Who is suprised

This unofficial St Kilda Saints fan forum is for people of all ages to chat Saints Footy and all posts must be respectful.

Moderators: Saintsational Administrators, Saintsational Moderators

saintspremiers
Saintsational Legend
Posts: 25303
Joined: Tue 01 Feb 2005 4:25pm
Location: Trump Tower
Has thanked: 142 times
Been thanked: 284 times

Post: # 438003Post saintspremiers »

cowboy18 wrote:
Riewoldting wrote:
westcoastwizard wrote:Bakers charge is a joke I agree there is no video evidence. The AFL cannot based their charge on what a Fremantle Officisal said. They should charge Baker if there was an UNBIAS person who witnessed the incident.

But your club will fight the charge.
All witnesses are biased.

The tribunal has to calculate the probative value of the evidence having regard to the inherent bias of the witness.
I assume that's wholly subjective. Which I guess highlights the importance of "real" physical evidence over testimony?

Bah. Marvelous system.
so taking that legal stance, if all witnesses are biased, and the only witness credited for this case going forward is from Freo, where is the Right Hand to balance the Left Hand???????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????


Richter
SS Life Member
Posts: 3914
Joined: Wed 30 Nov 2005 1:18pm
Location: Elwood

Post: # 438087Post Richter »

As far as I can gather, there seem to be about a dozen people who reckon they saw the incident - adding together a few callers to SEN, posters on here and Dockerland. All of them conflicting in what they claim to have seen.

Well, I'll give you an overwhelming non-conflicting account......

In front of 24000 people, 23988 people did not see anything untoward happen between Baker and Farmer. That is 99.95% of people there who give THE SAME STORY. If 99.95% of eyewitnesses give the same account of not seeing anything untoward then surely the logical explanation is that NOTHING UNTOWARD actually happened.

Seems like a straightforward case of "post hoc ergo propter hoc"

Latin for "after this, therefore because of this", is a logical fallacy which assumes or asserts that if one event happens after another, then the first must be the cause of the second.

Post hoc is a particularly tempting error because temporal sequence appears to be integral to causality. The fallacy lies in coming to a conclusion based solely on the order of events, rather than taking into account other factors that might rule out the connection


Hird... The unflushable one is now... just a turd...
User avatar
Riewoldting
SS Life Member
Posts: 2883
Joined: Thu 05 May 2005 1:34am
Location: Perth WA

Post: # 438088Post Riewoldting »

Richter wrote:In front of 24000 people, 23988 people did not see anything untoward happen between Baker and Farmer.
So who are the two who did?


Image
"To be or not to be" - William Shakespeare
"To be is to do" - Immanuel Kant
"Do be do be do" - Frank Sinatra
Richter
SS Life Member
Posts: 3914
Joined: Wed 30 Nov 2005 1:18pm
Location: Elwood

Post: # 438091Post Richter »

24000 - 23988 = 12, no? :D :wink:

Anyhow, I think even 12 eyewitnesses (all with conflicting accounts) is over the mark.

It is really quite incredible to me that there is NO actual compelling eyewitness evidence here. Isn't it just bleeding obvious for Pete's sake...... It's because there was nothing incriminating that actually happened for people to be able to see.


Hird... The unflushable one is now... just a turd...
User avatar
Riewoldting
SS Life Member
Posts: 2883
Joined: Thu 05 May 2005 1:34am
Location: Perth WA

Post: # 438093Post Riewoldting »

Richter wrote:24000 - 23988 = 12, no? :D :wink:
No. That's just what the liberal media wants you to believe. :wink:


Image
"To be or not to be" - William Shakespeare
"To be is to do" - Immanuel Kant
"Do be do be do" - Frank Sinatra
saint66au
Saintsational Legend
Posts: 17003
Joined: Tue 09 Mar 2004 9:03pm
Contact:

Post: # 438184Post saint66au »

temporal sequence appears to be integral to causality
I think you might be watching a bit too much Dr Who and Torchwood :-) 8-) :idea:


Image

THE BUBBLE HAS BURST

2011 player sponsor
User avatar
saintsRrising
Saintsational Legend
Posts: 30037
Joined: Mon 15 Mar 2004 11:07am
Location: Melbourne
Has thanked: 701 times
Been thanked: 1212 times

Post: # 438186Post saintsRrising »

Richter wrote:24000 - 23988 = 12, no? :D :wink:

Anyhow, I think even 12 eyewitnesses (all with conflicting accounts) is over the mark.

