Moved Thread #7: Jack Ziebell [Part I] © -

JZ Best Position

  • Inside Midfielder

    Votes: 89 41.8%
  • Forward Pocket

    Votes: 124 58.2%

  • Total voters
    213

Remove this Banner Ad

Status
Not open for further replies.
APPEAL THE BASTARDS. THIS IS A JOKE. THE AFL AND ALL IT STANDS FOR IS ROOTED. I HATE THIS GAME RIGHT NOW. STILL CAN NOT BELIEVE HOW DEMETRIOU AND HIS CRONIES HUNG THAT 13 YEAR OLD GIRL OUT TO DRY OVER A STUPID COMMENT. IT IS THE WORST RUN COMPETITION IN THE WORLD RUN BY MUPPETS.
 

Log in to remove this ad.

Thats me done, F**K this game, F**K the MRP, Healy Bartlett et al, what a joke, had Ziebs have followed through with the smother he would of taken Lyons legs out and probably seriously injured him. Someone wake me from this nightmare that is the AFL.
 
i'm an adelaide supporter and agree with all your comments. i believe it should have been a free kick down field for late contact and thats it. play on!
 
The worse thing is that the "bad record" is for a decision universally acknowledged as a mistake. The AFL have now chosen to COMPOUND their error by increasing the penalty on another charge that should have been thrown out.
 
In any other era, Ziebell would be feted for his selfless attack on the ball. See Archer.
In this era he is being run out of the game.
**** you AFL, **** you Kevin Bartlett and the rules committee, **** you Gerard Healy and the moral crusaders.
You protect Adam Goodes under all circumstances and hang JZ out to dry.
The game we loved is screwed.

Our most respected player would not get drafted in the modern era.
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

He jumped in the air and lead with his shoulder, slipping past and touching him lightly in the head. Of course it's a suspension.

The main thing to notice here is that if he had a good record it would have been two weeks down to one, because he has a bad one and carryover points it's two weeks out to four.

If it was a one week suspension would it be unfair? No. So Ziebell is not getting picked on, he just has a poor record.
 
Jack Ziebell, North Melbourne, has been charged with a Level Two engaging in rough conduct offence (225 demerit points, two-match sanction) for engaging in rough conduct against Jarryd Lyons, Adelaide Crows, during the second quarter of the Round Nine match between North Melbourne and the Adelaide Crows, played at Etihad Stadium on Sunday May 26, 2013.

In summary, due to his previous poor record, his two-mach sanction is increased to a three-match penalty, even with an early plea.

Based on the video evidence available and a medical report from the Adelaide Crows Football Club, the incident was assessed as reckless conduct (two points), low impact (one point) and high contact (one point). This is a total of five activation points, resulting in a classification of a Level Two offence, drawing 225 demerit points and a two-match sanction. He has an existing bad record of seven matches suspended within the last two years, increasing the penalty by 50 per cent to 337.50 points and a three-match sanction. He also has 67.50 points carried over from within the last 12 months, increasing the penalty to 405 points and a four-match sanction. An early plea reduces the sanction by 25 per cent to 303.75 points and a three-match sanction.
 
He jumped in the air and lead with his shoulder, slipping past and touching him lightly in the head. Of course it's a suspension.

The main thing to notice here is that if he was a good record it would have been two weeks down to one, because he has a bad one and carryover points it's two weeks out to four.

If it was a one week suspension would it be unfair? No. So Ziebell is not getting picked on, he just has a poor record.
ahhh yes it would be unfair, clearly went to smother and once the ball went past he protected himself from front on impact.

what did you want him to do, fly over lyons?
 
Appeal it boys - the 4th game is GWS and then make the tribunal earn their cash....
 
ahhh yes it would be unfair, clearly went to smother and once the ball went past he protected himself from front on impact.

what did you want him to do, fly over lyons?

Ryder went to get a ball, which was then knocked past him, he braced with his shoulder against the oncoming man, didn't leave the ground, and got 3 weeks.

Ziebell left the ground and jumped at a guy, hitting him late with his shoulder after he had kicked him. If he had the same record as Ryder he'd have only gotten 1 week.

So yeah, absolutely fair. You just can't jump and hit guys in the head (even softly). It's been made very very clear at the MRP over and over.
 
ahhh yes it would be unfair, clearly went to smother and once the ball went past he protected himself from front on impact.

what did you want him to do, fly over lyons?
No, no, no.

Jack was supposed to dematerialise so that Lyons could run through him, then rematerialise once out the other side.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top