EDFL Premier Division 2016

[Turbos mail]

yes remember it, was crude, umpires right there, was clear view but deemed it not reportable. What do you want done about it now, hopefully our guy had learnt his lesson.

Fair reply, appreciate the honesty. Cheers

 

[HAVEACHAT]

Reimers was very well held, all though he was holding his back in the last quarter and didn't fly for any marks..... Possible back injury?? No Reimers, No Abers??

His jumper held him in all day. Holding his back because of the strain from his gut. I think Abers need to put a weight clause in his contract. Embarrassing.

 

[sierra]

His jumper held him in all day. Holding his back because of the strain from his gut. I think Abers need to put a weight clause in his contract. Embarrassing.

Frequents Tony's Pie shop a bit, but can still turn a game on its head

 

[The Defender]

I can understand it being argued as a accident if it was in the heat of play. Like a bump or tackle. But how can it be an accident 100m off the ball. He must be very clumsy!

I'm with you, I would love to know his version of how a accident of this magnitude took place.

 

[Outbackhack37]

Under 18s in the grand final which they will be favourites and the seniors and reserves are in preliminary finals this week. Footy clubs are not all about the senior team.

I have been informed that Abers have removed the advertisement for Grand Final night celebrations. The under 18 boys would be gutted with this. What are they going to do if they salute? Clearly it is all about the Seniors down at Clifton Park Lol. I bet the treasurer hopes all 3 sides salute!

 

[HAVEACHAT]

My early tips for G/f's guys.

Seniors :
Abers def Keilor 32 points
Feel for Johns. Ripping bloke.

Reserves :
Greenvale def Keilor 49points

U18s :
Abers def Keilor 27 points

Weather permitting

 

[Hunter33]

there was no pleading guilty to king hit, to striking from behind. Pleaded guity to striking as he made contact to jaw. Argued it was not intentional but accidental contact which was probably why appeals board reduced the penalty

No it wasn't. He was found guilty of intentional contact again. Maybe you should ask those involved to confirm that. He also smiled when he walked out after crying last week. Makes one think he only cared about the sanction not remorse for the action. I have been told not 1 person from kfc has contacted the club or simon. Disgrace. It's not over yet im hearing.

 

[Hunter33]

I have no horse in this race or did i see the incident, but did he actually plead guilty to striking from BEHIND or striking? Everybody keeps going to the fact it was from behind but has there been any proof or admission of guilt?

Lots of proof he was the only 1 who said he didn't. There were about 5 eyewitnesses some independent league officials who said it was from behind.

 

[BlueJet]

Lots of proof he was the only 1 who said he didn't. There were about 5 eyewitnesses some independent league officials who said it was from behind.

Out of curiosity, how do you know all of this?

Sent from my SM-N915G using Tapatalk

 

[milkman99]

Lots of proof he was the only 1 who said he didn't. There were about 5 eyewitnesses some independent league officials who said it was from behind.

Well if their was 5 key witnesses surely the independent appeals board would of been in contact with them, maybe this needs to go to court where these witnesses need to be called up & Tell the truth & nothing but the truth & then all of us on bigfooty would know what really happened instead of just going on here say

 

[watch it all]

No it wasn't. He was found guilty of intentional contact again. Maybe you should ask those involved to confirm that. He also smiled when he walked out after crying last week. Makes one think he only cared about the sanction not remorse for the action. I have been told not 1 person from kfc has contacted the club or simon. Disgrace. It's not over yet im hearing.

gees stories told. Burke advised not sppropriate to make contact with clarke while tribunal process was still under review. After appeal result was made tried to speak to clarke but couldnt, not his decision.dont know about the smile bit, thats stretching it to make an issue of that.

 

[Hunter33]

Out of curiosity, how do you know all of this?

Sent from my SM-N915G using Tapatalk

Good friends with people in high places

 

[Hunter33]

Well if their was 5 key witnesses surely the independent appeals board would of been in contact with them, maybe this needs to go to court where these witnesses need to be called up & Tell the truth & nothing but the truth & then all of us on bigfooty would know what really happened instead of just going on here say

They were hence they found it intentional

 

[callmecrazy]

Should be able to play grand final. The seniors are playing this week so that will be the week he misses.

Who was suspended?

 

[EDFL knowitall]

Who was suspended?

Julian Hemela

 

[milkman99]

They were hence they found it intentional

So all 5 were contacted by the independent tribunal & they all said to the independent tribunal they had seen the keilor player intentionally king hit Clarke from behind & he had his sentence reduced, l find that hard to believe

 

[Hunter33]

So all 5 were contacted by the independent tribunal & they all said to the independent tribunal they had seen the keilor player intentionally king hit Clarke from behind & he had his sentence reduced, l find that hard to believe

You can check it with anybody there eyewitnesses all said that at both hearings. That was accepted and he was found guilty with intent. Their evidence proves intent. What the tribunal do with the consequence is like court they listen to character evidence and make a determination about the sentence. The witnesses aren't used in sanctioning. The way it's been explained to me by those in the know is both tribunals accepted the same incident occured. The appeals tribunal didn't agree with the sanction in the first case. The way in which clarke got injured was believed the same by both tribunals. I think I've made sense ?