It is really quite incredible to me that there is NO actual compelling eyewitness evidence here. Isn't it just bleeding obvious for Pete's sake...... It's because there was nothing incriminating that actually happened for people to be able to see.
Indeed....



And with the trainer....with him sitting down on the boundary line he would not have had a good view...at best he was half a ground from the incident....and as he was at the bounday most likely sitting down his sightline would have been looking up....


Flying the World in comfort thanks to FF Points....
User avatar
goodie
Club Player
Posts: 1289
Joined: Sun 31 Dec 2006 6:41pm

Post: # 438187Post goodie »

rexy wrote:If the tribunal has any credibility it should throw the case out. Am I right to say that the AFL decide what goes up and then the tribunal has the opportunity to look at it on the night and say based on the evidence there is no case to answer.

I dont even see where they could start the case on the night, Jeff what happened?....I dont know. Steve what happened?............he just fell. Does anyone else have any evidence?....................No............Case dismissed.
Unfortunately you lost me there, tribunal lost the last of its credibility when it let Barry Hall play in the Grand Final

I'm already braced for yet another bull**** decision against us[/b]


User avatar
riccardo
Saintsational Legend
Posts: 6952
Joined: Wed 10 Mar 2004 7:44am
Location: Jason Gram - Michael Tuck Medalist 2008

Post: # 438226Post riccardo »

SDisgusting to charge someone without evidence, the case wouldn't hold up in any court of law in the world.

Luckily for the AFL, the legal merits of any charges will not be discussed, as they don't have to prove or disprove any allegations, its thier word against ours.

When they believe a waste of skin and organs like Farmer is little Mr innocent, I'd be incredibly concerned.


Image

Image
St DAC
SS Hall of Fame
Posts: 2119
Joined: Tue 28 Sep 2004 7:43pm
Location: Gippsland
Has thanked: 3 times
Been thanked: 4 times

Post: # 438227Post St DAC »

Politically, the AFL have to be seen to do something about a player removed form the game concussed and bleeding. So they have; hence Bake's charge. It still remains to be seen if he's actually transgressed or not; that's what the tribunal hearing is for. Rather than pre-empt it let's see what happens; he may yet have no case to answer.

How much credence is given to an opposition trainers' evidence is yet to be seen.


User avatar
st_Trav_ofWA
Saintsational Legend
Posts: 8886
Joined: Wed 13 Sep 2006 7:10pm
Location: Perth
Contact:

Post: # 438228Post st_Trav_ofWA »

does the TRYbunal hold the same rules of the Criminal law system ?
correct me if im wrong but dont they have to prove "beyond reasonable doubt" that he is guilty ? or is that not part of the TRYbunal? if it is it would seem that it is then a reasonable assumption that Farmer may have triped and hit his nose on the turf so therefor isnt that a reasonable doubt on his guilt ?
please any one with a legal background correct me if im wrong


"The team that wins in the most positions and makes the least amount of mistakes, usually wins the game." -- Allan Jeans

http://westernsaints.wordpress.com/
Duggie
Club Player
Posts: 583
Joined: Mon 04 Oct 2004 5:53pm
Location: Labrador Qld
Contact:

Post: # 438234Post Duggie »

Do witnesses at the Tribunal swear on oath?
If not then can the "staffer's" evidence be taken as truth?
And whose word can be taken as truthful? Bakes or The Whiz?
Saints have got plenty of legal argument to fight this and win. The Filth would!! :lol: :lol:


A Saint Forever!
User avatar
Mr X from the West
Club Player
Posts: 1239
Joined: Wed 10 Mar 2004 5:58pm
Location: Subiaco

Post: # 438276Post Mr X from the West »

It is the "legality"of this case that worries me enormously.

