Howard Gets 1 week

[Rushby Hinds]

The player had his head over the ball. Howard charged at him front on with a full blooded hip and shoulder. Deserved a week. Lucky he didn't do any damage or it would have been more. Howard wouldn't be the first player this year to get a week for something like that.

I agree.

Just when i thought your avatar was as childish as you could get

So what are you saying?

the Centrals player didn't have his head over the ball?

The contact wasn't around the head or neck area?

Honestly, the video isn't as clear cut as some people say, but from the selective still shot it doesn't look good.

The umpire would have had a far clearer view then the video man, and he had no hesitation.

Rules are rules.

Murphy from the Bays got one week for a similar thing this year, i don't recall any Bays fans complaining about the injustice of it all, or calling the tribunal "piss weak".

[rod_rooster]

As you said yourself "the selective still shot".

FFS do you really believe what you say? If a Glenelg player got rubbed out for an incident the same as this i would be annoyed. If in fact that did happen and the Glenelg supporters didn't voice their disapproval perhaps the suggestion that they are bandwagonners and don't really care is spot on.

Oh, and of course the umpires in the SANFl always position themselves in the right spot and make sure they have the best possible view of the play

[smithy]

The rules are a changing Rod and we all gotta try and adjust rightly or wrongly.

Blame the AFL mate.

[rod_rooster]

The rules are a changing Rod and we all gotta try and adjust rightly or wrongly.

Blame the AFL mate.

That they are but regardless this was not an incident that should attract a suspension. Whether it be a North player or or one of the Gowans i'd feel the same.

At least in the AFL there is an appeals process. Is there anything similar in the SANFL?

[spell_check]

The rules are a changing Rod and we all gotta try and adjust rightly or wrongly.

Blame the AFL mate.

That they are but regardless this was not an incident that should attract a suspension. Whether it be a North player or or one of the Gowans i'd feel the same.

At least in the AFL there is an appeals process. Is there anything similar in the SANFL?

I'm not sure if anything changed so far as an appeals process, as that was talked about last year with the court appearance involving South regarding the Cupido suspension. There wasn't an appeal process at that time.

[rod_rooster]

The rules are a changing Rod and we all gotta try and adjust rightly or wrongly.

Blame the AFL mate.

That they are but regardless this was not an incident that should attract a suspension. Whether it be a North player or or one of the Gowans i'd feel the same.

At least in the AFL there is an appeals process. Is there anything similar in the SANFL?

I'm not sure if anything changed so far as an appeals process, as that was talked about last year with the court appearance involving South regarding the Cupido suspension. There wasn't an appeal process at that time.

Thanks spelly. That's what i thought.

[Jimmy]

looks worse that actually was on video, probably should have got a reprimand as thats the style these days isnt it??

probably could have laid a tackle but thug has to keep up with his rep hey?

[Wedgie]

The contact wasn't around the head or neck area?

That's the thing, if you'd actually read posts by people who were there you'd realise it wasn't hence the uproar.
I was in perfect position to see the hip and shoulder contact the Dogs player high on the arm and was immediately incensed that it was even a free kick, the umpire was on the Howard side of the play and wouldn't have actually seen the contact clearly.
Stupid parrt about it is even if he guessed he could have made an educated guess by the way no Dogs players remonstrated and that the Dogs player wasn't even holding his head as he wasn't contacted there.

Im pretty fair too as I called Wintles and Hargs as I saw them, reckless and deserving of a week. This wasn't even close to reckless.

And for the Eagles supporter that asked, Schwarze was found guilty of striking and got a reprimand.

Seems you can hit a bloke and get a reprimand but if you hip and shoulder a guy you get a week.

[am Bays]

Well following the Sporn report in the first trail game (v the Bays) and the information given to club by the SANFL umpire dept (DVDs and lectures) any player who goes up to the tribunal on a front on contact charge should get a week for stupidity.....seriously it has been one of teh highly publicised law changes in years league players should know the laws of teh game and adjust their games accordingly

As I said in these threads any player first to the footy is going to be protected this year more so than ever (isn't that what all coaches tell their players to do - be first to the footy) and under the new law this year 18.4.n (IIRC off the top of my head) forcefull front on contact is reportable.

