- Thread starter
- Moderator
- #3
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
LMAO that is a cracker!
Totally agree about Heeney as he was being hung onto by Webster and made more of a backhanded chopping action than actually trying to wack him imo and Rankine got done supposedly because the bump was high, but he bumped him flush on the ribs and their heads must have connected in the process, but a week should have been enough as he didn`t actually bump him in the head like good old Christian made out in his summary.The fact Heeney got a week and Greene got off is ridiculous. And there's no way Rankine deserves 4 weeks
Totally agree about Heeney as he was being hung onto by Webster and made more of a backhanded chopping action than actually trying to wack him imo and Rankine got done supposedly because the bump was high, but he bumped him flush on the ribs and their heads must have connected in the process, but a week should have been enough as he didn`t actually bump him in the head like good old Christian made out in his summary. I thought 3 weeks was the usual heaviest punishment, so where has 4 weeks turned up from all of a sudden? or has the AFL changed another rule on the run?!! I actually feel that if the umps don`t start penalising the Saints players (they are not alone doing that I know) that are cheating by hanging onto opposition players off the ball then more players are going to get reported because they are getting frustrated with the tactic. When the Saints played G.C. Windhager was actually wrapping his arms around Touk Miller off the ball and brought him to the ground, and that is a free and the umps should have jumped on it straight away as they need to defuse that sort of action. I know every team does things to put an opposition star off his game, but when it leads to a suspension it has gone too far imo. That "Ross the boss" tactic may have just cost Heeney the Brownlow and the umps should have free kicked Webster for holding before Heeney even did that in my book. St Kilda received a very soft free to King for supposedly being held late in the G.C. game and they won because of it, so where is the consistency AFL/Umps???!!!
The issue I have with Greene is that he is a repeat offender. Maybe it should be a fine for first offence of gut punches, then 1 week next time, and 2 weeks for each offence after that. And the following is said tongue in cheek, but next time we play GWS someone different should gut punch Greene in each quarter to make the point and then say "Who gives an f... if you're injured."Rankine: fair enough - aligns with penalty handed to Parker. This was further off the ball but injuries weren't as severe.
Heeney: could see it going either way, intent was to break a hold but still clipped Webster high.
Greene: no issue with a fine.
I get that mate, he deliberately operates in the grey area which can obviously frustrate fans.The issue I have with Greene is that he is a repeat offender. Maybe it should be a fine for first offence of gut punches, then 1 week next time, and 2 weeks for each offence after that. And the following is said tongue in cheek, but next time we play GWS someone different should gut punch Greene in each quarter to make the point and then say "Who gives an f... if you're injured."
Greene is a repeat offending grub.
The incident in question took place in the third term of Saturday's game between the two sides at Blacktown International Sportspark, with Keeffe seen to have made intentional contact to the body of Blues youngster Jaxon Binns through a strike.
The league's MRP has graded Keeffe's actions as intentional conduct, low impact and body contact, with a one-game suspension offered to the 34-year-old.