Legal counsel for the AFL, Andrew Tinney

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
GrumpyOne

Legal counsel for the AFL, Andrew Tinney

Post: # 441460Post GrumpyOne »

Quote:

"if you do the sort of thing Mr Baker did in this case, you do so at your own peril".


I think he was referring to the practise of telling the truth.


Class act, AFL.


kalsaint
Club Player
Posts: 1941
Joined: Sat 24 Apr 2004 10:24pm
Location: Perth WA
Has thanked: 1 time
Been thanked: 19 times

Post: # 441469Post kalsaint »

Thats all well and good but it needs application across the board not just in selected cases,

Their credibility here is very low IMO.


Midfield clearances and clear winners are needed to make an effective forward line.

You need to protect the ball handler to increase posession efficiency
User avatar
Kate
Club Player
Posts: 1174
Joined: Wed 07 Jul 2004 1:58pm
Location: Emerald
Has thanked: 133 times
Been thanked: 37 times

Post: # 441471Post Kate »

I bet Campbell Brown regrets his moment of honesty too.

James Hird can also testify that a fib is better than the truth when discussing McLaren.

There's also a growing list of coaches who have found that it's better to live with a few pimples on your tongue, than call it like it is when discussing umpiring.


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

Post: # 441473Post saintspremiers »

So it's obvious to all and sundry now.

NEVER tell the truth at the tribunal provided there won't be conflicting evidence.

Simple really isn't it?

How can they get you for lying if there isn't an alternative POV?


i am Melbourne Skies - sometimes Blue Skies, Grey Skies, even Partly Cloudy Skies.
BallBanger
Club Player
Posts: 789
Joined: Thu 25 Mar 2004 9:37pm

Post: # 441487Post BallBanger »

saintspremiers wrote:So it's obvious to all and sundry now.

NEVER tell the truth at the tribunal provided there won't be conflicting evidence.

Simple really isn't it?

How can they get you for lying if there isn't an alternative POV?
Its not just the tribunal....its also what gets referred to same from games. Did I see Lloyd cannon into someones back, I know he was pushed but he still took off and went straight for him crashing him to the ground....and several weeks ealier I seen him punch his oponent in the bread basket...not even the commentators referred back to it...one said oops and that was it.
There is so much corruption not just the AFL but the media/commentators

FFS the're blaming Baker for dobbing himself in...since when has blocking been a reportable offence?? Maybe farmer innitiated some of the force too as players don't like to be blocked and baker had his back turned.

I guess they will change the interpretation (now that another Saint has been hung under another first of its kind) so in future this farce won't happen again.....blocking is and has been happening for a very long time.

Where is Mike Sheean etc etc etc, don't want to know about it....he was more interested in canning him when he unfairly thought he decked him behind play.....

Patrick Smith is more interested in going on for wks about trivial shtt rather than attacking the real corrupt dealings of the lynching mob/fat cats


Post Reply