Chris Masten biting allegation

[SonOfurX]

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.

I think the tribunal taken into account the character of the victim (Suban) - and decided to go lenient on the perpetrator (Masten). For what looked to be a 4-5 week suspension, was most likely dropped down to a 2 week suspension.

 

[frenchconnection]

Not going to read this whole thread, but I'm sure there is plenty of bickering.
Let's just deal with the facts:
Masten has been tried and found guilty by an unbiased jury of upstanding peers of the reprehensible act of biting that is normally confined to children under 5, brain damaged boxers and rabid animals.
Suban has been vindicated in his quest to let the truth be known in a fight against a disgraceful act.

So to summarize, Masten - biter and liar. Suban - good bloke.

I think they both have a bit to answer for as think Suban bit off a bit more than he can chew to use a pun. However Dont agree re your comments about Suban being a good bloke - a real squealer in my opinion!! Be a man I say, not a sook.

 

[raffrox]

I think the tribunal taken into account the character of the victim (Suban) - and decided to go lenient on the perpetrator (Masten). For what looked to be a 4-5 week suspension, was most likely dropped down to a 2 week suspension.

Sure. That's it.

So somehow Suban is on trial here. Its not like this happened down a darkened alley way. It happened on a footy field in front of hundreds of thousands. Bite in arm received. Niggle is hardly an excuse for that. The MRP is still chook lotto so I'm not sure the number of weeks means anything.

The evidence was presented, the Eagles went all out (they certainly didn't hold back), Masten was found guilty and Suban is the one who is having his character questioned?

 

[greennick]

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

That was their defence, which is why I included it.

"Never mentioned in the findings" - so, where can I read these findings?

I think you'll find, you were talking of your arse and the tribunal jury doesn't release findings, they just hand down guilty or not guilty and determine a penalty, so you won't find anything saying they determined Masten intentionally bit him.

 

[salim malik]

That was their defence, which is why I included it.

"Never mentioned in the findings" - so, where can I read these findings?

I think you'll find, you were talking of your arse and the tribunal jury doesn't release findings, they just hand down guilty or not guilty and determine a penalty, so you won't find anything saying they determined Masten intentionally bit him.

Thats the finding ,Masten was guilty of biting.Nothing about accidental.You are one hell of a straw man.

 

[Yamumluvsbigcox]

Thats the finding ,Masten was guilty of biting.Nothing about accidental.You are one hell of a straw man.

If it was that clear cut why didn't masten get the 4-6 week suspension prescribed for biting ?
Because suban is a dirty flog that has a reputation for sticking fingers in people's mouths and face gouging ! The tribunal obviously thought Susan contributed to the incident thus only 2 games .

 

[kingswood71]

If it was that clear cut why didn't masten get the 4-6 week suspension prescribed for biting ?
Because suban is a dirty flog that has a reputation for sticking fingers in people's mouths and face gouging ! The tribunal obviously thought Susan contributed to the incident thus only 2 games .

There is a "prescribed suspension" for biting?
On what page of the tribunal document can I find this??
I think you will find that biting is such a rare thing that it is not specifically listed. Consequently, there is no "prescribed suspension". Instead it falls under misconduct.
or are you using the term prescribed suspension without a clue what it means??
But I basically agree with you in that he got a reduced suspension due to Suban's actions....He still bit though. Even if he did it because Suban was in his face, he still bit. He didnt need to. 100 players a season in similar circumstances dont. He did. And for that he will be always remembered as a biter. A dirty biting flog !

 

[Jafa]

There is a "prescribed suspension" for biting?
On what page of the tribunal document can I find this??
I think you will find that biting is such a rare thing that it is not specifically listed. Consequently, there is no "prescribed suspension". Instead it falls under misconduct.
or are you using the term prescribed suspension without a clue what it means??
But I basically agree with you in that he got a reduced suspension due to Suban's actions....He still bit though. Even if he did it because Suban was in his face, he still bit. He didnt need to. 100 players a season in similar circumstances dont. He did. And for that he will be always remembered as a biter. A dirty biting flog !

Yeh - but, only to you. And you're a Fremantle supporting flog so it doesn't really matter.

 

[passmark]

Can the thread title be changed to "Chris Masten, Guilty of Biting"

?

 

[inbetween]

Sure. That's it.

So somehow Suban is on trial here. Its not like this happened down a darkened alley way. It happened on a footy field in front of hundreds of thousands. Bite in arm received. Niggle is hardly an excuse for that. The MRP is still chook lotto so I'm not sure the number of weeks means anything.

The evidence was presented, the Eagles went all out (they certainly didn't hold back), Masten was found guilty and Suban is the one who is having his character questioned?

I questioned Harvey's character after the 'alleged' incidents with Crowley, and Crowley was found guilty too.

 

[Corkintheocean]

Apples and oranges mate. Why bring the Silvagni incident in to this debate? Just because they both happened on the same day and in the same game doesn't mean they should be compared so easily

I just think anything that has to do with blood/spit should be looked at totally differently to an errant, high elbow or a knee because there is potential there for a lot worse than a broken/bruised jaw or a corked leg etc.

