DOES THIS MEAN?

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

Post Reply
CURLY
Saintsational Legend
Posts: 9361
Joined: Fri 16 Feb 2007 3:24pm
Location: WARBURTON
Has thanked: 129 times
Been thanked: 1184 times

DOES THIS MEAN?

Post: # 441356Post CURLY »

Does the MRP panel now have to pass judgement on all blocks made during a game and pass verdict on all. The degree of impact obviously will vary but if they have now suspended one player for a off the ball block all players have to be reviewed and even minumum points have to be given. As a football lover I dont want to this happen but I cant see how they cannot.


NO IFS OR BUTS HARVS IS KING OF THE AFL
Go Sretnias Go
Club Player
Posts: 338
Joined: Tue 11 Apr 2006 12:16pm
Location: The Office.

Post: # 441362Post Go Sretnias Go »

Yes Curley they will, but only on St.KFC players. Interstate clubs in particular, will be exempt.


Once a Sainter always a Sainter.
User avatar
Saints94
SS Life Member
Posts: 3443
Joined: Wed 31 Jan 2007 10:47am
Location: NSW
Has thanked: 5 times
Been thanked: 1 time
Contact:

Post: # 441382Post Saints94 »

yes it does curly


JeffDunne

Post: # 441391Post JeffDunne »

Of course it doesn't.

What it means is the AFL will do nothing until a West Coast player flattens one of our players behind play. The AFL will then intervene and say they've changed their interpretation - this time no footage=no suspension.

Two weeks later, we'll see a Sydney player go down behind play, and they'll change their interpretations back again.

A bad liar always needs to tell more lies to cover their previous lies. The AFL are poor liars.


User avatar
meher baba
Saintsational Legend
Posts: 6928
Joined: Mon 14 Aug 2006 6:49am
Location: Tasmania
Has thanked: 1 time
Been thanked: 427 times

Post: # 441505Post meher baba »

What we might see is an increase in players defending what happened in terms of "I wasn't trying to lay a shepherd, I was simply stopping dead in my tracks so that I could watch where the ball was going".

Other than that, I don't think so. Still, it will be interesting to see what happens next time we get an accidental head clash more than 5 metres from the ball.


"It is useless to attempt to reason a man out of a thing he was never reasoned into."
- Jonathan Swift
spert
Saintsational Legend
Posts: 8841
Joined: Wed 29 Jun 2005 10:39pm
Location: A distant beach
Has thanked: 1 time
Been thanked: 386 times

Post: # 441594Post spert »

It means that when a player such as Baker gives his view of the "incident" he is deemed to be lying by the AFL. Clearly a premeditated outcome regardless of how much evidence was given.


CURLY
Saintsational Legend
Posts: 9361
Joined: Fri 16 Feb 2007 3:24pm
Location: WARBURTON
Has thanked: 129 times
Been thanked: 1184 times

Post: # 441610Post CURLY »

My main issue is that blocking has never been deemed a suspendable offence. Now that is every incident has to be graded with there ridiculous point system. Its the same with striking even a fairy tap gets viewed and graded.


NO IFS OR BUTS HARVS IS KING OF THE AFL
User avatar
SainterX1
Club Player
Posts: 211
Joined: Sun 21 Mar 2004 2:08am
Has thanked: 11 times
Been thanked: 2 times

Post: # 441621Post SainterX1 »

Does anyone remember a few years ago, Justin Murphy was playing at Essendon and put a block on Hamill. Aaron ran through him, and was reported. Don't remember what came of the report, but he was definitely hung, drawn and quartered by the media...

Just shows the changing interpretations by the AFL


Post Reply