put globes in, unlike the real reason night games didn't happen at Lizbeth :lol:

Cheers,
User avatar
Go Legs
Under 16s
 
 
Posts: 420
Joined: Wed Aug 13, 2008 12:22 pm
Has liked: 0 time
Been liked: 0 time
Grassroots Team: Seaton Ramblers

Re: 2012 Reports & Tribunal Discussion

Postby smac » Wed Jul 11, 2012 2:32 pm

Yeah, much better to be half-arsed.
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: 2012 Reports & Tribunal Discussion

Postby CENTURION » Sat Jul 14, 2012 10:37 am

Go Legs wrote:
CENTURION wrote:
The Sleeping Giant wrote:
smac wrote:Can still be reported for shoving someone into the fence.

I don't think the wall should be there in the safe and careful world we live in, but it is. So players need to ensure they don't injure an opponent with it.


At least spectators can't break their legs on the wall.

or have globes fall on them.


At least we can afford to put globes in, unlike the real reason night games didn't happen at Lizbeth :lol:

Cheers,

That's because We are perfectionists. Some call Us arrogant but We don't give a rats!!
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: 2012 Reports & Tribunal Discussion

Postby topsywaldron » Sat Jul 14, 2012 11:59 am

For someone who doesn't care you sure bring it up often enough.
'People are not stupid. They know when they are being conned. And two reserves teams operating in a League competition will reduce it to a farce, a competition without a soul.'

Dion Hayman 24th July 2013
User avatar
topsywaldron
Veteran
 
Posts: 3512
Joined: Fri Nov 25, 2005 5:16 pm
Has liked: 21 times
Been liked: 218 times

Re: 2012 Reports & Tribunal Discussion

Postby Jim05 » Sat Jul 14, 2012 12:03 pm

Take it the reports from the ressies last week between Norwood and Central were thrown out
Jim05
Coach
 
 
Posts: 48370
Joined: Wed Sep 22, 2010 9:03 pm
Has liked: 1130 times
Been liked: 3845 times
Grassroots Team: South Gawler

Re: 2012 Reports & Tribunal Discussion

Postby Big Phil » Sat Jul 14, 2012 12:04 pm

Jim05 wrote:Take it the reports from the ressies last week between Norwood and Central were thrown out

No. Both Central players, Matt White and Damian Hynes, copped 1 week bans.
User avatar
Big Phil
Coach
 
Posts: 20299
Joined: Wed Feb 20, 2008 11:56 pm
Has liked: 121 times
Been liked: 284 times

Re: 2012 Reports & Tribunal Discussion

Postby Jim05 » Sat Jul 14, 2012 12:08 pm

Big Phil wrote:
Jim05 wrote:Take it the reports from the ressies last week between Norwood and Central were thrown out

No. Both Central players, Matt White and Damian Hynes, copped 1 week bans.

Thanks, dont know much about White but Hynes appears to be handy. Why isnt he playing league?
Jim05
Coach
 
 
Posts: 48370
Joined: Wed Sep 22, 2010 9:03 pm
Has liked: 1130 times
Been liked: 3845 times
Grassroots Team: South Gawler

Re: 2012 Reports & Tribunal Discussion

Postby Big Phil » Sat Jul 14, 2012 12:25 pm

Jim05 wrote:
Big Phil wrote:
Jim05 wrote:Take it the reports from the ressies last week between Norwood and Central were thrown out

No. Both Central players, Matt White and Damian Hynes, copped 1 week bans.

Thanks, dont know much about White but Hynes appears to be handy. Why isnt he playing league?

He is quite injury prone and has been injured at times when there would have been an opportunity to go up to the League side...

Had been in great form in the 2's and wouldn't have been far away from elevation but this suspension sets him back, yet again.
User avatar
Big Phil
Coach
 
Posts: 20299
Joined: Wed Feb 20, 2008 11:56 pm
Has liked: 121 times
Been liked: 284 times

Re: 2012 Reports & Tribunal Discussion

Postby Jim05 » Tue Jul 17, 2012 8:04 pm

Byron Sumner copped a 1 match ban for front on contact.
Ben Kane was given a 1 match ban for rough conduct but has decided to contest the decision
Jim05
Coach
 
 
Posts: 48370
Joined: Wed Sep 22, 2010 9:03 pm
Has liked: 1130 times
Been liked: 3845 times
Grassroots Team: South Gawler

Re: 2012 Reports & Tribunal Discussion

Postby Big Phil » Tue Jul 17, 2012 8:07 pm

Anyone know whether Adam Cockshell was suspended from the North v Port game on Sunday?

I don't think the SANFL publish results from their Reserves tribunal hearings?
User avatar
Big Phil
Coach
 
Posts: 20299
Joined: Wed Feb 20, 2008 11:56 pm
Has liked: 121 times
Been liked: 284 times

Re: 2012 Reports & Tribunal Discussion

Postby Jim05 » Tue Jul 17, 2012 8:10 pm

Big Phil wrote:Anyone know whether Adam Cockshell was suspended from the North v Port game on Sunday?

I don't think the SANFL publish results from their Reserves tribunal hearings?

They dont BP, thats why I asked about the 2 Centrals lads last week
Jim05
Coach
 
 
Posts: 48370
Joined: Wed Sep 22, 2010 9:03 pm
Has liked: 1130 times
Been liked: 3845 times
Grassroots Team: South Gawler

PreviousNext

Board index   Football  SANFL

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 14 guests

Around the place

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