Pav Reprimand

Remove this Banner Ad

C

Centurions

Team Captain
Podcaster
Aug 17, 2009
501
430
AFL Club
Fremantle
Did anyone see the strike Pav was supposed to have made in the game yesterday and ending up with a reprimand. Good to see they didn't do anything about the Hill incident (they have to do something about guys keeping their heads low)
 

Log in to remove this ad.

MrMarkLatham said:
Yeah on Anthony near the wing, think he was venting some frustration for missing Edwards with a bump when he should have tackled.

Lucky not to cop weeks.
Click to expand...
Yeah it was a bit crude. In his favour was that a free kick wasn't paid and the North player wasn't hurt. All in all a reprimand is probably about right.
 
Jeez i must be thinking of a different incident. All i remember is a strong spoil where no free kick was given.

Last week Tambling nearly poked out Sandilands eye, he gave a free kick away and Sandilands had to leave the field. It was accidental but clumsy and he rightly had no case to answer.

This week, Pav spoils, doesn't give a free away, the player isn't injured, yet Pav gets a reprimand. I'm confused.
 
they supposedly have to take into account how forceful the contact is, which is why judd was able to cut open pavs face with his elbow and still win the brownlow.
 
I'd greatly appreciate it if one of you lovely people could please post a video of the footage? I'm suprised Van Berlo didn't get looked at...although Lindsey Thomas is a bit of a diver. Was quite hilarious seeing Van Berlo push him over then jog away and then the umpire casually run past as if nothing had happened :D
 
It was an ugly half hearted attempt at a spoil but free kick an thats it.
Reprimand wtf .
That sort of ugly spoil attempt happens every game.

Exact same thing happened to Mcphee.
Someone went for a bad spoil attempt got no where near ball an whacked him in back of the head.
He didnt even get the free kick though.
Hope the player that got him copped a reprimand also?

Its a free kick nothing more
 
Does this rub him out for brownlow - i suspect Victorians getting worried super pav might be going to win this year and trying to rub him out of contention.

I'd fight it!!!!!!!
 
rgauci said:
Jeez i must be thinking of a different incident. All i remember is a strong spoil where no free kick was given.

Last week Tambling nearly poked out Sandilands eye, he gave a free kick away and Sandilands had to leave the field. It was accidental but clumsy and he rightly had no case to answer.

This week, Pav spoils, doesn't give a free away, the player isn't injured, yet Pav gets a reprimand. I'm confused.
Click to expand...

Tambling can be forgiven in the fact that, A he's an uncordinated spud, and B, try as you may reaching Sandilands as he attempts to reach the mark is nigh impossible, but you could see his intent was to spoil the ball.

Pav led with his elbow and was never going to complete the spoil, crude and dangerous.

im_a_lazy_sod said:
If Pav got done for high contact in an attempted spoil, why wasn't Tamblings looked at?

Ridiculous MRP system

Also: lol @ Harvey going down like he'd been shot when Frodo gave him a little bit of a love tap to the stomach
Click to expand...

See above.

Harvey is weak as piss and indicative of why North Melbourne are a basket case and have been since Carey.
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

shibz_1989 said:
I'd greatly appreciate it if one of you lovely people could please post a video of the footage? I'm suprised Van Berlo didn't get looked at...although Lindsey Thomas is a bit of a diver. Was quite hilarious seeing Van Berlo push him over then jog away and then the umpire casually run past as if nothing had happened :D
Click to expand...

Look at video in this link

http://www.afl.com.au/news/newsarticle/tabid/208/newsid/111943/default.aspx

Not much in it but Pav hit Anthony with an elbow which was never going to help him.

Hill's wasn't looked at, but Thomas? running headfirst into Pitt was and no action taken. Not sure why they looked at it tbh.

Harvey needs more acting lessons

Pav won't miss games due to his good record but will be ineligible for the Brownlow unless he contests it and gets off.
 
Tundrawolf said:
Pav wasn't even looking at the ball, and the contact was high and reasonably forceful, cant believe people would say otherwise:rolleyes:
Click to expand...

Are you being sarcastic...

Even if you're not, crap like this happens in almost every game. I don't see why it is a reportable offence, especially when Anthony was not injured.
 
Ok just read that article and saw it's only if below 100 points.

Wouldn't that add insult to injury (literally) if Pav missed a Brownlow while the guy who gave him a permanent scar on his face the year before somehow remained eligible for his win.
 
estibador said:
You sure? I thought reprimands meant you were still eligible?
Click to expand...


Article said that Pav's elbow was worth 125 points but his good record reduces by 25% to 90 something and an early plea brings it down by another 25% to 70 something. It means that he can play because his points are less than 100 but since the original penalty was over 100 it means he is ineligible for the brownlow.

I'm going of the afl website here so I'm taking a risk believing them, but you'd think they'd be able to their own rules correct. At least you'd hope so.
 
shibz_1989 said:
Are you being sarcastic...

Even if you're not, crap like this happens in almost every game. I don't see why it is a reportable offence, especially when Anthony was not injured.
Click to expand...

No, not being sarcastic.

Believe me I hate the inconsistency that always comes out of the MRP especially after the Judd/Pav incident last year.

But Pav did not have eyes for the ball and his intent (appears to be) in putting his forearm into the back of Anthony's head. By chance, Anthony wasn't injured, but it doesn't take away from the fact Pav wasn't looking at the ball or looking to spoiling.

I agree that there are some incidents every week that are looked at and others aren't when they perhaps should be, but IMO Pav definitely had a case to answer.
 
I saw it live on Tv and told the missus* there would be trouble.

On one hand, he shouldn't have done it...

...on the other hand, we all know from last year's hit by Judd that you have to open the victim's face PLUS MORE just to reach the minimum force required.

So, I don't think his hit reached the "Juddforce test."

He should have just kicked his opponent in the goolies because the tribunal have told us that is A OK.

* (My missus, not Pavlich's)
 

Remove this Banner Ad

Pav Reprimand

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top