robert shirley

[redden whites]

it sounds like a bit of a brain fade from a normally fair player similar to Bickley's hit on Wakelin many years ago.

You did not see the International rules incident then?

[NFC]

There's no way Shirley is 187cm.

Carry on.

[Brodlach]

Received 2 weeks and cannot play AFL. Personally I think it is too leniant.

[Wedgie]

A fair result in my opinion, probably would have got more if Collins kept his mouth shut.
I'm still looking forward to some vision of it as from the descriptions given Shirley would have needed 3 arms to have made a 'spear' tackle.

[MightyEagles]

Saw vision on the news, didn't look good.

[wycbloods]

Received 2 weeks and cannot play AFL. Personally I think it is too leniant.

Having seen the vision that is a very lenient penalty. However, i am not surprised because the SANFL tribunal rarely suspends players, you only get done if they dont know who you hit .

[Swamp Donkey]

Disgraceful tribunal. So much for having a good record. Any person with half a football brain would know the character of Rob Shirley isnt cut out to deliberately hurt another player. Unfortunately Shirley became a scape goat as the tribunal felt it had to address the huge amount of fuss made by some members of the footy fraternity including pissweak supporters who need to harden up and understand that poor decisions are often just that. I think a reprimand would have been more suitable and again the tribunal is bluffed into making a decision. To compare it incidents in the 1991 GF is just plain stupid!

[whufc]

two weeks. It is two games though isn't it, so really 3 weeks because the state game won't count as a game.

[Swamp Donkey]

two weeks. It is two games though isn't it, so really 3 weeks because the state game won't count as a game.

Maybe but I'd say the Crows would have seriously considered him for this week, but now he wont be in the equation. Surely 2 weeks is just that!

[Wedgie]

two weeks. It is two games though isn't it, so really 3 weeks because the state game won't count as a game.

Probably 4 weeks as the Eagles have a bye 2 weeks after the state game.
Its lucky a North player didnt cop 6 games in the last minor round game last year as it would have translated to 9 weeks thanks to the draw.

[Pseudo]

It's ... Tangential Question Time (tm)!

Should an AFL listed player get suspended by the SANFL tribunal for x weeks, must he wait until his SANFL club has played x games before he can play anywhere again, AFL or SANFL?

Should said player be suspended for x games by the AFL tribunal, must he wait until his AFL club has played x games? Say he got suspended playing for the bottom-placed Crows in the final round of the year, would he have to stand out of SANFL finals until the Crows had played more games?

Should said player be suspended while playing for North's bottom-ranked reserves because his regular SANFL club has the bye, does he have to wait until North plays x more games?

[bayman]

It's ... Tangential Question Time (tm)!

Should an AFL listed player get suspended by the SANFL tribunal for x weeks, must he wait until his SANFL club has played x games before he can play anywhere again, AFL or SANFL?

Should said player be suspended for x games by the AFL tribunal, must he wait until his AFL club has played x games? Say he got suspended playing for the bottom-placed Crows in the final round of the year, would he have to stand out of SANFL finals until the Crows had played more games?

Should said player be suspended while playing for North's bottom-ranked reserves because his regular SANFL club has the bye, does he have to wait until North plays x more games?

remember as i said in an earlier post MARK VISKA

[Brodlach]

Disgraceful tribunal. So much for having a good record. Any person with half a football brain would know the character of Rob Shirley isnt cut out to deliberately hurt another player. Unfortunately Shirley became a scape goat as the tribunal felt it had to address the huge amount of fuss made by some members of the footy fraternity including pissweak supporters who need to harden up and understand that poor decisions are often just that. I think a reprimand would have been more suitable and again the tribunal is bluffed into making a decision. To compare it incidents in the 1991 GF is just plain stupid!

Your Kidding. This is the most stupid quote (and there have been many) to ever be written on this site. You obviously didnt see the incident. I agree it is not in Shirleys nature to do this sort of thing but he "did the crime, so needs to do the time". He could have broken Fishers neck the way he landed. There is no way I need to harden up and I beleive he should have got at least 4 weeks.

[whufc]

I may be wrong but my understanding was that the tribunal hands down suspensions in games not weeks.

It would be silly if they handed down games in weeks, if Robert Shirley was a Glenelg player and had to serve a 2 WEEK suspension from now he actually wouldn't miss a game with Glenelg having the bye after the state game.

Surely Robert Shirley has to miss 2 GAMES.

[phantom57]

Shirley....an appropriate name for a Crow thug !

[mal]

Disgraceful tribunal. So much for having a good record. Any person with half a football brain would know the character of Rob Shirley isnt cut out to deliberately hurt another player. Unfortunately Shirley became a scape goat as the tribunal felt it had to address the huge amount of fuss made by some members of the footy fraternity including pissweak supporters who need to harden up and understand that poor decisions are often just that. I think a reprimand would have been more suitable and again the tribunal is bluffed into making a decision. To compare it incidents in the 1991 GF is just plain stupid!

Have a good think about this
If we let Robbie off
Then we must allow all players with good previous records off ???
Dangerous precident set

That precident could ensure blood baths in all Grand Finals ?

My opinion
Robbies very very good record was taken into account, hence a lightish 2 week suspension


If it was these guys spear tackling [apologies for singling out these 2 players]
Gary Mcintosh = 6 weeks
David Grainger = 12 weeks

By giving Robbie 2 weeks, scapegoat gulity or not sends a very clear message that these tackles will be sanctioned as punishable

PS
Had Robbie Shirley got off,what message does that send to Ben Fisher

PS
Had Robbie Shirley got off, how would Robbie Dejongh feel copping a suspension for a crude tackle earlier this year

[Oval Ave]

he got 2 games for rough play what i dont get is who decides what is rough . Rugby at leasts defines unacceptable tackles (lifting player horizontal)

[eaglehaslanded]

2 wks as an Eagles supporter i'm happy with that outcome. A question need to be asked does this wks Crows v Carlton game count as 1 of those wks or is it 2 Eagles games he will be forced to miss. Surely if he was considered for selection this week for the Crows this suspension should be invoked and used in AFL games as well in light of sanfl state weekend etc.

[Columbo]

Although the verdict from the tribunal was 2 games, its more than likely that it will mean he misses 4. Firstly he misses this week due to the state game, he then serves his 2 games then the Eagles have a bye, although he could play for the Crows that week it would seem unlikey seeing he has missed 3 weeks.

[Mythical Creature]

I beleive you have to serve your suspension in the grade you were reported in. Therefore Shirley will have to miss the next 2 Eagles games before he can be considered in any league.