knackers_2
Team Captain
The Hunter said:
Either biting Whiting or citing fighting.
-
AFLW 2024 - Round 10 - Chat, game threads, injury lists, team lineups and more.
D3 Ammos
- Thread starter randallbone
- Start date
- Tagged users None
- Status
Either biting Whiting or citing fighting.
reilly said:
I'm actually impressed Reilly, this is about the most sensible contribution you've made to the forum.
My point is that an innaccurate side can dominate a game and still lose. If Elsternwick dominate WB in the finals but are too inaccurate to gain full advantage on the scoreboard their dominance is meaningless.
The only statistic that will matter Sunday evening is the final score.
Mark Harvey
Debutant
iTap said:
a bit of both spud No 2
VAFA vote count. Leading vote getters by club:
BENTLEIGH- James Robertson
ELSTERNWICK AFC- Craig Mahony
KEW AFC- Craig Horne
MONASH GRYPHONS- Nicholas Rutherford
OLD WESTBOURNE- Gary Walker
STH MELB DIST- Steven Aquilina
ST MARYS AFC- Cameron Armstrong
SWINBURNE UNI- James Gordon
UHS-VU AFC- Shane Cracknell
WEST BRUNSWICK- Bill Irving
BENTLEIGH- James Robertson
ELSTERNWICK AFC- Craig Mahony
KEW AFC- Craig Horne
MONASH GRYPHONS- Nicholas Rutherford
OLD WESTBOURNE- Gary Walker
STH MELB DIST- Steven Aquilina
ST MARYS AFC- Cameron Armstrong
SWINBURNE UNI- James Gordon
UHS-VU AFC- Shane Cracknell
WEST BRUNSWICK- Bill Irving
iTap
Debutant
mcglede said:
could we have this list translated into nicknames so I might have a better idea who the hell any of them are?
The OW bloke belted the SM bloke. As a result a blue started during which some retalliation occurred, but the SM player was reported for incidents involving another OW player. Long story short, the umpire saw nothing, but OW saw fit to lodge their own report and the tribunal took them at their word. 8 weeks is a tough penaly for a 'his word against mine' report.collinsr said:
reilly said:
surely you don't think anyones actually taking you seriously any more reilly?? if a team kicks so many points, wouldn't you say indicates a lack of skill?
but nevertheless i think you're right - elsternwick will win convincingly this weekend. no disrespect to WB.. but i believe sths & wicks are a cut above Bentleigh & WB.. and they will fight out the grannie
bigw said:
Old West would have to be the lowest bunch pricks i've ever seen pretend they are footy club. Massive loss of respect from many in the football world. LOW DOGS.
So headbutting and biting is OK as long as the ump doesn't see it and nobody tells, huh?
I go the other way - I tend to have a massive loss of respect for the morons who think its ever so tough and manly to indulge in behaviour that, off the footy field, would see them up on assault charges.
On one hand, Harper, people can say yah boo hiss LOW DOGS for snitching, but please keep in mind that others think its right to speak up to stop abuse and thuggery from gaining acceptance in the ammos. It doesn't take many mouse clicks away from this forum to find leagues where it is accepted and tolerated.
Footy isn't a pansy sport, it is a tough physical game. Free kicks and reports are there to help keep onfield behaviour within certain boundaries. If the adrenalin is rushing and people can't control their aggression, then they should be bitchslapped back into line either at the time or on Tuesday night - and they should be man enough to own up to doing wrong and taking whats coming to them. They don't need peanuts encouraging silence on the issue.
So; are you saying that, since OW did the report and are LOW DOGS,
a) headbutting and biting shouldn't be reported, or
b) if the ump saw it and black carded the guy the ump would be a LOW DOG too
Either way, your argument doesn't stack up.
I go along to the footy to enjoy the footy. I guess that puts me in the pillow-biting low-dog-apologist head-ducking minority. Such is life.
Tigernuts
I go the other way - I tend to have a massive loss of respect for the morons who think its ever so tough and manly to indulge in behaviour that, off the footy field, would see them up on assault charges.
On one hand, Harper, people can say yah boo hiss LOW DOGS for snitching, but please keep in mind that others think its right to speak up to stop abuse and thuggery from gaining acceptance in the ammos. It doesn't take many mouse clicks away from this forum to find leagues where it is accepted and tolerated.
Footy isn't a pansy sport, it is a tough physical game. Free kicks and reports are there to help keep onfield behaviour within certain boundaries. If the adrenalin is rushing and people can't control their aggression, then they should be bitchslapped back into line either at the time or on Tuesday night - and they should be man enough to own up to doing wrong and taking whats coming to them. They don't need peanuts encouraging silence on the issue.
So; are you saying that, since OW did the report and are LOW DOGS,
a) headbutting and biting shouldn't be reported, or
b) if the ump saw it and black carded the guy the ump would be a LOW DOG too
Either way, your argument doesn't stack up.
I go along to the footy to enjoy the footy. I guess that puts me in the pillow-biting low-dog-apologist head-ducking minority. Such is life.
Tigernuts
oldtimer said:
The Kew player i mentioned actually lied to get a guy weeks. Said a slap was a punch, that his jaw still hurt etc, etc.
Biting is something different altogether and from what i understand the player was just calling it as it was! A totally unacceptable act on a footy field!
To be brutally honest if it was an OW player doing the biting I'd be happy to see him get weeks if he did it.
My point from earlier on was that the Kew player had embelished his story to get our player weeks .... again totally unacceptable.