 

[Turbos mail]

You can check it with anybody there eyewitnesses all said that at both hearings. That was accepted and he was found guilty with intent. Their evidence proves intent. What the tribunal do with the consequence is like court they listen to character evidence and make a determination about the sentence. The witnesses aren't used in sanctioning. The way it's been explained to me by those in the know is both tribunals accepted the same incident occured. The appeals tribunal didn't agree with the sanction in the first case. The way in which clarke got injured was believed the same by both tribunals. I think I've made sense ?

Hunter I'm with you on all this. But I think someone has called in some favours and done a deal with the investigation panel to get it reduced. You wouldn't need to look to hard to find out who has got involved. Utter disgrace that Keilor FC want to have this player on the field next season.

It's the reason why this league needs to be cleaned up as well. To many clubs being treated different to others.

I do like how this league let's a bit of argy bargy go by, but we need some consistency.

Can someone also explain how not 1 umpire seen this when there was apparently a bit of push & shove happening prior to this incident. The non officiating umpire should be watching behind play. Did they see it but not wish to report it?? Interesting...

 

[milkman99]

You can check it with anybody there eyewitnesses all said that at both hearings. That was accepted and he was found guilty with intent. Their evidence proves intent. What the tribunal do with the consequence is like court they listen to character evidence and make a determination about the sentence. The witnesses aren't used in sanctioning. The way it's been explained to me by those in the know is both tribunals accepted the same incident occured. The appeals tribunal didn't agree with the sanction in the first case. The way in which clarke got injured was believed the same by both tribunals. I think I've made sense ?

 

[FromTheBar]

Hunter I'm with you on all this. But I think someone has called in some favours and done a deal with the investigation panel to get it reduced. You wouldn't need to look to hard to find out who has got involved. Utter disgrace that Keilor FC want to have this player on the field next season.

It's the reason why this league needs to be cleaned up as well. To many clubs being treated different to others.

I do like how this league let's a bit of argy bargy go by, but we need some consistency.

Can someone also explain how not 1 umpire seen this when there was apparently a bit of push & shove happening prior to this incident. The non officiating umpire should be watching behind play. Did they see it but not wish to report it?? Interesting...

Great comment Turbo nothing surer - the haves and the have nots perpetuated by EDFL treating Clubs differently !!

 

[MYOB]

Can someone also explain how not 1 umpire seen this when there was apparently a bit of push & shove happening prior to this incident. The non officiating umpire should be watching behind play. Did they see it but not wish to report it?? Interesting...

What is your point?

 

[Minka Beaver]

Got to say the AFL is doing local footy no favours by saying "not welcome" to its worst at-ground spectators in recent years. It'll drive the AFL's worst to local parks and local games where there isn't the security or fencing to stop them.

I'm not sure that's a recent problem though - for instance, older posters might remember the on and off-field problems surrounding Ascot Vale in the 1980s. Local footy's accessibility unfortunately means there'll always be a minority who act badly, no matter what the league.

The thing that's quite shocking for someone who is a part-time observer of the EDFL is that this incident didn't involve two mug footballers at a low level of the game.

 

[Hunter33]

Anyone else hearing that Keilor is going to have a message of support and solidarity for a certain suspended player on their grand final banner?

This would be in extremely poor taste. He was found guilty of intentionally striking somebody in the manner he did it I'd be saying pack your bags and get out. Surely the club has to stand for something.

Now it goes into criminal and civil action. Hopefully the courts send a strong message.

 

[Outbackhack37]

So all 5 were contacted by the independent tribunal & they all said to the independent tribunal they had seen the keilor player intentionally king hit Clarke from behind & he had his sentence reduced, l find that hard to believe

Hey Milkman I wonder if the 5 dependant so called witnesses would tell their story under oath.. As they would then be liable for every word they say!
Maybe that's why 2 of the dependent witnesses didn't answer their phones on Monday night during the appeal process

 

[Hunter33]

Hey Milkman I wonder if the 5 dependant so called witnesses would tell their story under oath.. As they would then be liable for every word they say!
Maybe that's why 2 of the dependent witnesses didn't answer their phones on Monday night during the appeal process

I wonder if a disgraced dr would give their evidence under oath to his defence even though he said on the night he wouldn't and in hindsight shouldn't have on the night. The lengths some go to.