MRP - Ziebell, Greenwood, Thomas and ARMO?

[F_Q_F]

what he's got to lose is 2 weeks next time instead of 1.

Oh I thought I read earlier it doesn't matter if he gets found guilty.

If thats the case just cop the 1 week, not ideal but rather have him available for a final.

[satchmo]

It was a sling tackle. Called it at the time, adams landed on his head. Much like the Kosi / Duncan incident. But adams wasn't concussed

Yup - in light of the sling tackle crackdown one is reasonable.

Thomas should have got at least three.

Ziebel 3 is reasonable.

Harvey should have got ten for bringing the game into disrepute

ka-boomer should get two weeks to have his head gasket replaced.

[saintbrat]

He might have a chance at the tribunal, didn't pin the arm in the tackle. Can't see clearly from the vision if his head hit the ground either.

What has he got to loose...

what he's got to lose is 2 weeks next time instead of 1.

David will not get two- Points only come to 185

In summary, due to his carry-over points for a previous offence, his one-game sanction must remain at one game, even with an early plea.

Based on the video evidence available and a medical report from North Melbourne, the incident was assessed as negligent conduct (one point), low impact (one point) and high contact (two points). This is a total of four activation points, resulting in a classification of a level one offence, drawing 125 demerit points and a one-match sanction. He has no existing good or bad record. He has 60 demerit points carried over from within the last 12 points, increasing his penalty to 185 points and a one-match sanction. An early plea reduces the sanction by 25 per cent to 138.75 points and a one-match sanction.

but My query is when they say-

He has no existing good or bad record.

yet he has a record of 60 points...

[plugger66]

He might have a chance at the tribunal, didn't pin the arm in the tackle. Can't see clearly from the vision if his head hit the ground either.

What has he got to loose...

what he's got to lose is 2 weeks next time instead of 1.

David will not get two- Points only come to 185

In summary, due to his carry-over points for a previous offence, his one-game sanction must remain at one game, even with an early plea.

Based on the video evidence available and a medical report from North Melbourne, the incident was assessed as negligent conduct (one point), low impact (one point) and high contact (two points). This is a total of four activation points, resulting in a classification of a level one offence, drawing 125 demerit points and a one-match sanction. He has no existing good or bad record. He has 60 demerit points carried over from within the last 12 points, increasing his penalty to 185 points and a one-match sanction. An early plea reduces the sanction by 25 per cent to 138.75 points and a one-match sanction.

but My query is when they say-

He has no existing good or bad record.

yet he has a record of 60 points...

With the last part dont you get an extra 10% for each week you are suspended. He didnt get enough points previously to get a week so he doesnt have a bad record. Not sure if that is correct but that may be it.

[perfectionist]

...With the last part dont you get an extra 10% for each week you are suspended. He didnt get enough points previously to get a week so he doesnt have a bad record. Not sure if that is correct but that may be it.

That's correct. He doesn't have a bad record because he wasn't suspended. He doesn't have a good record because he was reprimanded.

Also, good records take longer to accrue than bad records. The former take five years and the latter three years, but I guess that so many of the dummies who have contributed to this thread won't have a clue as to what I'm taking about. Things have reached a sorry state. The only person who seems to make sense any more is plugger66!

[saintbrat]

...With the last part dont you get an extra 10% for each week you are suspended. He didnt get enough points previously to get a week so he doesnt have a bad record. Not sure if that is correct but that may be it.

That's correct. He doesn't have a bad record because he wasn't suspended. He doesn't have a good record because he was reprimanded.

Also, good records take longer to accrue than bad records. The former take five years and the latter three years, but I guess that so many of the dummies who have contributed to this thread won't have a clue as to what I'm taking about. Things have reached a sorry state. The only person who seems to make sense any more is plugger66!

Thanks for the explanations

[battye]

Dead-set joke that one! Just watched the video linked to in a post above (I didn't remember seeing that live)... it was a good tackle!

Should definitely appeal it.

[Rosco]

He might have a chance at the tribunal, didn't pin the arm in the tackle. Can't see clearly from the vision if his head hit the ground either.

What has he got to loose...

what he's got to lose is 2 weeks next time instead of 1.

David will not get two- Points only come to 185

no, i said next time. it's not his first offence and most likely not his last, so a longer suspension next time is what he has to lose due to 85 carry over points instead of 38ish.

[saintbrat]

ok

[DWOODROW]

What a poor effort to get a week for dave. You could have at least made him come off the ground.

FFS, that was soft to get a week for. Good tackle but no way is that a tackle to be suspended for.

What a joke. I would have rather he got a week for acting when he got greenwood to the face.

[desertsaint]

...With the last part dont you get an extra 10% for each week you are suspended. He didnt get enough points previously to get a week so he doesnt have a bad record. Not sure if that is correct but that may be it.

That's correct. He doesn't have a bad record because he wasn't suspended. He doesn't have a good record because he was reprimanded.

afl purgatory?

[saint tash]

The Daisy Thomas report is a joke. He hardly did anything, it was just an accident. He should appeal.

Was silly. Had carryover points and left the ground. Had to be 2.

Anyways, rumour has it that they r going to do the old Arizona trick again and send him away for a week or so to fine tune.

Not like they can't cover him.

[Old Mate]

The Daisy Thomas report is a joke. He hardly did anything, it was just an accident. He should appeal.

