Setanta O'Hailpin punches and kicks Cameron Cloke

[Zvim]

Re: Rules bent for Carlton

ah look , a semblance of intelligence

i look forward to being thrashed by your team as usual next friday

lol

I think we will be fielding a pretty young side so doubt it will be a thrashing, we normally do well against the blues in the pressure, tackling and contested football, NAB is typically pretty free flowing and not much pressure. Wouldn't be surprised if we lost this, we quite often bomb out fairly early, doesn't suit our normal gameplan I think.

 

[Waspy79]

Re: Rules bent for Carlton

The AFL is a joke. They apparently halve penalties in intra-club games and then double them in grand finals.

Sounds a bit like introducing two more boundary umpires half-way through a season or penalising a team a 50m penalty from the centre square for getting an interchange wrong. Don't even mention the new rushed-behind law. Shambles.

 

[Juddy88]

Re: Rules bent for Carlton

Apparently there were official AFL umpires umpiring the match, so therefore the AFL can act. Apparently.

Are there official umpires for other teams intraclub matches?

 

[estibador]

Re: Rules bent for Carlton

Are there official umpires for other teams intraclub matches?

I'm guessing there won't be anymore. Otherwise, now they've set a precedent, the next thing you know the AFL will be stretching their powers to reporting every trip or bump that slips high, or any other minor accident between teammates.

Why would you risk it if you were an AFL club? I'd tell the AFL to go **** themselves and wouldn't let them anywhere near the intraclub games. It's bad enough having to chance your luck at the MRP at the best of times without them sticking their unpredictable noses into intraclub affairs too.

 

[celtic_pride]

Re: Rules bent for Carlton

How were the rules bent or changed for Carlton, when something like this (a player charged and sentenced in an inter-club match by the AFL/MRP) has ever happened before ???

It's an strange quirk/perhaps flaw of the AFL System, but certainly not Carlton's fault ,and as a Blues fan, and Carlos fan, I'm delighted at the loophole ..

seems to be it's just a case of another bitter Richmond fan having a go to knock Carlton again, tall poppy syndrome at it's finest.

 

[ShinSplints]

Re: Rules bent for Carlton

stop complaining if carflton want him to play let him!!

Its great he suks!

 

[LoneStar]

Re: Rules bent for Carlton

I think the AFL have always allowed suspensions incurred during NAB Cup games to be served by sitting out subsequent NAB Cup games during the same season. But they haven't allowed suspensions to be served during other pre-season matches - like NAB Challenge games, or whatever they are called.
Issuing a suspension for an incident that occurred during an interclub practice match is ridiculously asinine. It's up to the Blues -as it is with any club- to deal with incidents that occur during training & practice matches.

 

[Tigersman]

Re: Rules bent for Carlton

How were the rules bent or changed for Carlton, when something like this (a player charged and sentenced in an inter-club match by the AFL/MRP) has ever happened before ???

It's an strange quirk/perhaps flaw of the AFL System, but certainly not Carlton's fault ,and as a Blues fan, and Carlos fan, I'm delighted at the loophole ..

seems to be it's just a case of another bitter Richmond fan having a go to knock Carlton again, tall poppy syndrome at it's finest.

As I said in an earlier post I did not start the thread to discuss Setanta's act or Carlton. I was pointing out the AFL rule on when the penalty should be served and asking why they have ignored their own guidelines.

The same question can be asked on the Maxwell charge.

(I dont see why this has been merged with the setanta thread.)

By the way, in order for this to be tall poppy syndrome Carlton actually have to be worthy of being held in high regard. Clearly the syndrome cannot be in effect in relation to the Blues.

 

[LoneStar]

Re: Rules bent for Carlton

As I said in an earlier post I did not start the thread to discuss Setanta's act or Carlton. I was pointing out the AFL rule on when the penalty should be served and asking why they have ignored their own guidelines.

The same question can be asked on the Maxwell charge.

(I dont see why this has been merged with the setanta thread.)

By the way, in order for this to be tall poppy syndrome Carlton actually have to be worthy of being held in high regard. Clearly the syndrome cannot be in effect in relation to the Blues.

I don't think rules were changed - it seems to me players suspended for actions in a NAB Cup game in previous seasons have been allowed to serve those suspensions while their clubs continued on in the NAB Cup.

Mods - WHY WAS THIS MERGED WITH THE SETANTA THREAD????
It isn't really the same discussion!