Chris Masten biting allegation

Remove this Banner Ad

ziad said:
He didn't, but the tribunal had to say he did for PR value, particularly after their recent caning. hence the very week in between penalty as a token.

This begs the question - why didn't the umpire award a free for intentional high contact off the ball.
Click to expand...

Are you disagreeing with the West Coasts counsel?

Taken direct from last nights hearing.

8:29pm: Jury asked by West Coast's lawyer to find Masten's actions were "an instinctive or involuntary reaction to the situation he was in."

So there is no dispute that there was a bite. West Coast admitted it. It was then whether it was "an instinctive or involuntary reaction" but there was a reaction. That is, a motion that would be constituted as a bite.

Case closed on that aspect. West Coast brought in an expert to say why there might have been a bite, tried to sully Suban's character with Woosha saying that something must have happened (although there is ZERO proof of this) but there was a bite.

Masten bit.

The end.
 

Log in to remove this ad.

greennick said:
I think that is exactly what they did. The mark on Suban's arm wasn't much of a bite, however skin appeared to be broken so something was going on there, whether it was a bite or his arm just scraped across Masten's mouth was a bit of a he said, she said scenario. Suban clearly contributed to it with his actions after the tackle, it is not like Masten just walked up and bit him. So, they had a bob each way. I thought that was fair enough though probably given the circumstances.

It should have been 50 to Masten on the day (prior to the bite). If the umpires called more of those on the day and stopped players on both sides trying to hurt each other, we probably wouldn't be having this discussion.
Click to expand...

It should have been a free to Suban for Masten's incorrect disposal.
Then it should have been a free and 50 to Masten for the lingering tackle by Suban.
Then it should have been a green jab to the dog who bit a human. Or at least a free to Suban for inappropriate contact.
And anyone complaining about Suban snitching on Masten is attacking the victim. Which is in itself a pretty low act.
 
raffrox said:
Bucks weighs in...

http://www.afl.com.au/news/2015-08-...ceptable-buckley-queries-mastens-twomatch-ban

No hiding from what Mastens done. Own it and move on.
Click to expand...
Buckley is right, if there was a deliberate bite the penalty would and should be worse. I think the Tribunal was obviously not convinced the action was deliberate, but for the look of the game decided that he should get a penalty anyway, which is bizarre.

As I said on another thread, if the umpire had intervened over Suban's actions that may have prevented this accident from happening.
 
Quinz said:
Buckley is right, if there was a deliberate bite the penalty would and should be worse. I think the Tribunal was obviously not convinced the action was deliberate, but for the look of the game decided that he should get a penalty anyway, which is bizarre.

As I said on another thread, if the umpire had intervened over Suban's actions that may have prevented this accident from happening.
Click to expand...

That stuff happens a dozen times a game.

That's no justification for him biting. None.
 
Quinz said:
As I said on another thread, if the umpire had intervened over Suban's actions that may have prevented this accident from happening.
Click to expand...
LOL.
If Cripps wasn't blocking illegally off the ball he wouldn't have copped an inadvertent elbow.
 
raffrox said:
So saying Masten should have gotten more weeks and that the player code should be broken for biting isn't having a go at Masten or Schofield?

Sure.
Click to expand...

Sure - he expected the suspension to be longer - he says it right in the fluff piece. This is a reflection on the tribunal and their decision making process and has nothing to do with Masten.
 
Quinz said:
You seem to be taking the derby loss quite poorly Salim.

I don't think the derby paints Freo as a poor side or definitively worse than ours- teams have lapses as we did against the Suns. This part of the season is all gamesmanship for the top sides, only finals matter from here.
Click to expand...

Just taking pot shots at the silly comments of one of the Eagles less intelligent posters.
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

11902535_299259613577996_7077873394029371546_n.jpg
 
Quinz said:
When Suban is playing it certainly does.

If Masten deliberately bit him I'd be all for 5+ weeks. The Tribunal clearly weren't satisfied it was deliberate. This makes their 2 week penalty confusing, as Buckley said.
Click to expand...

Every side has Suban type players.Was Worsfold bitten,has Steve Johnson been chomped on .The roll over struggle happens countless times a game and Masten is the first to retaliate with a bite. Masten had a brain fade like a thousand players before him.He did it ,the Eagle's mob need to get over it and move on.
 
salim malik said:
Every side has Suban type players.Was Worsfold bitten,has Steve Johnson been chomped on .The roll over struggle happens countless times a game and Masten is the first to retaliate with a bite. Masten had a brain fade like a thousand players before him.He did it ,the Eagle's mob need to get over it and move on.
Click to expand...
??? We are over it. We're not the ones whinging about the penalty and acting like it was the most dangerous thing to ever happen on a footy field. Most of us thought it was fair enough given the circumstances and we hope it doesn't happen again, accident or not.
 
greennick said:
Bucks is definitely the epitome of good grace on the football field, he is most defintely the first person I would call, lol.

Click to expand...

Like using Woosh as a character reference.....


"Did Ben use drugs John? "No he looked me in the eye and said he doesn't use drugs, that's good enough for me".
 
greennick said:
??? We are over it. We're not the ones whinging about the penalty and acting like it was the most dangerous thing to ever happen on a footy field. Most of us thought it was fair enough given the circumstances and we hope it doesn't happen again, accident or not.
Click to expand...

Accident or not:rolleyes: He was found guilty of biting, accidental biting was never mentioned in the findings.
 

Remove this Banner Ad

Chris Masten biting allegation

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top