Roy drills* a bloke at The 'Gabba

[rod_rooster]

Heard on the radio news this morning, if you can believe it that Symonds may well be charged with offences, firstly for conduct offences under the international cricket code and secondly by the Police for assault. If either of these things occur it is an absolute joke

He Should get done- the bloke is a meathead- and this incident proves it-hope he gets a year- As Iv said all summer the aussies are far too big for their boots .

WTF??

it may be acceptable in your world PAFC- but in mine I would step out the way, and let the security people do their job. A stupid thing to do ( as was the streak) and I maintain he should be punished by the authorities (i have read the article saying he wont be)

It's better to stay quiet and have people think you're stupid than to open your mouth and remove all doubt Stumps

[evans01]

http://www.news.com.au/couriermail/stor ... 52,00.html


i think this sums it all up

[bulldogproud]

It's un-Australian to think Symonds should be charged by anybody.[/quote]

.. but Symonds was charged - by the streaker!
Really, what would you have done in the circumstances? I think that Roy did nothing wrong and any thought of charges should be dropped.
Cheers

[Stumps]

I didnt open my mouth RR:roll:

you must be right as usual -


although ....your opinion may have changed if the contact caused the spectator to hit his head (on symonds arm or the pitch) and killed him- much like what happened to hookesy in a seemingly "minor" incident.
It was totally different, it Wouldnt have happened, the spectator shouldnt have been there in the first place, it was his own fault- i can hear the arguments. But yes- it could have easily happend with a heavy hit like that, and yes although the spectator instigated the incident- symonds shouldnt have tried to deck him like he did- it was meathead thing to do and hes a lucky boy nothing came of it.

[Dirko]

I didnt open my mouth RR:roll:

you must be right as usual -


although ....your opinion may have changed if the contact caused the spectator to hit his head (on symonds arm or the pitch) and killed him- much like what happened to hookesy in a seemingly "minor" incident.
It was totally different, it Wouldnt have happened, the spectator shouldnt have been there in the first place, it was his own fault- i can hear the arguments. But yes- it could have easily happend with a heavy hit like that, and yes although the spectator instigated the incident- symonds shouldnt have tried to deck him like he did- it was meathead thing to do and hes a lucky boy nothing came of it.

Bullshit...What would've happened if the bloke went at Symonds...turn the other way and do nothing...He knew he'd get tackled or hit soon, so would've been ready for something. Fair crack...
The only guilty bloke in this and the one who has been charged is the moron streaker....

[FlyingHigh]

The only guilty bloke in this and the one who has been charged is the moron streaker....

Not to mention that other f***wit who stopped play just as the Aussies were getting on top at 5/190. Hussey out 3 balls later.

[rod_rooster]

I didnt open my mouth RR:roll:

you must be right as usual -


although ....your opinion may have changed if the contact caused the spectator to hit his head (on symonds arm or the pitch) and killed him- much like what happened to hookesy in a seemingly "minor" incident.
It was totally different, it Wouldnt have happened, the spectator shouldnt have been there in the first place, it was his own fault- i can hear the arguments. But yes- it could have easily happend with a heavy hit like that, and yes although the spectator instigated the incident- symonds shouldnt have tried to deck him like he did- it was meathead thing to do and hes a lucky boy nothing came of it.

Yes i am right as usual. Thanks for noticing.

Secondly what if the security had tacked the bloke and he hit his head and died. Should the security face charges? Plus this from one of the many articles on the subject:

"Officials said their legal advice had been that Symonds would be protected from any action because the man was trespassing at the time he was felled."

Basically as it should be.

[JK]

I didnt open my mouth RR:roll:

you must be right as usual -


although ....your opinion may have changed if the contact caused the spectator to hit his head (on symonds arm or the pitch) and killed him- much like what happened to hookesy in a seemingly "minor" incident.
It was totally different, it Wouldnt have happened, the spectator shouldnt have been there in the first place, it was his own fault- i can hear the arguments. But yes- it could have easily happend with a heavy hit like that, and yes although the spectator instigated the incident- symonds shouldnt have tried to deck him like he did- it was meathead thing to do and hes a lucky boy nothing came of it.

Yes i am right as usual. Thanks for noticing.

Secondly what if the security had tacked the bloke and he hit his head and died. Should the security face charges? Plus this from one of the many articles on the subject:

"Officials said their legal advice had been that Symonds would be protected from any action because the man was trespassing at the time he was felled."

Basically as it should be.

I agree ... Anyone with unidentified intentions in a restricted area shouldn't have a lot to fall back on.

Just hope no other meathead-wannabe-streakers out there see this as a good opportunity for their 3 seconds of fame.

[RustyCage]

The streaker works in a mine and earns $4000 a week, he's hardly going to notice the tiny $1500 fine. I thought it was a $5000 fine everywhere?

[Stumps]

I didnt open my mouth RR:roll:

you must be right as usual -


although ....your opinion may have changed if the contact caused the spectator to hit his head (on symonds arm or the pitch) and killed him- much like what happened to hookesy in a seemingly "minor" incident.
It was totally different, it Wouldnt have happened, the spectator shouldnt have been there in the first place, it was his own fault- i can hear the arguments. But yes- it could have easily happend with a heavy hit like that, and yes although the spectator instigated the incident- symonds shouldnt have tried to deck him like he did- it was meathead thing to do and hes a lucky boy nothing came of it.

