Agree. Moronic.
ITT: people with such little knowledge of the game that they think tackling someone to the ground without even pinning their arms is suspension worthy
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Agree. Moronic.
ITT: people with such little knowledge of the game that they think tackling someone to the ground without even pinning their arms is suspension worthy
ITT: people with such little knowledge of the game that they think the AFL will suspend a Collingwood player.
The irony is these same clowns would absolute spit the dummy if Lachie Neale attempted the same tackle and got suspended for it. And the sad thing is they cover up their bitterness by pretending to care about concussions and head knocks. It’s not a concussion issue. It’s a Collingwood issue.
Go research the only two players to miss grand finals through suspension since 1999 and tell me what club they played forOnce the AFL allowed Maynard free passage everyone knew the agenda.
Go research the only two players to miss grand finals through suspension since 1999 and tell me what club they played for
Line-up who?Enjoy watching Nick and Brayden line up next sat
It wasn't the AFL. It was actually Chief that paid off the tribunal members. Your tears are what powers the Bigfooty servers. Enjoy the GF.Once the AFL allowed Maynard free passage everyone knew the agenda.
Go research the only two players to miss grand finals through suspension since 1999 and tell me what club they played for
No one argues that. The point was that posters with victimhood complexes keep posting "tHe AfL wOuLd NeVeR bAn a CoLlInGwOoD pLaYeR iN fInAlS" when we are the only club to have had players suspended for a GF this millennium, not once but twice. So it's a bit of the ole facts > feelings:Both totally innocent eh?
No one argues that. The point was that posters with victimhood complexes keep posting "tHe AfL wOuLd NeVeR bAn a CoLlInGwOoD pLaYeR iN fInAlS" when we are the only club to have had players suspended for a GF this millennium, not once but twice. So the facts are against those posters, it's a bit of the ole facts > feelings:
View attachment 1812660
That was a special effort by the AFL to forget to mention his charge during the Tribunal opening the door to an appeal.
We all know they would have done similar for Daicos given they didnt bother appealing against the Maynard finding.
There was nothing to appeal about the Maynard finding. An appeal isn't a re-trial - there's got to be a problem with the interpretation of the rules. Read the ruling - pretty hard to see any possibility that an appeal would have had any chance at all.
The AFL for 2 years have had specific rules on jumping and causing damage making you at fault.
The idea they had no room to challenge is ridiculous. It also would have been with legal minds not former players.
Who said that?Both totally innocent eh?
No it's s "why are the mro results completely randomised for similar incidents" issueThe irony is these same clowns would absolute spit the dummy if Lachie Neale attempted the same tackle and got suspended for it. And the sad thing is they cover up their bitterness by pretending to care about concussions and head knocks. It’s not a concussion issue. It’s a Collingwood issue.
Have you actually seen it? Post one similar where a bloke has been suspended this year. Just ridiculous that it's even being discussed as an issue.preciousness around collingwood and daicos aside, it was inevitable there would be one in a prelim that would have a different standard applied.
kleenex shareholders will be disappointed though.
would have cleaned up this week
Have you actually seen it? Post one similar where a bloke has been suspended this year. Just ridiculous that it's even being discussed as an issue.
That one had a slinging motion in it.Brad Close.