MRP / Trib. You have got to be friggin kidding me

Remove this Banner Ad

Words cannot describe how shocked I am, and I imagine every Saints supporter and possibly the whole footy world is.
 

Log in to remove this ad.

is it actualy 12 weeks hes been suspended for ? I keep hearing between 7-14 from diffrent sources

I think he needed to get something but it should of been 2-4 weeks .12 is far too much and cant be described as anything but a joke
 
zuzu_1976 said:
No, not really.

Baker is a gutless, sniping dog.
Click to expand...

what a hopeless comment. Baker, love or hate him, can not be called gutless for squaring up to somebody time and again. He takes his medicine if it is given to him.

And as for sniping, I don't even know where to start with how wrong that comment is. Do you even know what a sniper is? They certainly don't get in your face.
 
As as a non Saint supporter my initial reaction was shock, however upon reflection its understandable when viewing each separate incident and accumulating the weeks for Each incident. Unfortunately this is a precedent for the AFL to stop the niggling taggers. Unlucky but fair
 
Ridiculous verdict.

Hall - 8 weeks
Baker - 12 weeks


If you're on the field, you're 100%. Penalising him extra because of the 'malice' of hitting a broken hand is balderdash. Punish him for hitting, yes. That is ok. That'll be low impact - 1 week. This verdict is absolutely ridiculous.

FU Demetriou
 
chenyan said:
Ridiculous verdict.

Hall - 8 weeks
Baker - 12 weeks


If you're on the field, you're 100%. Penalising him extra because of the 'malice' of hitting a broken hand is balderdash. Punish him for hitting, yes. That is ok. That'll be low impact - 1 week. This verdict is absolutely ridiculous.

FU Demetriou
Click to expand...

This....i dont often agree with hawks supporters, but good call sir
 
DoggyStyle said:
As as a non Saint supporter my initial reaction was shock, however upon reflection its understandable when viewing each separate incident and accumulating the weeks for Each incident. Unfortunately this is a precent for the AFL to stop the niggling taggers. Unlucky but fair
Click to expand...

But Doggie that is the whole point the AFL doesn't give a shit about precedence and consistency. If it did we would all be able to wear it but it doesn't and its clubs like the Saints ,Dogs, North and until recently the Cats, who are only considered to be there to make up the numbers and as such to be treated in anyway the AFL wants. In this case it is the AFL sending a message to the Mum's telling them all is safe and sound in AFL land. This would not have happened if it was an interstate team or the Pies, Blues etc. No hold fire and then whack the Saints to show the example. :mad:
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

DoggyStyle said:
As as a non Saint supporter my initial reaction was shock, however upon reflection its understandable when viewing each separate incident and accumulating the weeks for Each incident. Unfortunately this is a precent for the AFL to stop the niggling taggers. Unlucky but fair
Click to expand...

The AFL should really of come out after the Hall-Thompson incident and told everyone that they are stamping it out and if you do it you will be suspended. That would have stopped it before all of this.

As for the seperate incidents if you break it down, Baker got 3 weeks per charge, the exact same as Stevie J got for elbowing Baker in the eye. Can anyone seriously say what Baker did was worth the same as what Stevie J did. Because if they do then they seriously dont know a thing about football.
 
DoggyStyle said:
As as a non Saint supporter my initial reaction was shock, however upon reflection its understandable when viewing each separate incident and accumulating the weeks for Each incident. Unfortunately this is a precent for the AFL to stop the niggling taggers. Unlucky but fair
Click to expand...

Conduct;
Intentional: Yes, he intended to strike, but will be argued as reckless "aimed at the chest, caught the chin / aimed to spook him, the bastard moved etc" which would immediately reduce all charges from 6 points to 5, as if everyone who struck was deemed intentional then you would not have people getting off on striking what with it carrying 3 activation points.

Misconduct charge altered to a fine (Hall headlock precedent and absence of definition of "injured player" creating doubt in the laying of charges that are not financial. Speculation; "if I flex my hand and feign injury on the field are players disallowed to touch my hand despite obvious bullshit? If so how does one enforce this and charge retroactively based on decisions made at the time?")

5 (-1) activation points gives a level 2(-1) offense drawing 125 activation points (-100) which is then increased by 50% to 187.5 points and a 1 match ban.

x3

You then have a possible 9 -12 week scenario, through simply contesting the intent of the strikes to 3 weeks flat (misconduct altered to fine) and you have a far more reasonable outcome for the incidents.
 
