Baker's case is underway - discussion

saintsRrising · Tue 21 Aug 2007 7:43pm

Classic case of why club officials SHOULD NOT be witnesses.......

BIAS

Young Georgie · Tue 21 Aug 2007 7:47pm

joffaboy wrote: If I had a kid going to his school i would pull them out of his classes. He is not the type of character whom I would want influencing my children.

Bring on the spitballs kiddies!

FullMonty · Post: # 438520Post **FullMonty** » Tue 21 Aug 2007 7:50pm

No wonder lawyers cost so much.
They keep discussing a dead issue!
Just throw it out already!

joffaboy · Post: # 438523Post **joffaboy** » Tue 21 Aug 2007 7:51pm

saintDal wrote:Bakers account on the events is he is not sure where contact was made but he has a tender bump on his head. He was trying to bloke Farmers run when it happened.

So Baker has given himself up?

If he blocked his run wouldn't that be an illegal shepard off the ball?

RooandKosi · Post: # 438526Post **RooandKosi** » Tue 21 Aug 2007 7:53pm

nah in the Back of the head?????

no way that would be bruce lee type of s*** to hit a guy when you cant see him!!

saintDal · Post: # 438527Post **saintDal** » Tue 21 Aug 2007 7:53pm

joffaboy wrote:
saintDal wrote:Bakers account on the events is he is not sure where contact was made but he has a tender bump on his head. He was trying to bloke Farmers run when it happened.
So Baker has given himself up?

If he blocked his run wouldn't that be an illegal shepard off the ball?

I'm sure if Baker tried to block his run then Farmer should be good enough not to run into him.

Iceman234 · Post: # 438528Post **Iceman234** » Tue 21 Aug 2007 7:54pm

joffaboy wrote:
saintDal wrote:Bakers account on the events is he is not sure where contact was made but he has a tender bump on his head. He was trying to bloke Farmers run when it happened.
So Baker has given himself up?

If he blocked his run wouldn't that be an illegal shepard off the ball?

Or does that make it a charge?

But Farmer's not charged cos he was the one carried off.....

yipper · Post: # 438530Post **yipper** » Tue 21 Aug 2007 7:54pm

How absurd this is becoming!! Why is it still going??

St. Luke · Post: # 438532Post **St. Luke** » Tue 21 Aug 2007 7:55pm

Farmer should be up for charging a player behind play! 6 weeks I reckon! Baker has feelings as well - people seem to forget that!

Young Georgie · Tue 21 Aug 2007 7:57pm

joffaboy wrote:
saintDal wrote:Bakers account on the events is he is not sure where contact was made but he has a tender bump on his head. He was trying to bloke Farmers run when it happened.
So Baker has given himself up?

If he blocked his run wouldn't that be an illegal shepard off the ball?

Don't have to make contact to block, defenders do it all the time to hinder run way before the ball comes in without penalty. Farmer may have more than likely sped up aggressively last minute to create the contact. Certainly one of the many grey areas we members will be paying for our legal team to sort out.

Life Long Saint · Tue 21 Aug 2007 7:59pm

joffaboy wrote:So Baker has given himself up?

If he blocked his run wouldn't that be an illegal shepard off the ball?

Yes it is illegal...it should have been a free kick.

Snakeman66 · Post: # 438541Post **Snakeman66** » Tue 21 Aug 2007 8:00pm

Ricky Nixon supports Bakes evidence.

Go Ricky.

saintDal · Post: # 438543Post **saintDal** » Tue 21 Aug 2007 8:01pm

Ricky Nixon called as a witness.

Said he saw it from a coorperate box and supports Bakers account.

St. Luke · Post: # 438545Post **St. Luke** » Tue 21 Aug 2007 8:03pm

Surely its out the door now????

What a complete balls-up!

Iceman234 · Post: # 438547Post **Iceman234** » Tue 21 Aug 2007 8:05pm

Does anyone know whether these witnesses were formally interviewed, statements taken, whether a brief of evidence (or AFL equivalent) was compiled, if it was reviewed, then a decision made.

Or was it a case of "it's Baker, there's an injury, staight to the tribunal". (yeah yeah Plugger66 but I subscribe to the conspiracy theory with interstate clubs - we do "seem" to get screwed)

And this is not tongue in cheek, has there been any of this revealed in the media or is this literally a witch hunt with witnesses coming out on the night?

Grimfang · Post: # 438551Post **Grimfang** » Tue 21 Aug 2007 8:06pm

Who is Baker's manager?

(Hoping it's not Nixon, could be viewed as tainted evidence if he is.)

{edited to add} No, he's not.

saintDal · Post: # 438552Post **saintDal** » Tue 21 Aug 2007 8:06pm

This has been going for 3 hours. What a joke.

Young Georgie · Tue 21 Aug 2007 8:07pm

Grimfang wrote:Who is Baker's manager?

(Hoping it's not Nixon, could be viewed as tainted evidence if he is.)

Who is Farmer's trainer - this is a farce!!

super dooper · Tue 21 Aug 2007 8:08pm

Grimfang wrote:Who is Baker's manager?

(Hoping it's not Nixon, could be viewed as tainted evidence if he is.)

Would be no difference in M.Voss giving evidence wouldnt it??

Well thats the way i see it, if he happens to be his manager

Sainterman · Post: # 438555Post **Sainterman** » Tue 21 Aug 2007 8:08pm

Nothing more than another AFL circus led by Dimwit and his ape side kick Ando

Snakeman66 · Post: # 438556Post **Snakeman66** » Tue 21 Aug 2007 8:10pm

super dooper wrote:
Grimfang wrote:Who is Baker's manager?

(Hoping it's not Nixon, could be viewed as tainted evidence if he is.)
Would be no difference in M.Voss giving evidence wouldnt it??

Well thats the way i see it, if he happens to be his manager

Does not manage either.

saintDal · Post: # 438557Post **saintDal** » Tue 21 Aug 2007 8:10pm

Kirkwood was given transcripts of Farmers and Bakers evidence before he presented his

joffaboy · Post: # 438558Post **joffaboy** » Tue 21 Aug 2007 8:11pm

More fix up by the AFl

Matt Thomson has said that lying barry Kirkwood has been given transcripts of the Farmer and the Baker evidence - against all precedent, this never happens.

More evidence that the AFL is corrupt and is trying to oust Baker so he wont carve up their darlng Judd.

Incredible how low these imbiciles will go.

plugger66 · Post: # 438559Post **plugger66** » Tue 21 Aug 2007 8:11pm

Sainterman wrote:Nothing more than another AFL circus led by Dimwit and his ape side kick Ando

Are they at the tribunal. Did they do the investigation. No and no. Lets wait and see what happens. who cares how long it goes for. And people saying why did it even go to the tribunal does every police case that goes to court are the person on trial always guilty. No.

Solar · Post: # 438560Post **Solar** » Tue 21 Aug 2007 8:13pm

illegal shepard, very happy to go back to the ground and let farmer have his kick, wont change the result, heck if he gets on it he might get a score

If this wasn't our players and our season on the line it would be funny