robert shirley

[The Sleeping Giant]

Lets hope it backfires and he gets a harsher penalty. I'm sorry but they should've just accepted the original sentence, they should’ve been happy with 2 weeks.

Your getting the SANFL and the AFL confused.

[dedja]

I find it really weird that the people who say the penalty is too harsh are ACTUALLY NOT THE PEOPLE WHO WENT TO THE GAME AND SAW THE INCIDENT. Bayman, Mal, myself and others who saw the game and incident all seem to agree that the penalty is not harsh enough. Surely that has to say something.

I wasn't at the game but saw it on the news the other night.

All I will say is that if I was the Eagles, I'd be taking the medicine and not appealing the sentence.

[matt1]

I find it really weird that the people who say the penalty is too harsh are ACTUALLY NOT THE PEOPLE WHO WENT TO THE GAME AND SAW THE INCIDENT. Bayman, Mal, myself and others who saw the game and incident all seem to agree that the penalty is not harsh enough. Surely that has to say something.

I wasn't at the game but saw it on the news the other night.

All I will say is that if I was the Eagles, I'd be taking the medicine and not appealing the sentence.

How about if you were the Crows........................ THINK ABOUT IT PEOPLE!

[oldfella]

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.

I feel that the tribunal wanted to give him 3 or 4 but have taken the state game/bye into account and awarded 2 games -- this is what they have done with another guilty report this year.

If it finishes his Crows career then I would find that sad however he did the untidy tackle and must face the music --- any talk of not suspending because he is a AFL player I do not agree with.

[dedja]

I find it really weird that the people who say the penalty is too harsh are ACTUALLY NOT THE PEOPLE WHO WENT TO THE GAME AND SAW THE INCIDENT. Bayman, Mal, myself and others who saw the game and incident all seem to agree that the penalty is not harsh enough. Surely that has to say something.

I wasn't at the game but saw it on the news the other night.

All I will say is that if I was the Eagles, I'd be taking the medicine and not appealing the sentence.

How about if you were the Crows........................ THINK ABOUT IT PEOPLE!

I'd be saying the same thing if it was the Bays ... and no offence, but Shirley being available sooner is not going to alter the Crows' current fortune either.

[matt1]

I find it really weird that the people who say the penalty is too harsh are ACTUALLY NOT THE PEOPLE WHO WENT TO THE GAME AND SAW THE INCIDENT. Bayman, Mal, myself and others who saw the game and incident all seem to agree that the penalty is not harsh enough. Surely that has to say something.

I wasn't at the game but saw it on the news the other night.

All I will say is that if I was the Eagles, I'd be taking the medicine and not appealing the sentence.

How about if you were the Crows........................ THINK ABOUT IT PEOPLE!

I'd be saying the same thing if it was the Bays ... and no offence, but Shirley being available sooner is not going to alter the Crows' current fortune either.

No, but they may want him to play this weekend... whether it changes thier fortunes or not!

[mal]

I was a neutral supporter at this game
I barrack for NW
In the AFL I barrack for SK/AC/PP
Robbie plays for a team I supPORT in the AFL
He is a very lucky man to only get 2 weeks for this

[dedja]

No, but they may want him to play this weekend... whether it changes thier fortunes or not!

That eagerness to have him earlier may mean he's out for longer ... it's a game of russian roulette when you appeal.

[The Sleeping Giant]

That eagerness to have him earlier may mean he's out for longer ... it's a game of russian roulette when you appeal.

More AFL confusion? Two totally different systems.

[dedja]

That eagerness to have him earlier may mean he's out for longer ... it's a game of russian roulette when you appeal.

More AFL confusion? Two totally different systems.

You're the one that confused ... you obviously are too naive (or ..., no I won't say it) to believe that the AFL teams don't talk to their SANFL counterparts.

I apologise, we all should be typing very slowly so that you can catch up ...

[Wedgie]

That eagerness to have him earlier may mean he's out for longer ... it's a game of russian roulette when you appeal.

More AFL confusion? Two totally different systems.

You're the one that confused ... you obviously are too naive (or ..., no I won't say it) to believe that the AFL teams don't talk to their SANFL counterparts.

I apologise, we all should be speaking very slowly to you so that you can catch up ...

Perhaps we should be typing very slowly to you if you think anyone actually speaks to each other on here! I haven't installed any speech systems on here! Yet!

[dedja]

pedantic b*astard, speak up, I can't hear you.

[nickname]

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.

Firstly, to suggest the tribunal reduced the sentence because of Collins' comments is ludicrous.
Secondly, your arrogance in refusing to accept the view of so many, West and Eagles fans alike, who witnessed the tackle is extraordinary, as is describing as "fair" a tribunal's decision on an incident you haven't seen.

[The Sleeping Giant]

That eagerness to have him earlier may mean he's out for longer ... it's a game of russian roulette when you appeal.

More AFL confusion? Two totally different systems.

You're the one that confused ... you obviously are too naive (or ..., no I won't say it) to believe that the AFL teams don't talk to their SANFL counterparts.

I apologise, we all should be typing very slowly so that you can catch up ...

Two totally different tribunal systems. Maybe you should read posts abit more carefully. My fault though, I should of dumbed it down some for you.

[dedja]

[redandblack]

I saw the incident through binoculars when it happened and described it accurately on here.

I've since seen the video several times.

It was a shocking spear tackle. Ben Fisher has still not fully recovered and the potential for a disastrous injury with that tackle was high.

Two games is at the very light end of the possible verdicts and to plead not guilty defies reason.

The suspension can't be increased, but it would be a disgrace if it was lessened.

As has been said, those at the game who saw it have no doubt at all how bad it was.

[dedja]

The suspension can't be increased

Are you sure?

[redandblack]

The suspension can't be increased

Are you sure?

Yes.

[The Sleeping Giant]

The suspension can't be increased

Are you sure?

No increase of suspension in SANFL if appeal fails.

In the AFL, if appeal fails, the player doesn't get the "early guilty plea" reduction. It reverts back to original suspension length.

Hope this clears the confusion you are having. You can thank me privately later.

[am Bays]

The suspension can't be increased

Are you sure?

No increase of suspension in SANFL if appeal fails.

In the AFL, if appeal fails, the player doesn't get the "early guilty plea" reduction. It reverts back to original suspension length.

Hope this clears the confusion you are having. You can thank me privately later.

Umm, If you use the "early guilty plea" reduction to get a lesser sentance, why would you appeal??