What if one or both players had hepatitis or anything else blood-borne? I doubt either do but if one did and the other caught it then the results could have been a lot worse. A mistimed bump/elbow can only do so much damage to someone at the time - anything blood/saliva related has the potential for far worse

If a player is so concerned about Hepatitis they should reconsider the move to run their hands/forearms/fingers across opponent faces in an aggressive manner.

 

[Corkintheocean]

lol, imagine the uproar from the Eagles fanboys if this was Ballantyne that did it to one of their spud players, like I dunno Shepperd or someone.

Biting is one of the most reprehensible and filthy acts anywhere. Masten got caught and rightfully found guilty.

West Coast supporters really embarrassing themselves.

The same Sheppard that toweled you up all day long on Sunday? Must be a quality spud...a La Bonnotte perhaps.

 

[raffrox]

I questioned Harvey's character after the 'alleged' incidents with Crowley, and Crowley was found guilty too.

Well there was a bite mark so not sure about the alleged bit.

 

[inbetween]

Well there was a bite mark so not sure about the alleged bit.

Firstly, I said alleged incidents with Crowley.
Secondly both were found guilty, so neither of the incidents are alleged anymore.

Im simply responding to your question into Suban's character being questioned after the incident despite the fact that countless Freo supporters did the same with Harvey, and rightly so.

 

[raffrox]

Firstly, I said alleged incidents with Crowley.
Secondly both were found guilty, so neither of the incidents are alleged anymore.

Im simply responding to your question into Suban's character being questioned after the incident despite the fact that countless Freo supporters did the same with Harvey, and rightly so.

Harvey character was challenged because he clearly exaggerated.

Suban was legitimately shocked by the bite (watch the footage) and yelled out because of this IMO. Then there was clear physical evidence (ie the bite mark).

When he got to the tribunal what would you suggest he say?

If his character is being challenged because he got rough with Masten then that is completely and utterly soft.

 

[wal]

Suban didn't want to give evidence at the tribunal. Ironically it was WC that forced him to attend because typical of these ......... the modus operandi for their defence when they know they have nothing is to attack the victim's character.

https://au.news.yahoo.com/thewest/wa/a/29301099/suban-attacks-a-bit-rich/

 

[The Joker]

they should reconsider the move to run their hands/forearms/fingers across opponent faces in an aggressive manner.

If the player needs to bite because someone has become agressive, maybe they should turn to a none contact sport.

 

[Corkintheocean]

If the player needs to bite because someone has become agressive, maybe they should turn to a none contact sport.

Ok Joker that is the perfect solution. You are 100% correct. Such wise. Many wisdom. Much knowledge.

 

[The Joker]

Ok Joker that is the perfect solution. You are 100% correct. Such wise. Many wisdom. Much knowledge.

Well dont sit there and defend such a pathetic act...

 

[Corkintheocean]

Well dont sit there and defend such a pathetic act...

It makes it difficult to defend when you remove part of my original quote when you respond. Aside from that, I'm not on trial and neither am I counsel for Masten. My main point is, if you initiate an attack, you are naive to think there will be no response.

 

[Bulldocker]

I think they both have a bit to answer for as think Suban bit off a bit more than he can chew to use a pun. However Dont agree re your comments about Suban being a good bloke - a real squealer in my opinion!! Be a man I say, not a sook.

There is a line of behaviour on a footy field my friend. There's run-of-the-mill stuff..... then there is spitting, kicking and biting. Cross over the line to one of those three and the player's code is rightfully forgotten. I suspect that you are probably only about 12yo with such a puerile view of right and wrong. But wake up tomorrow without your one eyed view and perhaps realise that the one not being a man here is the one who resorted to sinking his teeth into someone and then not at least having the balls to wear his shame. The next two weeks off will be the easy bit for Masten. Because every time he steps on to the field from then on, every other AFL player will be reminding him of what a piece of crap he is.

 

[Eagle-Eye]

LOL.
If Cripps wasn't blocking illegally off the ball he wouldn't have copped an inadvertent elbow.

Oh FFS. Either you are having a lend or you need your head read.

 

[Eagle-Eye]

You dont have enough Internets street cred.

U gonna be ok, mate?

*Sniff*...yeah, bro, I think i can make it..

 

[Eagle-Eye]

Sure. That's it.

So somehow Suban is on trial here. Its not like this happened down a darkened alley way. It happened on a footy field in front of hundreds of thousands. Bite in arm received. Niggle is hardly an excuse for that. The MRP is still chook lotto so I'm not sure the number of weeks means anything.

The evidence was presented, the Eagles went all out (they certainly didn't hold back), Masten was found guilty and Suban is the one who is having his character questioned?

Suban has prior rep for interfering with oppostion player's faces. 2013 GF ring a bell?

 

[Eagle-Eye]

If the player needs to bite because someone has become agressive, maybe they should turn to a none contact sport.

You clown, you