I really don't think people should come on the Saints board and start insulting one of their players, do that on the main board.

As for the verdict, 12 weeks is definitely very rough, but he did sock Stevie J a few times and was a tad more than a pest.
 
When you break it down into each individual incident..and Bakers record you realise that it's not overly harsh.....seen worse get less, like the Eagles player who broke a Dees player's jaw in a NAB cup game and didn't even get cited.

I think the MRP are making a statement regarding taggers who push the envelope ..and i think we all agree that Baker pushes the envelope.
 
aussiethunda said:
The AFL should really of come out after the Hall-Thompson incident and told everyone that they are stamping it out and if you do it you will be suspended. That would have stopped it before all of this.

As for the seperate incidents if you break it down, Baker got 3 weeks per charge, the exact same as Stevie J got for elbowing Baker in the eye. Can anyone seriously say what Baker did was worth the same as what Stevie J did. Because if they do then they seriously dont know a thing about football.
Click to expand...

Maybe, although the length of suspension is as much as anything because of his carry over points and poor record, which he knew before he went onto the field on friday night. I'm not saying I agree with that part of the system, I'm simply saying I don't think he can claim ignorance about it.
 
I honestly thought this was someone having a joke when I first heard about it, then I checked the calender and realised it wasn't April 1st.

This suspension is beyond a joke and completely out of whack compared to other suspensions. How on earth can Baker get more for niggling with a few slaps or jumper punches than Hall got for kinghitting Staker and knocking him unconcious or Solomon for kinghitting Ling and breaking his jaw or even Johnson for an elbow to the face that required stitches? Staggering.

I don't care about all this bullshit about loading for a poor record, that suspension is a complete joke, it will virtually end Baker's season.

I can guarantee that all the opposition supporters trying to justify this suspension now never thought he would get anywhere near this many weeks. If they did they are lying.

I hope the club fights this suspension every way they can. Absolutely sick of this inconsistent MRP bullshit that we always seem to be on the wrong end of every time.
 
Ruanaidh said:
Was not a good look. This sort of behavior needs to be stamped out but I would have thought 4 weeks would have been sufficient.
Click to expand...

What? Why?

I thought it was great to see two blokes having a good old fashioned duel for 100 minutes. They both gave as good as they got (SJ maybe more so) and at the end of it they shook hands and had a laugh.

It's a ****ing MAN'S game.

How a bloke can get suspended for 'interfering with an injured player' who is still out on the ground playing the bloody game defies logic. Does this mean anyone who tackled him could get suspended too?

SJ was on the field and participating - therefore he is not considered injured. He was being tagged by a bloke who is pushing the boundaries for the benefit of his club. What are they going too do next, ban taggers?

Then you have that filthy mercenary Judd who gets off despite hitting Pavlich.

I'm almost over this ****ing game. I'll go and watch the soccer if this is the sort of shit that is going to become part of our sport. After what they did to Buddy - now this - I reckon the game is STUFFED.

FU Demetriou, you fat ****. Give me my game back.

An absolute joke. :thumbsdown:
 
Guessing game. Deal or no deal and baker opened the wrong case
first.

Because of his really bad record doesn't help, he may be a saint
but he ain't no angel!
 

Remove this Banner Ad

MRP / Trib. You have got to be friggin kidding me

Similar threads

Mr Platinum
RIP The great John Beveridge
Replies
2
Views
578
worbod
worbod
bergholt
  • Poll
Prediction Who will be off the list before 2025 starts?
2 3 4 5
Replies
101
Views
8K
lethalsaints
lethalsaints
Chief
Win Prizes St Kilda Tipping 2024 - Now Open - 🔥 - Reply IN when you join
Replies
10
Views
834
Left Back 1
L
George
Memberships 2024 St.Kilda Membership Thread (Final total: 60,332 - New club record!)
9 10 11 12 13
Replies
308
Views
32K
sammm
sammm
Mat Mann
Toast Welcome to St Kilda Jackson Macrae
2 3 4 5 6
Replies
134
Views
8K
ScrappyDo
ScrappyDo
S
  • Locked
1 list spot open in the MSD, what position do we need to fill the most or do we pick best available or do we pick a mature aged player.
5 6 7 8 9
Replies
211
Views
10K
Hubnester
Hubnester
Mat Mann
AFLW Rnd 7b St Kilda v Melbourne Sun 3:05pm
Replies
21
Views
738
BrutThough
BrutThough

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top