GuessWho wrote:Once again it appears as through the inconsistency of the Hills tribunal has raised it's ugly head. I have it on good authority 2 Macclesfield players were last night suuspended for 2 matches each. One was a striking charge that was a result of a player reacting to one of his team mates being punched in the groin.The Kangarilla player got a yellow card while the Maccie player recieved red and a subsequent 2 match ban. The other was for what can only be described at worst as a head high bump. The player got up, was not injured as was able to take his kick. I think it depends on the tribunal panel as to the extent of the suspension of if there is one. The other week Stringer recieved a 2 match SUSPENDED sentence for hitting an opposition player. Fair I think not. A player from Nairne found guilty of kicking in the umpires door and abusing them after the match recieves a one match ban.
Make up your own mind on this one. I would love to hear your feedback
I probably know who you are
Even as a Macclesfield player, think that I can comment on this in an unbiased manner.
I was within 10 metres of both incidents when they occurred and ironically it was the same Kangarilla player on the receiving end both times. In the first case, the player was flying the flag and while he should have realised that the retaliator is always the one that gets pinched, a two game ban seems excessive and the umpire who red carded him must have turned his head for a few seconds because the Macclesfield player that was on him hit him in the head also and didn't even get yellow carded!!!!
As far as the second incident is concerned, that is an absolute joke. It was a head high bump that you see at least once a week and is only ever paid as a free down field and what's more, in the leadup to the bump Macclesfield player David Murphy received a free kick on his forward flank and he kicked the ball into the man on the mark because he had crept at least 3 metres over the mark while Murphy was trying to take his kick and at no stage did the umpire call play on so it should have been a 50 metre penalty. If the 50 had been paid like it should have been the incident would never have occured.