I am actually oif the belief that we should not expect that players lie to protect other players, but surely lying to put them in it would not be condoned by ANY club????
Old Warrior
Debutant
harper said:
There's some things that are not acceptable on the footy field - biting is one of them. The finger was bitten hard enough that skin was broken and blood started flowing. HIV and Hepatitis tests take three months to know the result. This player with a young family has been and continues to wait very nervously on the results. Harper, do you think this is a reasonable situation to be in playing ammo's footy or something that should not be tolerated within our league? I'm curious on other people's views on this also.
berzerk22 said:
Whose to say that the slap was a punch or vice versa. That was one person's word against another. In this situation it was OW word against the SM player. Tribunal found SM guilty same as in the OW / KEW situation. Obviously the charge is different but the situation is the same.
The Tigers Nuts said:
Tigernuts, I do not condone the use of headbutts and biting on any sportsfield. The problem I have with this incident is the way it has been handled by OW and the VAFA.
If you don't now the details of what happened on the ground that day "big w" has given a brief summary earlier on this thread.
This is what I saw from where I stood. SM player is punched in the BACK of the head by more than one OW player, SM players retaliates causeing a wrestle (i think the VAFA rules would call it a melee, although no umpire's report was submitted as these type of jumper punching tangos occur in most quarters of most games). Let's say a headbut was thrown, to my knowledge no injury occured and no umpire report. As for the biting, an OW player was bitten on the finger. What was his finger doing in the mouth of an opposition player?, was he trying to get a position to eye gauge or just trying to rip a blokes head off. Either way the SM player did not go out of his way to bite, he was in a struggle and was being hit in the head, I think most blokes jaws may go tense in this situation.
I'm sure someone from OW will post a different version of events and thats cool, as i've already said headbutts and biting should be reported as well as coathangers, punches, kicks and dissent to umpires.
What s h i t s me the most about this is that the guys who are paid to rule on a game, the umpires, saw no need to take any further action than sending off the players involved. Cop it on the chin and come back on in 15.
To take it further s h i t s in the face of the feild umpires adjudicating that day. If the umpire had of "black carded" any player that day with a report then fair enough cop that on the chin and come back in 2-8 weeks.
Tigernuts, I too enjoy going to the footy and I enjoy playing the game. No one goes on a feild that I know to deliberatly hurt another player. I have copped my share of late and high whacks but always believed that any free kick or punishment dished out should be given by the men and woman controlling the game. The umpires. To go above them to try an gain "justice" or "revenge" is what I refer to as a low act performed by low dogs.
harper said:
That's comedy gold!
I can't believe Scotland didn't get weeks for elbowing Didak's shoulder. What was his head doing there in the first place. And how dare JFK put his head in the way of Lee Harvey Oswald's bullet? (conspiracy theories aside)
I think we know when your jaw goes tense.
iTap
Debutant
Red Gum said:
You may welcome blokes sticking bits of their person in your mouth, but some people resent it and can react violently.
ratting out players in the lowest act you can do in footy, I'm sure those OW blokes weren't entirely innocent....
the only other person I can remember that has done this in the ammos was Boyce....says alot about OW if they have choosen to take that path!!
Good luck in the twos OW
the only other person I can remember that has done this in the ammos was Boyce....says alot about OW if they have choosen to take that path!!
Good luck in the twos OW
knackers_2
Team Captain
collinsr said:
It all comes back to Boyce...
No one wants their mouth to be fingered, and similarly you should expect to play footy without being bitten.
I can't believe there have been posts suggesting that those officiating matches in D3 are in control for most of the time - but on the other hand, 8 weeks resulting from a 'his word against mine' situation opens up a Pandora's Box for the VAFA tribunal.
A well articulated argument, but there were extenuating circumstances. The SM player wasn't being a thug. He'd been knocked out by a thuggish act (2 weeks was all that was worth) and was in the thick of a melee in which he was out numbered. Unfortunately the primal instincts kicked in and unacceptabelk incidents occurred. The bloke didn't just walk up and commit these acts, they were in the midst of a full on attack. Personally I would not have acted the same way in response, but you have to take into account what was going on at the time, and I'm sure OW didn't explain that. Their version would have been a lovely gathering that was suddenly trashed by a psycho headbutting and biting all in his path. The penalties should have been the other way around and if you are going to snitch then at least tell the whole truth even if it paints your own club in a bad light.The Tigers Nuts said:
knackers_2
Team Captain
chase said:
Boyce wasn't in the country when Murphy hit him at the 2000 presentation dinner? Murphy's got a pretty good reach, but I doubt it is THAT good
My only question would be to all - How was the finger bitten?
To me that is the most important question.
If that finger was deliberately in the SM players mouth, then he had every right to bite it in self defence though stupid this may be.( i have seen the result of fishhooks and the like and they are not pretty) However if he chomped freely on an errant finger, then things swing the other way and the book should be thrown at him.
To me the actual suspension times suggest that the Ammos think there was much more to the situation, but unable to do more about it. I feel he would have gone for at least twice the time if they thought he was purely to blame, and that they were cornered into the judgement they gave.
To me that is the most important question.
If that finger was deliberately in the SM players mouth, then he had every right to bite it in self defence though stupid this may be.( i have seen the result of fishhooks and the like and they are not pretty) However if he chomped freely on an errant finger, then things swing the other way and the book should be thrown at him.
To me the actual suspension times suggest that the Ammos think there was much more to the situation, but unable to do more about it. I feel he would have gone for at least twice the time if they thought he was purely to blame, and that they were cornered into the judgement they gave.
- Status