There is plenty of recent history to suggest that the AFL will decide on the desired outcome and work back from there. (eg Sirengate, headland/Selowood, Chick/Carr, etc). If that means guilty until proven innocent, then so be it as far as they are concerned.

They will go out of their way to find Baker guilty of something, make no mistake. In doing so, they will not create any new "precedent" because there is no such thing as precedent with the tribunal, they just make it up as they go along.

What makes me puke more is the way the Fremantle FC go about their business. Any other club would have told their "Melbourne based trainer" to pull his big, fat head in. There is a well established mechanism for paying back clubs for previous wrong doings - the Pies have been seeking on field retribution for over 30 years since the Greening/O'Dea incident, which is their right.

The less we see of this grubby, pathetic dobbing from Clubs like the Dockers the better.


"Blow out the candle I will burn again tomorrow"
congorozides
Club Player
Posts: 1129
Joined: Thu 16 Sep 2004 5:32pm
Has thanked: 18 times
Been thanked: 30 times

Post: # 438278Post congorozides »

saint patrick wrote:Ditto and well said Joffa...It is imperrative that the club is contacted by every saintsational member either by phone or email[reception@saints.com.au] to demand that the club takes action [Legal if necessary]over this farce.

As I said this is the last straw and

WE MUST TAKE A STAND AND SAY ENOUGH IS ENOUGH!!! :evil: :evil: :evil:
poor old receptionists always cop it. I say we go for Anderson. Im sure hes involved in this.


joffaboy
Saintsational Legend
Posts: 20200
Joined: Tue 09 Mar 2004 1:57pm
Been thanked: 1 time

Post: # 438282Post joffaboy »

St DAC wrote:Politically, the AFL have to be seen to do something about a player removed form the game concussed and bleeding.
Too bad they didn't do anything when

1) Lenny was thrown into a fence and broke his arm
2) Riewoldt was throat punched
3) Riewoldt was bumped twice on his broken collarbone
4)Kosi got his skull fractured
5) Luke Ball got his face smashed in

but wait......

they are Saints players so who cares?????


Lance or James??

There comes a point in every man's life when he has to say, "Enough is enough." For me, that time is now. I have been dealing with claims that I cheated and had an unfair advantage in <redacted>. Over the past three years, I have been subjected to a <redacted>investigation followed by <redacted> witch hunt. The toll this has taken on my family, and my work for <redacted>and on me leads me to where I am today – finished with this nonsense. (Oops just got a spontaneous errection <unredacted>)
HarveysDeciple

Post: # 438284Post HarveysDeciple »

joffaboy wrote:
St DAC wrote:Politically, the AFL have to be seen to do something about a player removed form the game concussed and bleeding.
Too bad they didn't do anything when

1) Lenny was thrown into a fence and broke his arm
2) Riewoldt was throat punched
3) Riewoldt was bumped twice on his broken collarbone
4)Kosi got his skull fractured
5) Luke Ball got his face smashed in

but wait......

they are Saints players so who cares?????
you also forgot to mention Maguire being punched in the stomach by a trained boxer in 05 :wink:


saintspremiers
Saintsational Legend
Posts: 25303
Joined: Tue 01 Feb 2005 4:25pm
Location: Trump Tower
Has thanked: 142 times
Been thanked: 284 times

Post: # 438298Post saintspremiers »

The tribunal and AFL are pissed off re the loophole that allowed Bakes last time to collect carryover points from 2 charges in one week that totalled over 100 points......that in their mind is as good enough reason to do all that is possible to see Bakes get rubbed out this time.


User avatar
yipper
SS Life Member
Posts: 3967
Joined: Wed 10 Mar 2004 8:18am
Location: Gippsland
Been thanked: 10 times

Post: # 438305Post yipper »

It's just another example of the media dictating to the AFL what should and shouldn't be going to the tribunal!!

If there had have been no hysteria from the media and certain "commentators" - then this would have been overlooked on the grounds of no footage - no case.


I want to stand for something. I'm a loyal person and I think at the end of my career it will be great to look back and know that I'm a St Kilda person for life.
- Nick Riewoldt. May 19th 2009.
Leo.J
SS Life Member
Posts: 3116
Joined: Sun 27 Mar 2005 8:29pm
Has thanked: 9 times
Been thanked: 66 times

Post: # 438322Post Leo.J »

Freo have about 43,000 members.
WC have about 45,000 members.
We have 30,000.