It would be interesting to see where the umpires thought his eyes were looking - at the Centrals player or the ball.

http://www.safooty.net/forum/viewtopic.php?f=1&t=6740&start=0

http://www.safooty.net/forum/viewtopic.php?f=1&t=6698

[Wedgie]

As mentioned before Wintle and Hargs were clear cut reckless and got a game.
I thought Sporn should have got off as the Bay player ducked when he saw him coming but it was head high.
Howard didn't make any contact to the head whatsoever.
Even Rusbhy who would have tried his hardest couldn't pull out a frame with head high contact.
People ask why Howard didn't tackle him?
Simple, the ball hadn't been picked up yet hence a hip and shoulder being the only legal manouvre Howard could do under the rules as the ball as he wouldn't have been able to pick it up before the CDFC player.
He's not only been penalised a free kick but a week off for taking the only legal option under the rules that he could.
Ive actually been in perfect position for all 4 of the above mentioned incidents and on the fence at the time directly viewing the incidents.
4 cases with completely different contacts and degree of contact yet the same result hence the frustration with inconsistancies.
If Howard's was a week for hitting the high part of the guys arm then there ware at least half a dozen incidents later in the game that deserved more than 1 week and probably are at least that amount each game.
The hip and shoulder is going to be completely taken out of the game.

[bulldogproud]

Wedgie, I must be blind as both the second and the third photos do look as if there is head high contact.

[Wedgie]

Wedgie, I must be blind as both the second and the third photos do look as if there is head high contact.

You must be mate, but if I remember correctly you do wear glasses, I recently got my eyes tested at the optometrist though and they're still perfect, as I said previously, I was in a better angle than the camera but even if you do look closely at the following shot which is at impact unlike some of Rushby's efforts you can quite clearly see Howards upper arm/shoulder making contact with the Dogs player lower shoulder/upper arm. Because of the angle Dean hit him at the Central player momentum reversed before any contact was made to the head. The 2nd and 3rd shots (Rushby did some editting since my last post) are before and after impact. Shots before or after impact are irrelevent, it'd be like showing McConnell looking at a ball just before he pulls out of a mark when he hears footsteps!

[Rushby Hinds]

Still looks guilty to me from that photo.

If it was that clearly obvious, why would the umpire immediately blow the whistle and report him?

[Jar Man Out]

not a great deal in it. at worse you could say howard certainly was reckless.

if he had a better record more than likely he would of got off.

but he doesnt. nothing worth crying over though.

[Wedgie]

Still looks guilty to me from that photo.

If it was that clearly obvious, why would the umpire immediately blow the whistle and report him?

Its already been discussed mate, read previous posts.
The umpire was out of position and directly behind Howard and couldn't see the contact, he simply guessed.
If you watch the video you'll see another umpire with a clear view of the contact as he's side on not pay a free.

Also, just curious, do you need glasses for anything?

[bulldogproud]

Thanks for the explanation Wedgie. Even looking at your last photo, it could look as if his chest would make contact with Andrew Hayes' head. However, without being there I cannot comment further and accept your comments as accurate. The action is certainly reckless though.
Cheers!

[Rushby Hinds]

If this wasn't North, this wouldn't be an issue.

[Wedgie]

If this wasn't North, this wouldn't be an issue.

Ridiculous and childish statement, I expected better from you.

I was just as animated about the Cupido report last year and Brett Burton's 2 game suspention last year and last time I looked neither played for North or Geelong.
I and most others call them as we see them, don't assume other's have petty biases just because you may do.

[maxyoz]

I've just been talking to Wilson Tuckey and Peter Costello and they both agree that "Howard should go".

[Aerie]

Seems you can hit a bloke and get a reprimand but if you hip and shoulder a guy you get a week.

A jumper punch doesn't have the potential to paralyze someone like a front on charge to a player with his head over the ball.