Yes i am right as usual. Thanks for noticing.

Secondly what if the security had tacked the bloke and he hit his head and died. Should the security face charges? Plus this from one of the many articles on the subject:

"Officials said their legal advice had been that Symonds would be protected from any action because the man was trespassing at the time he was felled."

Basically as it should be.

If the streaker was injured whilst security were trying to stop him tresspassing (by tackling him to the ground) then course they shouldnt face charges- if they waited for him to get close to them- then hip & shouldered him with the intent of hurting him as well as retarding his progress- then they should.

Since when have you been able to do what you want to people because they are tresspasing?
I seem to remember an old bloke getting charged for assaulting a robber not so long ago- And that was his home- not just his "home" ground

[rod_rooster]

I didnt open my mouth RR:roll:

you must be right as usual -


although ....your opinion may have changed if the contact caused the spectator to hit his head (on symonds arm or the pitch) and killed him- much like what happened to hookesy in a seemingly "minor" incident.
It was totally different, it Wouldnt have happened, the spectator shouldnt have been there in the first place, it was his own fault- i can hear the arguments. But yes- it could have easily happend with a heavy hit like that, and yes although the spectator instigated the incident- symonds shouldnt have tried to deck him like he did- it was meathead thing to do and hes a lucky boy nothing came of it.

Yes i am right as usual. Thanks for noticing.

Secondly what if the security had tacked the bloke and he hit his head and died. Should the security face charges? Plus this from one of the many articles on the subject:

"Officials said their legal advice had been that Symonds would be protected from any action because the man was trespassing at the time he was felled."

Basically as it should be.

If the streaker was injured whilst security were trying to stop him tresspassing (by tackling him to the ground) then course they shouldnt face charges- if they waited for him to get close to them- then hip & shouldered him with the intent of hurting him as well as retarding his progress- then they should.

Since when have you been able to do what you want to people because they are tresspasing?
I seem to remember an old bloke getting charged for assaulting a robber not so long ago- And that was his home- not just his "home" ground

I'm no lawyer but i'd suggest if this is the legal advice that they got it would be pretty much correct. The old bloke you mention would be the guy who shot the intruder with an unlicensed shotgun? Bit different. Had Roy pulled out a shotgun and blown the bloke away it might be a different story.

[Punk Rooster]

force has to equal threat.
If a guy comes in brandishing a gun, you're entitled to shoot him.
If he comes in brandishing a sock full of rose petals, you can't shoot him.

What Symonds did was use force that equalled the threat.

[Stumps]

can see and respect what your saying PR and RR- and im all for sticking up for yourself and also not giving the streaker any favours- but still reckon it was excessive and stupid by symonds and hes lucky the guy wasnt hurt- thats all- - over and out from stumps
sorry about the "know all" sledge RR- I was getting carried away- play on

[redden whites]

Yes i am right as usual.

Dare i say...."Holier than thou"??

[Dog_ger]

A monkey would not have done better....

[rod_rooster]

can see and respect what your saying PR and RR- and im all for sticking up for yourself and also not giving the streaker any favours- but still reckon it was excessive and stupid by symonds and hes lucky the guy wasnt hurt- thats all- - over and out from stumps
sorry about the "know all" sledge RR- I was getting carried away- play on

No worries at all. I do tend to carry on myself. Whilst i think the whole sage was quite amusing i do agree that Symonds was pretty silly doing that if for no other reason than the threat to his own safety. We all remember what happened to Terry Alderman.

At the end of the day the bloke who got polaxed was remorseful about what he did and feels like a twit now i bet. No damage done to either person so a good result. Hopefully this does not inspire similar incidents in the future.

[rod_rooster]

Yes i am right as usual.

Dare i say...."Holier than thou"??

[locky801]

force has to equal threat.
If a guy comes in brandishing a gun, you're entitled to shoot him.
If he comes in brandishing a sock full of rose petals, you can't shoot him.

What Symonds did was use force that equalled the threat.

depends what you are talking about Punk, Stumps bought up a good point about security, just have a look at the footage, the guy gets head driven (and he deserved it) by the first person on him straight into the ground, that guy deserves to be signed up as well

[RustyCage]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eGhuCk5q ... re=related

A video of another streaker getting smashed. No security to be seen. He just gets up and walks very slowly off.

[Rucciangelo]

Heard on the radio news this morning, if you can believe it that Symonds may well be charged with offences, firstly for conduct offences under the international cricket code and secondly by the Police for assault. If either of these things occur it is an absolute joke

He Should get done- the bloke is a meathead- and this incident proves it-hope he gets a year- As Iv said all summer the aussies are far too big for their boots .

WTF??

it may be acceptable in your world PAFC- but in mine I would step out the way, and let the security people do their job. A stupid thing to do ( as was the streak) and I maintain he should be punished by the authorities (i have read the article saying he wont be)

May I introduce you to SturtPeter?
So you're suggesting Symonds didn't act in the appropriate manner?

I say well done Symmo! Best tackle seen all night!