Was silly. Had carryover points and left the ground. Had to be 2.

Anyways, rumour has it that they r going to do the old Arizona trick again and send him away for a week or so to fine tune.

Not like they can't cover him.

It's all starting to unravel for the Filth. MM and Fat Eddie's relationship in tatters, the Shaw incident and now Daisy being outed. I can't see the Saints push them however it's looking more and more likely that we will see the Hawks do another Bradbury. I wouldn't be too disappointed.

[saint tash]

The Daisy Thomas report is a joke. He hardly did anything, it was just an accident. He should appeal.

Was silly. Had carryover points and left the ground. Had to be 2.

Anyways, rumour has it that they r going to do the old Arizona trick again and send him away for a week or so to fine tune.

Not like they can't cover him.

It's all starting to unravel for the Filth. MM and Fat Eddie's relationship in tatters, the Shaw incident and now Daisy being outed. I can't see the Saints push them however it's looking more and more likely that we will see the Hawks do another Bradbury. I wouldn't be too disappointed.

The Shaw incident all those weeks ago??? All done and dusted. Due back first final. Handy inclusion me thinks, add Ball, Wellingham, Tarrant and Maxwell and I don't see much unravelling there.

[Old Mate]

The Daisy Thomas report is a joke. He hardly did anything, it was just an accident. He should appeal.

Was silly. Had carryover points and left the ground. Had to be 2.

Anyways, rumour has it that they r going to do the old Arizona trick again and send him away for a week or so to fine tune.

Not like they can't cover him.

It's all starting to unravel for the Filth. MM and Fat Eddie's relationship in tatters, the Shaw incident and now Daisy being outed. I can't see the Saints push them however it's looking more and more likely that we will see the Hawks do another Bradbury. I wouldn't be too disappointed.

The Shaw incident all those weeks ago??? All done and dusted. Due back first final. Handy inclusion me thinks, add Ball, Wellingham, Tarrant and Maxwell and I don't see much unravelling there.

Looking very shaky for your mob

[saint tash]

The Daisy Thomas report is a joke. He hardly did anything, it was just an accident. He should appeal.

Was silly. Had carryover points and left the ground. Had to be 2.

Anyways, rumour has it that they r going to do the old Arizona trick again and send him away for a week or so to fine tune.

Not like they can't cover him.

It's all starting to unravel for the Filth. MM and Fat Eddie's relationship in tatters, the Shaw incident and now Daisy being outed. I can't see the Saints push them however it's looking more and more likely that we will see the Hawks do another Bradbury. I wouldn't be too disappointed.

The Shaw incident all those weeks ago??? All done and dusted. Due back first final. Handy inclusion me thinks, add Ball, Wellingham, Tarrant and Maxwell and I don't see much unravelling there.

Looking very shaky for your mob

[maverick]

The Daisy Thomas report is a joke. He hardly did anything, it was just an accident. He should appeal.

Was silly. Had carryover points and left the ground. Had to be 2.

Anyways, rumour has it that they r going to do the old Arizona trick again and send him away for a week or so to fine tune.

Not like they can't cover him.

It's all starting to unravel for the Filth. MM and Fat Eddie's relationship in tatters, the Shaw incident and now Daisy being outed. I can't see the Saints push them however it's looking more and more likely that we will see the Hawks do another Bradbury. I wouldn't be too disappointed.

The Shaw incident all those weeks ago??? All done and dusted. Due back first final. Handy inclusion me thinks, add Ball, Wellingham, Tarrant and Maxwell and I don't see much unravelling there.

Get these people of this site please, if I want to read this shite I would buy the Collingwood Sun...

[kosifantutti23]

The Daisy Thomas report is a joke. He hardly did anything, it was just an accident. He should appeal.

Not sure if serious.

[Thinline]

The Daisy Thomas report is a joke. He hardly did anything, it was just an accident. He should appeal.

Was silly. Had carryover points and left the ground. Had to be 2.

Anyways, rumour has it that they r going to do the old Arizona trick again and send him away for a week or so to fine tune.

Not like they can't cover him.

It's all starting to unravel for the Filth. MM and Fat Eddie's relationship in tatters, the Shaw incident and now Daisy being outed. I can't see the Saints push them however it's looking more and more likely that we will see the Hawks do another Bradbury. I wouldn't be too disappointed.

The Shaw incident all those weeks ago??? All done and dusted. Due back first final. Handy inclusion me thinks, add Ball, Wellingham, Tarrant and Maxwell and I don't see much unravelling there.

Get these people of this site please, if I want to read this shite I would buy the Collingwood Sun...

Hear f****** hear.

I mean as if it's not mindless enough lurking around your OWN club's fan forum...

[perfectionist]

The Daisy Thomas report is a joke. He hardly did anything, it was just an accident. He should appeal.

Not sure if serious.

Deadly serious. What's the worst that could happen if he loses the appeal? Only another week.

P.S. Refer to the finals system.

[desertsaint]

The Daisy Thomas report is a joke. He hardly did anything, it was just an accident. He should appeal.

Not sure if serious.

Deadly serious. What's the worst that could happen if he loses the appeal? Only another week.

P.S. Refer to the finals system.

pretty sure he the rest week won't count and he'd miss the prelim.
unless that's exactly what you meant. and in which case i agree!