By suspending Baker the AFL will be pleasing at least 60,000 more supporters, with the AFL it always comes down to the bottom line.

Its never about the rules or justice it about the $$$.


Richter
SS Life Member
Posts: 3914
Joined: Wed 30 Nov 2005 1:18pm
Location: Elwood

Post: # 438374Post Richter »

saint66au wrote:
temporal sequence appears to be integral to causality
I think you might be watching a bit too much Dr Who and Torchwood :-) 8-) :idea:
Ok, you got me! The definition of pheph is from wikipedia! Not sure what Torchwood is, but Ah, the Good Doctor! What great memories of a British childhood spent watching Jo Pertwee and Tom Baker (now the voice behind Little Britain!) as the Good Doctor!


Hird... The unflushable one is now... just a turd...
St DAC
SS Hall of Fame
Posts: 2119
Joined: Tue 28 Sep 2004 7:43pm
Location: Gippsland
Has thanked: 3 times
Been thanked: 4 times

Post: # 438399Post St DAC »

joffaboy wrote:Too bad they didn't do anything when

1) Lenny was thrown into a fence and broke his arm
2) Riewoldt was throat punched
3) Riewoldt was bumped twice on his broken collarbone
4)Kosi got his skull fractured
5) Luke Ball got his face smashed in

but wait......

they are Saints players so who cares?????
1. Agree - travesty.
2. Not true ... Scarlett was reported, got off; was given "benefit of the doubt" (not that I had any doubt)
3. Wasn't unduly rough play ... Hammer has done similar for no charge.
4. Didn't you and I debate this? Didn't you say "no report"? :? You've changed your tune ...
5. Fair bump on Ball. He should have been more aware. Pretty much a perfect shirtfront.

On Baker, I would have thought no evidence == no charge. And I'd give no credence to a Freo "official" due to bias. But clearly I'm not running the tribunal ... He may still get off though.


plugger66
Saintsational Legend
Posts: 50626
Joined: Mon 26 Feb 2007 8:15pm
Location: oakleigh

Post: # 438402Post plugger66 »

St DAC wrote:
joffaboy wrote:Too bad they didn't do anything when

1) Lenny was thrown into a fence and broke his arm
2) Riewoldt was throat punched
3) Riewoldt was bumped twice on his broken collarbone
4)Kosi got his skull fractured
5) Luke Ball got his face smashed in

but wait......

they are Saints players so who cares?????
1. Agree - travesty.
2. Not true ... Scarlett was reported, got off; was given "benefit of the doubt" (not that I had any doubt)
3. Wasn't unduly rough play ... Hammer has done similar for no charge.
4. Didn't you and I debate this? Didn't you say "no report"? :? You've changed your tune ...
5. Fair bump on Ball. He should have been more aware. Pretty much a perfect shirtfront.

On Baker, I would have thought no evidence == no charge. And I'd give no credence to a Freo "official" due to bias. But clearly I'm not running the tribunal ... He may still get off though.
thank goodness someone who can see with both eyes.


saint66au
Saintsational Legend
Posts: 17003
Joined: Tue 09 Mar 2004 9:03pm
Contact:

Post: # 438469Post saint66au »

Richter wrote:
saint66au wrote:
temporal sequence appears to be integral to causality
I think you might be watching a bit too much Dr Who and Torchwood :-) 8-) :idea:
Ok, you got me! The definition of pheph is from wikipedia! Not sure what Torchwood is, but Ah, the Good Doctor! What great memories of a British childhood spent watching Jo Pertwee and Tom Baker (now the voice behind Little Britain!) as the Good Doctor!
Sorry..appallingly off-topic...but Torchwood ( anagram of Dr Who) is the Dr Who spin off currently buried at midnight on Ch 10. If you reckon you'd like your Dr Who MA rated with lashings of sex and violence..give it a try!!!


Image

THE BUBBLE HAS BURST

2011 player sponsor
Post Reply