Rnd 24 - Central v North POST GAME DISCUSSIONS

[CENTURION]

Clinch cited by the SANFL Tribunal. No video of the alleged strike against the Central's player (one of the Gowans) nor was the alleged offence seen by any umpire so the report was made on the basis of Gowan's complaining to the umpire that Clinch hit him!

So referred straight to the Tribunal so I assume Gowan's will have to give evidence that it was Clinch who allegedly hit him? So it will be the word of one player against another being the only evidence.

The irony of a Gowan's running to the umpire and dobbing!

he will get off*, don't fret.

[The Sleeping Giant]

Be interesting to see how far this report goes.

[The Sleeping Giant]

Clinch cited by the SANFL Tribunal. No video of the alleged strike against the Central's player (one of the Gowans) nor was the alleged offence seen by any umpire so the report was made on the basis of Gowan's complaining to the umpire that Clinch hit him!

So referred straight to the Tribunal so I assume Gowan's will have to give evidence that it was Clinch who allegedly hit him? So it will be the word of one player against another being the only evidence.

The irony of a Gowan's running to the umpire and dobbing!

he will get off*, don't fret.

Why will he get off?

[CENTURION]

Gowans won't give evidence if there's no video to support it....unless it was a dirty, gutless act. even then He might not.

[sjt]

Agree, but the 21 playing last night pretty much new they were secured a spot next week.

Where is Nason?

CD fans kept telling me he would be a key recruit this year!

do you want Him? He'd walk into your league side!

He'd be captain.

[sjt]

Agree, but the 21 playing last night pretty much new they were secured a spot next week.

Where is Nason?

CD fans kept telling me he would be a key recruit this year!

do you want Him? He'd walk into your league side!

Has missed the majority of the year with a back and groin injury. Has been back playing reserves the last 4 weeks and was easily best on ground in the Dogs' 2's last week.

Would be coming under close consideration for League selection this week...

What's with your fascination for Nason, Dutchy, you post more about him (and Ed Sansbury) than you do your own players?

Dutchy posts about them until they win a best and fairest. Not sure what nasons done wrong.

[Dutchy]

Getting a bit defensive, just asking where he is. Not sure what that has to do with Glenelg!

[sjt]

Clinch cited by the SANFL Tribunal. No video of the alleged strike against the Central's player (one of the Gowans) nor was the alleged offence seen by any umpire so the report was made on the basis of Gowan's complaining to the umpire that Clinch hit him!

So referred straight to the Tribunal so I assume Gowan's will have to give evidence that it was Clinch who allegedly hit him? So it will be the word of one player against another being the only evidence.

The irony of a Gowan's running to the umpire and dobbing!

From what I have been told perhaps Clinch just has to show the Tribunual the injury he sustained stemming from this incident and it should hopefully be thrown out, perhaps they should scrape under Mr Gowans fingernails for the evidence

From what I've heard, hopefully he'll get the opportunity to try to defend a behind the play incident.

[sjt]

Getting a bit defensive, just asking where he is. Not sure what that has to do with Glenelg!

You forgot to add the wink.

[The Sleeping Giant]

Clinch cited by the SANFL Tribunal. No video of the alleged strike against the Central's player (one of the Gowans) nor was the alleged offence seen by any umpire so the report was made on the basis of Gowan's complaining to the umpire that Clinch hit him!

So referred straight to the Tribunal so I assume Gowan's will have to give evidence that it was Clinch who allegedly hit him? So it will be the word of one player against another being the only evidence.

The irony of a Gowan's running to the umpire and dobbing!

From what I have been told perhaps Clinch just has to show the Tribunual the injury he sustained stemming from this incident and it should hopefully be thrown out, perhaps they should scrape under Mr Gowans fingernails for the evidence

From what I've heard, hopefully he'll get the opportunity to try to defend a behind the play incident.

From what I've heard, he might not want it to go too far.

[sjt]

Both Clinch and J Gowans reported for striking.

[The Sleeping Giant]

The plot thickens. Will they both be reprimanded? How many times can you receive a reprimand for striking?

[cennals05]

So did Gowans dob himself in seeing as he apparently dobbed on Clinch?

[on the rails]

Clinch's defence is that he retailiated so the league left with no choice but to report Gowans even though there is no footage and Gowans made the complaint in the first place. What a farce!

