Autopsy Round 4, 2022: Hawthorn v St.Kilda

Remove this Banner Ad

bird_man said:
From what read I don't think the argument from the tribunal was the incidents weren't similar, it was that the non guilty verdict was handed by the MRO which is separate to the tribunal.

Seems as though the tribunal think the English one should have been guilty also
Click to expand...
But they didn't challenge it. Seems weird.
 
StJHD said:
AFL admitted that English incident was similar but that it shouldn't be considered as "the MRO and this Tribunal...don't always agree with each other's assessment". So if the Tribunal (the appellate and therefore higher authority) feel that English deserved 2 weeks, why on earth did the AFL not appeal the MRO decision and make an example of it then?? If the precedent was set the week before then Paddy may well have tried to hurdle Day instead.
Click to expand...
Spot on.

They've basically told everyone they didn't do their assigned role.

In all seriousness the next AFL CEO needs to clean house at the MRP and tribunal
 

Log in to remove this ad.

malevu said:
A hypothetical question. How many players when running directly at an opposition player 'front on' decide to tackle ?

I would say the vast majority of tackles are laid either from behind or side on. From a front on position you would be risking a head clash, broken ribs or simply opening yourself up for a major collision/injury. It's only human nature to brace for impact. For mine that's what Paddy did. There's a big difference when a player continues on with the action in an old fashioned shirt front.

So the current mantra "if you choose to bump, you're in trouble" is flawed when two players are about about to make face on contact. Self preservation to protect yourself would kick in if you have any brains.

So it seems in a situation like Ryder's your only course of AFL approved action is to step aside and let them through. Now that would be a great look. Otherwise try and tackle front on and wear a broken cheek bone or jaw.
Click to expand...
And so if players must step aside when they approach a player about to kick, imagine how easy it will be for player with ball to baulk oncoming opponents. Which is more "reasonable"? - To expect a competitive professional footballer to allow an opponent to waltz by for fear there may be contact? Or for a kicking player to expect that the oncoming opposition player may want to stop their progress and so should either dodge oncoming player or brace for contact??
 
StJHD said:
AFL admitted that English incident was similar but that it shouldn't be considered as "the MRO and this Tribunal...don't always agree with each other's assessment". So if the Tribunal (the appellate and therefore higher authority) feel that English deserved 2 weeks, why on earth did the AFL not appeal the MRO decision and make an example of it then?? If the precedent was set the week before then Paddy may well have tried to hurdle Day instead.
Click to expand...
Yep - if it were serious about minimising head high contact, the AFL should have appealed the non decision by MRO.

By not appealing it they proved they are more concerned about media management than player welfare.
 
Plugger35 said:
So in other words it is just pot luck with the MRO whether they decide to apply a suspension or not for similar incidents like the English and Ryder ones.

That's just not good enough for a so called professional sport, how is it fair that English gets off scot free while Ryder cops two weeks, it would be bad enough if Ryder copped one more week than English but him copping 2 more weeks than English just makes this decision even more ridiculous.

Michael Christian should be under scrutiny for inconsistent decisions like this with his suitability for the job questioned but it probably won't happen.
Click to expand...

Its like a legal system where everything is illegal.
That way if you're fine as long as you don't get picked up by the cops.
 
278237234_10159410378168183_1313646195265390239_n.jpg

He is a good size and would only get bigger I would think after a yr or 2 AFL training
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

PostmanBish said:
Problem is, McCartin doesn't play for the plastics ...

On the one hand, I don't want Paddy to get hurt (I see him as an "accident" waiting to happen) ... but I'm a lot more concerned about the consequences for our player if they are the one deemed responsible, because if you wear RWB there are no "accidents" - only pre-meditated murder.
Click to expand...

Oh nah, what I mean is the covid excuse, this week covid, straight "Ratts tested postive we're erring on caution this week" next week potential to KO a bloke and still recovering from covid as woah, widespread and nasty business, wouldn't want a perennial concussed player contracting nasal congestion and lung issues, better sit this one out ol Gil sorry for 2 weeks in a row... oh look paddy's back, we're right as rain with split points or a reschedule now.

They want to play the fool in both courts, game the system like a boss and stick it up em in the hip pocket.
 
Saints TV said:
Podcast is up!




Sent from my iPhone using BigFooty.com
Click to expand...


Big thumbs up for Marshy's Minute. I too thought it was sh*thouse treatment of our women and our B&F. Didn't even know it was coming up until I stumbled on it during the count! We have the third highest AFLW membership in the league and we didn't know about the B&F. What was probably a special night kinda feels swept under the rug. And how hard is it just to run a stream of it?

We do a lot right as a club. We missed the mark with this one though. Need to keep improving.
 
Munga said:
Big thumbs up for Marshy's Minute. I too thought it was sh*thouse treatment of our women and our B&F. Didn't even know it was coming up until I stumbled on it during the count! We have the third highest AFLW membership in the league and we didn't know about the B&F. What was probably a special night kinda feels swept under the rug. And how hard is it just to run a stream of it?

We do a lot right as a club. We missed the mark with this one though. Need to keep improving.
Click to expand...
So who is running that shit show then?
 
puppy_dog7 said:
Just realised Gunston had Disposals from 88% Time on Ground. Big props to Wilkie! Gave him an absolute bath!
Click to expand...
Wilkie's defensive work really is incredible. If we can become a team that plays finals, his ability to completely shut down a dangerous forward will be so valuable.
 
stfan said:
And further than that if lookup our ABN. You will note that it is St Kilda Saints.

If as you seem believe Saints and St are the same thing with our name, and are interchangeable, that would be Saint Kilda Saints Football Club Ltd.....which would be daft!

View attachment 1369850
Click to expand...
There was a rugby league player called Peter Peters. Talk about daft.

On SM-T290 using BigFooty.com mobile app
 

Remove this Banner Ad

Autopsy Round 4, 2022: Hawthorn v St.Kilda

Similar threads

Hubnester
  • Locked
Votes Round 9, 2024: Hawthorn v St.Kilda
Replies
7
Views
680
borderbarry
borderbarry
Hubnester
  • Locked
Autopsy Round 9, 2024: Hawthorn v St.Kilda
33 34 35 36 37
Replies
908
Views
31K
Hubnester
Hubnester
Hubnester
  • Locked
Votes Round 4, 2024: Richmond v St.Kilda
Replies
17
Views
931
CursingFijian
CursingFijian
Hubnester
Autopsy Round 4, 2024: Richmond v St.Kilda
15 16 17 18 19
Replies
462
Views
21K
The_Steadier
The_Steadier
Hubnester
Votes Round 20, 2024 - St.Kilda v Essendon
Replies
8
Views
635
Kildonan
Kildonan
Hubnester
  • Locked
Votes Round 14, 2024: Brisbane v St.Kilda
Replies
7
Views
725
Brains Trust66
Brains Trust66
S
Autopsy Round 14, 2024: Brisbane v St.Kilda
16 17 18 19 20
Replies
487
Views
18K
tomjoad
tomjoad

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top