Steven Baker has done double the damage that Barry Hall did

Remove this Banner Ad

If he broke his jaw though he wouldn't of been on the field....to continue to niggle.
Well thats Bakers fault.

He has 50% loading on each report because of prior, also weighting of each report

He will fight each one and they will probably drop the impact of the charges, etc and he will only end up with 5-7 weeks.

Currently as it stands with each report and the player in question, the 12/9 is fine. No need to panic, it just seems absurd at the moment, by tomorrow evening everyone will accept the weeks.

We didn't see the 12 weeks coming because we didn't know how many reports he would have.
 
This is a disgrace!

How could a bunch of love taps, that had NO dibilitating effects at all on Jonstone (other than annoy him) end with baker getting 12 weeks, while baker gets his eye closed up & off the ground for a qtr, and Jonstone gets 2 weeks???

This is madness.

The AFL clearly has biases and hidden agendas.

Judd deliberately elbows player, off the ground with 6 stitches in the face = no charge
Baker no harm to Jonstone = 12 weeks

Its a sham!
 

Log in to remove this ad.

On the Website it says - 14, if enter early plea he can get 9.

SJ elbow to face and he gets 2.

hm - is this described as anti football?

AFL are desperate to stop the Saints from winning a premiership.

You might be onto something there. If you look very closely at the footage of Riewoldt doing his hamstring against Collingwood, you can see Andrew Demetriou shooting Roo's hammy with a pea-shooter from behind the grassy knoll. :p

Ling, C Jones, A Selwood, Baker, Cornes and all the other taggers your about to become obselete. Taggers are just as good for footy as any other position, they are needed.

When was the last time you saw Ling or Cornes throw punches behind the play?
 
When players throw a punch or two, yep sure, a few weeks, when they bump high or clothesline someone, yep another couple....but if a dog comes along and tries to deliberately target an injured area than he deserves to get all the games thrown at him.

And please, this was exactly the same situation that happened when Riewoldt injured his shoulder in 2004 - when the lions deliberately targeted his shoulder.

The lucky one out of all this is the dog who tried to knock Jimmy Bartels arm after he hyper-extended his elbow and was coming off clearly in a lot of pain. NOt sure if it was Hayes or Dal Santo or whoever....but they should count there lucky stars that they aren't slapped with a massive suspension.

Mooney and Johnson got what they desereved, Baker deserves more in my opinion.

Well theres your predecent

Mal Michael - 0 Weeks
Brad Scott - 0 weeks
 
I really do hope no weeks have been given for the hand taps

You return to the field, you become fair game. Fraser Gehrig copped the same with his broken hand...be smarter, dont hang it out there :rolleyes:
 
To the people saying "he targetted an injury" harden up. Once you cross the line you are fair game injury or not.
Exactly. If you are going off the field for an injury, different story.
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

This is what you get when you put dweeby little accountants like Adrian Anderson in charge of the MRP.

I can just see the little dweeb sitting there with his calculator adding up all the charges and multiplying by x amount for a bad record then pressing equals and 14 weeks getting spat out.

Must be correct because his calculator says so. Who cares if the suspension is completely ridiculous and completely out of whack with all other suspensions? :rolleyes:

I hope St Kilda appeals against this shit every way possible. Absolute joke.
 
To the people saying "he targetted an injury" harden up. Once you cross the line you are fair game injury or not.

once people would have said the same thing about sniping tactics or racial abuse - if you're on the ground, you're fair game.

The AFL obviously want to change that. It's not a good look at all having someone "target" someone's injury; it's a shit look. It's also unsporting IMO.

I wouldn't be sad to see the likes of Baker & his tactics eradicated from the game. The only issue I have is the rampant inconsistency of the MRP.

I still can't believe Judd got off
 
I seriously question the umpires on the night, they could have poured water on this farce between these two by paying a couple of free's, the whole thing just snowballed, just ridiculous.

this mess is on the umpires head IMO
 
Well thats Bakers fault.

He has 50% loading on each report because of prior, also weighting of each report

He will fight each one and they will probably drop the impact of the charges, etc and he will only end up with 5-7 weeks.

Currently as it stands with each report and the player in question, the 12/9 is fine. No need to panic, it just seems absurd at the moment, by tomorrow evening everyone will accept the weeks.

We didn't see the 12 weeks coming because we didn't know how many reports he would have.
Spot on. :thumbsu:

The sky isn't falling.
 
Must be correct because his calculator says so. Who cares if the suspension is completely ridiculous and completely out of whack with all other suspensions? :rolleyes:

if I drive down Eastlink to Frankston, and do 120k the whole way, & get snapped by three speed cameras, what penalty do I get? One speeding ticket or 3?

Do I complain that it's completely unfair that I rack up more than 12 demerit points & lose my license?
 
I seriously question the umpires on the night, they could have poured water on this farce between these two by paying a couple of free's, the whole thing just snowballed, just ridiculous.

this mess is on the umpires head IMO

Agree with this but unfortunately the Cats don't get much from the men in white these days. I guess it's a legacy of being the dominant team for the last few years.
 
This is what you get when you put dweeby little accountants like Adrian Anderson in charge of the MRP.

I can just see the little dweeb sitting there with his calculator adding up all the charges and multiplying by x amount for a bad record then pressing equals and 14 weeks getting spat out.

Must be correct because his calculator says so. Who cares if the suspension is completely ridiculous and completely out of whack with all other suspensions? :rolleyes:

I hope St Kilda appeals against this shit every way possible. Absolute joke.
If he wasn't Stevie 'dog' Baker he would have got 9 weeks (225,225,225,125) and 6 weeks early plea (168.75,168.75,168.75,93.75)

And that is what we should be arguing.
 
How hard is it to work out for people, he got cited for 4 seperate incidents. 4. Not 1 like Hall did but 4. He's got priors which add loading. He struck Johnson in the face twice and once in the stomach. Love taps maybe but he still committed the offence. I'm assuming that each subsequent offence increase the loading, hence the large number of weeks.

He did the crime, he has to cop what's coming.

Hall didn't break Stakers Jaw either people. f$%k me, if you are going to carry on at least get your facts straight.

johnson copped his right whack but had a better record at the tribunal.
 

Remove this Banner Ad

Steven Baker has done double the damage that Barry Hall did

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top