Heath Shaw Suspension?

[CoverKing]

What an idiot...

This.

Seriously, how dumb can a bloke be?

This made me chuckle mate!
The previous post you state you just traded suckling in and then realized he had a bye, and after that this post was given

[The Sleeping Giant]

I know I will be in the minority, but 8 weeks is very very harsh IMO. 2 would of been enough.

[Adelaide Hawk]

I know I will be in the minority, but 8 weeks is very very harsh IMO. 2 would of been enough.

Nope, not in the minority at all ... if we are being told the full story. An 8 week suspension suggests to me that there is a little more to this than we are being told. 8 weeks for a $10 bet seems ridiculous.

[Q.]

I know I will be in the minority, but 8 weeks is very very harsh IMO. 2 would of been enough.

Nope, not in the minority at all ... if we are being told the full story. An 8 week suspension suggests to me that there is a little more to this than we are being told. 8 weeks for a $10 bet seems ridiculous.

Harsh it is, but probably because they are making an example of him.


Shaw, you are a ****tard. Don't you get paid enough FFS?!

[rod_rooster]

I know I will be in the minority, but 8 weeks is very very harsh IMO. 2 would of been enough.

Why is it harsh? He knew the rules yet still gave his money to a mate to place a bet on footy. The fact he is that stupid doesn't surprise me but anyone as dumb as that is lucky to have made it to his age let lone get away with this crap. It may seem minor what he did but an example needs to be made and IMHO the AFL hasn't made the strong statement they could have. Shaw deserved more thn 8 weeks just for being as ridiculously dumb as he is.

[rod_rooster]

I know I will be in the minority, but 8 weeks is very very harsh IMO. 2 would of been enough.

Nope, not in the minority at all ... if we are being told the full story. An 8 week suspension suggests to me that there is a little more to this than we are being told. 8 weeks for a $10 bet seems ridiculous.

I can't see how the size of the bet is relevant. Shaw provided inside knowledge of a game and not only was that used for gambling purposes but he actually gambled on it himself. 8 weeks is very lenient.

[CoverKing]

I think it's very harsh in the face there are people out there on two drug strikes and we don't know them and they haver been suspended. Travis tuck got how many matches for a third offense??
Would it have been different if shaw had admitted to a gambling problem? Would he then be protected to some extent?

And on the other hand, I think it's lenient for a couple of reasons! Why give him 6 weeks suspended? Simply because they didn't have the balls to suspend him for a finals series knowing collingwood are every chance to win the flag! I think it's also bloody lenient in that he was on his last warning after that car crash IIRC and collingwood at this stage have stuck with him

[rod_rooster]

I think it's very harsh in the face there are people out there on two drug strikes and we don't know them and they haver been suspended. Travis tuck got how many matches for a third offense??
Would it have been different if shaw had admitted to a gambling problem? Would he then be protected to some extent?

And on the other hand, I think it's lenient for a couple of reasons! Why give him 6 weeks suspended? Simply because they didn't have the balls to suspend him for a finals series knowing collingwood are every chance to win the flag! I think it's also bloody lenient in that he was on his last warning after that car crash IIRC and collingwood at this stage have stuck with him

If Tuck was taking performance enhancing drugs it would be different but regardless you can't compare a drug offence to this.

[fish]

If Tuck was taking performance enhancing drugs it would be different but regardless you can't compare a drug offence to this.

Wanna bet?

[CoverKing]

I think it's very harsh in the face there are people out there on two drug strikes and we don't know them and they haver been suspended. Travis tuck got how many matches for a third offense??
Would it have been different if shaw had admitted to a gambling problem? Would he then be protected to some extent?

And on the other hand, I think it's lenient for a couple of reasons! Why give him 6 weeks suspended? Simply because they didn't have the balls to suspend him for a finals series knowing collingwood are every chance to win the flag! I think it's also bloody lenient in that he was on his last warning after that car crash IIRC and collingwood at this stage have stuck with him

If Tuck was taking performance enhancing drugs it would be different but regardless you can't compare a drug offence to this.

