Preview 2nd Elimination Final, 2023: St.Kilda v GWS - MCG, Saturday 9th September, 3:20PM AEST *WEBSTER 150TH* *BATTLE 100TH*

Who Wins?

  • Saints

    Votes: 85 86.7%
  • Giants

    Votes: 13 13.3%

  • Total voters
    98

Remove this Banner Ad

Status
Not open for further replies.
Of course. Bedford free to play us. To be the best you have to beat the best, I guess.

I'm waiting to see their reasons for the manifest misjudgement, will be hilarious as per usual.
 

Log in to remove this ad.

Now or never for types like Tim, Seb and JWeb - they won't be part of the regeneration, they may not even be playing next year. Expect those guys to leave nothing in the locker and die trying.

Well not "die", but you know what I mean
Hope we get a win for these guys who have spent 90% of their careers in aggressively mediocre sides
 
The whole system is a joke.

Surely it doesn't have to be that convoluted.

They dunno physics, straight, so they view a lack of alternative since the AFL reps just stand up and go "I reject your voice, it's horrible, shut up" whilst the clubs reps generally try to find loopholes and errors of law, of which there are many, and so the appeal board normally just state "yeah, previous peeps screwed up, we'll do better next time". Then next time happens and same result just different road to get there.

Then MC goes "the system works!" and we rinse and repeat as Neanderthal.

Is why I brushed up on Newtons 2nd law, had a feeling at 50mins in that they were struggling to bullshit a reason to state something in motion had no force and thus was not forceful when it gets imparted into a different object of mass that was Fisher.

Over it now anyway, even if GWS make it they'll fold like the bitches they are. Just hope Bedford didn't pull a hammy in that leap from his chair in joy.
 
Don’t they take that fee every time all year? I’m a Saints AFL member and every booking includes that fee I believe (totally agree with you - it’s extraordinary what they get away with).
That's what you get with a monopoly. The only way to change it is the govt forces them to break up or legislates max fee
 
Hope we get a win for these guys who have spent 90% of their careers in aggressively mediocre sides
Every good team has got a mix of those kamikaze campaigners ready to go out punching. I'm thinking specifically of Darren Milburn at the Cats but there are countless examples I'm sure.
 
Every good team has got a mix of those kamikaze campaigners ready to go out punching. I'm thinking specifically of Darren Milburn at the Cats but there are countless examples I'm sure.
Milburn got his flag(s) in the end too
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

Didn't Ben Long get suspended because he might hurt someone?
 
Soft. He should get off, but prob wont. Wrong skin color.


Kenan Thompson Eating GIF by Saturday Night Live
 
Just for those playing along, and I hope those that read the journey enjoyed it, Bedford is free to play for them, it got overturned.

I'm waiting to see their reasons for the manifest misjudgement, will be hilarious as per usual.

The whole system is a joke.

Surely it doesn't have to be that convoluted.
I’ll have to read the reasoning (which will be ridiculous no doubt) but frankly that is staggering.

It was a one game suspensions upheld by 3 different panels. How the **** the appeals board determined that was excessive or incorrect is beyond me
 
I’ll have to read the reasoning (which will be ridiculous no doubt) but frankly that is staggering.

It was a one game suspensions upheld by 3 different panels. How the * the appeals board determined that was excessive or incorrect is beyond me

I liked the "we'll be sure to write it down in the future" comment in it, as if they haven't been using crayon all this time given the glaring issues with the MRO and appeals process.
 
I’ll have to read the reasoning (which will be ridiculous no doubt) but frankly that is staggering.

It was a one game suspensions upheld by 3 different panels. How the * the appeals board determined that was excessive or incorrect is beyond me
the issue was more that the suspension was ever handed out and supported. Joke of a suspension and we would have been livid if it was a saints player
 
the issue was more that the suspension was ever handed out and supported. Joke of a suspension and we would have been livid if it was a saints player


They usually reserve those kind of ones for us.
 
I liked the "we'll be sure to write it down in the future" comment in it, as if they haven't been using crayon all this time given the glaring issues with the MRO and appeals process.
Jesus Christ, the reasoning is ridiculous.

The appeals board accepted that the mro/mrp and tribunal all were not reasonable in their assessment that the contact was high. They also accepted Fishers assertation that he did not recall any high contact (not that there was none mind you). Further to that the appeals board accepted that the mro/mrp and tribunal could not determine the force based on video. So surely that sets the precedent that you can’t adjudge force in the future without a medical report (spoiler it won’t).
the issue was more that the suspension was ever handed out and supported. Joke of a suspension and we would have been livid if it was a saints player
Sure but that’s not really the issue. You can argue alls well that ends well and I’m not begrudging Toby but 2 things.
1- any consistency and you have to argue he could have done something else, so it might not be in the spirit but it’s consistent.
2- the process here is mind boggling. 2 seperate bodies said he gets a week and the 3rd (which is really not there to judge the others judgement) decides he’s fine? It doesn’t make any sense.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top