Let's hope it doesn't include what was said on the field although my mail says that won't or shouldn't be an issue.

[scoob]

Clinch's defence is that he retailiated so the league left with no choice but to report Gowans even though there is no footage and Gowans made the complaint in the first place. What a farce!

Let's hope it doesn't include what was said on the field although my mail says that won't or shouldn't be an issue.

I have it on good authority that Gowans retailated intially and that lead to Clinch retailation... which means Clinch is reported twice and Gowans once. But you are correct no footage of the incident. OL is willing to testify as he reckons he saw all of it and as a amatuer league umpires and can be call to the stand.

[Wedgie]

I heard that Clinch retaliated to Gowan's retaliation who retaliated to Clinch's retaliation who retaliated to Gowan's retaliation who retaliated to Clinch's retaliation who retaliated to Gowan's retaliation who retaliated to Clinch's retaliation who retaliated to Gowan's retaliation who retaliated to Clinch's retaliation who retaliated to Gowan's retaliation who retaliated to Clinch's retaliation who retaliated to Gowan's retaliation who retaliated to Clinch's retaliation who retaliated to Gowan's retaliation who retaliated to Clinch's retaliation who retaliated to Gowan's retaliation who retaliated to Clinch's retaliation who retaliated to Gowan's retaliation who retaliated to Clinch's retaliation who retaliated to Gowan's retaliation who retaliated to Clinch's retaliation who retaliated to Gowan's retaliation who retaliated to Clinch's retaliation who retaliated to Gowan's retaliation who retaliated to Clinch's retaliation who retaliated to Gowan's retaliation who retaliated to Clinch's retaliation who retaliated to Gowan's retaliation who retaliated to Clinch's retaliation who retaliated to Gowan's retaliation who retaliated to Clinch's retaliation who retaliated to Gowan's retaliation who retaliated to Clinch's retaliation who retaliated to Gowan's retaliation who retaliated to Clinch's retaliation who retaliated to Gowan's retaliation who retaliated to Clinch's retaliation who retaliated to Gowan's retaliation who retaliated to Clinch's retaliation who retaliated to Gowan's retaliation who retaliated to Clinch's retaliation who retaliated to Gowan's retaliation who retaliated to Clinch's retaliation who retaliated to Gowan's retaliation who retaliated to Clinch's retaliation who retaliated to Gowan's retaliation who retaliated to Clinch's retaliation who retaliated to Gowan's retaliation who retaliated to Clinch's retaliation who retaliated to Gowan's retaliation who retaliated to Clinch's retaliation who retaliated to Gowan's retaliation who retaliated to Clinch's retaliation who retaliated to Gowan's retaliation who retaliated to Clinch's retaliation who retaliated to Gowan's retaliation who retaliated to Clinch's retaliation who retaliated to Gowan's retaliation who retaliated to Clinch's retaliation who retaliated to Gowan's retaliation who retaliated to Clinch's retaliation who retaliated to Gowan's retaliation who retaliated to Clinch's retaliation who retaliated to Gowan's retaliation who retaliated to Clinch's retaliation who retaliated to Gowan's retaliation who retaliated to Clinch's retaliation who retaliated to Gowan's retaliation who retaliated to Clinch's retaliation who retaliated to Gowan's retaliation to Clinch's retaliation who retaliated to Gowan's original strike.
Clinch has been reported 45 times and Gowan's has been reported 46 times.
I also heard that Gowan's didn't lose 2 teeth, he did in fact have 2 teeth put back as Clinch is a qualified dentist and performed implant surgery at half time. Gowans has been using falsies since the age of 14 when his brother knocked them out.
Clinch will be using the "he did it first" defence and Gowan's will be using the "nyah nyah nyah nyah nyah" defence.
If it goes to appeal they'll both be looking at using the Chewbacca defence.
References will be made to the constitution and the vibe of it.

[Groucho]

Makes my blood boil! I can see it now Clinch will get off and James will get 2 weeks. Nothing surer.
No one gets suspended for hitting Centrals players.

[smac]

Gowans not guilty.

[Groucho]

Thank you Smac. Just read on SANFL site thet Clinch guilty and received 2 games.

Seems I was correct except for getting the players the wrong way around.

There is justice in the world after all. My faith in the SANFL and the system has been restored.

[Mic]

2 games? A shame, but worth it.