Why can't you? Both affect the integrity of the game don't they?

[rod_rooster]

I think it's very harsh in the face there are people out there on two drug strikes and we don't know them and they haver been suspended. Travis tuck got how many matches for a third offense??
Would it have been different if shaw had admitted to a gambling problem? Would he then be protected to some extent?

And on the other hand, I think it's lenient for a couple of reasons! Why give him 6 weeks suspended? Simply because they didn't have the balls to suspend him for a finals series knowing collingwood are every chance to win the flag! I think it's also bloody lenient in that he was on his last warning after that car crash IIRC and collingwood at this stage have stuck with him

If Tuck was taking performance enhancing drugs it would be different but regardless you can't compare a drug offence to this.

Why can't you? Both affect the integrity of the game don't they?

How many games did Justin Charles get? Shaw is lucky.

[Dirko]

How many games did Justin Charles get? Shaw is lucky.

16.

[Voice]

I think it's very harsh in the face there are people out there on two drug strikes and we don't know them and they haver been suspended. Travis tuck got how many matches for a third offense??
Would it have been different if shaw had admitted to a gambling problem? Would he then be protected to some extent?

And on the other hand, I think it's lenient for a couple of reasons! Why give him 6 weeks suspended? Simply because they didn't have the balls to suspend him for a finals series knowing collingwood are every chance to win the flag! I think it's also bloody lenient in that he was on his last warning after that car crash IIRC and collingwood at this stage have stuck with him

If Tuck was taking performance enhancing drugs it would be different but regardless you can't compare a drug offence to this.

Why can't you? Both affect the integrity of the game don't they?

One can affect a games result as this sort of thing can lead to corruption. The other affects the reputation of the sport in general but has no bearing on results. Which do you think is a bigger problem?

[The Sleeping Giant]

I know I will be in the minority, but 8 weeks is very very harsh IMO. 2 would of been enough.

Why is it harsh? He knew the rules yet still gave his money to a mate to place a bet on footy. The fact he is that stupid doesn't surprise me but anyone as dumb as that is lucky to have made it to his age let lone get away with this crap. It may seem minor what he did but an example needs to be made and IMHO the AFL hasn't made the strong statement they could have. Shaw deserved more thn 8 weeks just for being as ridiculously dumb as he is.

Very naive if you think there aren't many more footballers having a punt or giving family and friends inside information. Simon Goodwin was fined a record $40,000 and ordered to undertake compulsory counseling for placing four bets involving AFL matches totaling $16,024.58. No your right, Shaw hasn't been harshly dealt with at all.

[overloaded]

how can you say Shaw was harshly delt with when he bet $10 and Goodwin bet $16,024.58 ?

Your an idiot

What a load of carp the whole thing is.

Imagine in the racing industry if they did this to an owner who layed his horse on betfair or a trainer told his family member that a horse would win.

get a grip people

[Barto]

how can you say Shaw was harshly delt with when he bet $10 and Goodwin bet $16,024.58 ?

Your an idiot

What a load of carp the whole thing is.

Imagine in the racing industry if they did this to an owner who layed his horse on betfair or a trainer told his family member that a horse would win.

get a grip people

Is the horse being moved to another barrier without being made public knowledge?

[The Sleeping Giant]

LOL. Nice one.

[overloaded]

how can you say Shaw was harshly delt with when he bet $10 and Goodwin bet $16,024.58 ?

Your an idiot

What a load of carp the whole thing is.

Imagine in the racing industry if they did this to an owner who layed his horse on betfair or a trainer told his family member that a horse would win.

get a grip people

Is the horse being moved to another barrier without being made public knowledge?

ok so the barrier attendants put a horse in the wrong barrier and then have $10 on it. Hang them FFS

[Dogwatcher]

I'm confused, were the horses putting bets on Nick Maxwell kicking the first goal?

[Dutchy]

he was going to stand Betts tomorrow also...