Boyd targetting Harvey's hand
Moderators: Saintsational Administrators, Saintsational Moderators
-
- Club Player
- Posts: 718
- Joined: Fri 09 Apr 2004 1:04pm
- Has thanked: 26 times
- Been thanked: 31 times
Boyd targetting Harvey's hand
http://www.heraldsun.com.au/sport/afl/b ... 6097271727
They showed footage On The Couch of Boyd taking cheap shots at Harvey's broken thumb - isn't this exactly the same thing that Bakes did to Johnson and later (from video footage) got reported and harangued by that Tilley dickead for being weak and "against the spirit of the game" before being suspended?
Is there a difference between the two incidents that I'm overlooking? Surely if they're both on the ground and deemed fit to play then there can be no distinctions on the severity of the injuries or anything?
They showed footage On The Couch of Boyd taking cheap shots at Harvey's broken thumb - isn't this exactly the same thing that Bakes did to Johnson and later (from video footage) got reported and harangued by that Tilley dickead for being weak and "against the spirit of the game" before being suspended?
Is there a difference between the two incidents that I'm overlooking? Surely if they're both on the ground and deemed fit to play then there can be no distinctions on the severity of the injuries or anything?
The future's so bright I've got to wear shades...
- DWOODROW
- Club Player
- Posts: 1123
- Joined: Tue 10 Feb 2009 4:36pm
- Location: TOWNSVILLE
- Has thanked: 8 times
- Been thanked: 38 times
Re: Boyd targetting Harvey's hand
There is difference, Boyd plays for Bulldogs and not ST Kilda.Harvey To Hayes wrote:http://www.heraldsun.com.au/sport/afl/b ... 6097271727
They showed footage On The Couch of Boyd taking cheap shots at Harvey's broken thumb - isn't this exactly the same thing that Bakes did to Johnson and later (from video footage) got reported and harangued by that Tilley dickead for being weak and "against the spirit of the game" before being suspended?
Is there a difference between the two incidents that I'm overlooking? Surely if they're both on the ground and deemed fit to play then there can be no distinctions on the severity of the injuries or anything?
![Wink :wink:](./images/smilies/icon_wink.gif)
Only ST Kilda players are weak apparently
![Rolling Eyes :roll:](./images/smilies/icon_rolleyes.gif)
-
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 5062
- Joined: Sun 27 Feb 2005 2:30am
- Has thanked: 15 times
- Been thanked: 125 times
I'll throw in another one. In the Lions Geelong game on Sunday, a heavily bandaged Mitch Clark came back late after getting injured in the Brown death wish incident.
As soon as he came back he got involved in pursuing the ball towards the boundary line. When the pill went over the line he was clearly distressed - he couldn't even jog back to his position (the lame bloke in the square position).
On his way back, with the ball nowhere around, Harry Taylor began to bump into him. It was clearly designed to discomfort Clark and exploit the injury.
If he is the only one to be held to account for 2 rules, or interpretations, Stephen Baker should take out copyright over 2 laws of the game, 1) don't stop running and let a bloke run into the back of you and 2) don't attempt to discomfort an opponent who may, or may not, be injured.
The bureaucrat who potted Baker for his failure to adhere to the spirit of the game should be similarly admonished for his role in a quasi judicial process that seeks to punish, or excuse, on the basis of who someone is, rather than what they have done. Judicial processes, quasi or not, can NEVER discriminate on any basis, if they are to maintain any credibility whatsoever.
We saw the system fail last week when Ottens only got one for decking a bloke from behind way off the ball. There is way too much discretion afforded these snouts in the trough at the MRP/tribunal quango.
As soon as he came back he got involved in pursuing the ball towards the boundary line. When the pill went over the line he was clearly distressed - he couldn't even jog back to his position (the lame bloke in the square position).
On his way back, with the ball nowhere around, Harry Taylor began to bump into him. It was clearly designed to discomfort Clark and exploit the injury.
If he is the only one to be held to account for 2 rules, or interpretations, Stephen Baker should take out copyright over 2 laws of the game, 1) don't stop running and let a bloke run into the back of you and 2) don't attempt to discomfort an opponent who may, or may not, be injured.
The bureaucrat who potted Baker for his failure to adhere to the spirit of the game should be similarly admonished for his role in a quasi judicial process that seeks to punish, or excuse, on the basis of who someone is, rather than what they have done. Judicial processes, quasi or not, can NEVER discriminate on any basis, if they are to maintain any credibility whatsoever.
We saw the system fail last week when Ottens only got one for decking a bloke from behind way off the ball. There is way too much discretion afforded these snouts in the trough at the MRP/tribunal quango.
'I have no new illusions, and I have no old illusions' - Vladimir Putin, Geneva, June 2021
Sorry, thought that was weeks, did I miss a change in the rules AGAIN
p66, you there... I need help!!!!!!
p66, you there... I need help!!!!!!
FQF
loyal in the good times and bad
In richo I trust
2013 trade/draft best ever?
Billings - future brownlow medallist Longer - future best ruck
Dunstan - future captain Eli - future cult hero
Acres - future norm smith
loyal in the good times and bad
In richo I trust
2013 trade/draft best ever?
Billings - future brownlow medallist Longer - future best ruck
Dunstan - future captain Eli - future cult hero
Acres - future norm smith
-
- Club Player
- Posts: 300
- Joined: Tue 05 Jul 2011 11:56pm
- DWOODROW
- Club Player
- Posts: 1123
- Joined: Tue 10 Feb 2009 4:36pm
- Location: TOWNSVILLE
- Has thanked: 8 times
- Been thanked: 38 times
The OtherThommo wrote:I'll throw in another one. In the Lions Geelong game on Sunday, a heavily bandaged Mitch Clark came back late after getting injured in the Brown death wish incident.
As soon as he came back he got involved in pursuing the ball towards the boundary line. When the pill went over the line he was clearly distressed - he couldn't even jog back to his position (the lame bloke in the square position).
On his way back, with the ball nowhere around, Harry Taylor began to bump into him. It was clearly designed to discomfort Clark and exploit the injury.
If he is the only one to be held to account for 2 rules, or interpretations, Stephen Baker should take out copyright over 2 laws of the game, 1) don't stop running and let a bloke run into the back of you and 2) don't attempt to discomfort an opponent who may, or may not, be injured.
The bureaucrat who potted Baker for his failure to adhere to the spirit of the game should be similarly admonished for his role in a quasi judicial process that seeks to punish, or excuse, on the basis of who someone is, rather than what they have done. Judicial processes, quasi or not, can NEVER discriminate on any basis, if they are to maintain any credibility whatsoever.
We saw the system fail last week when Ottens only got one for decking a bloke from behind way off the ball. There is way too much discretion afforded these snouts in the trough at the MRP/tribunal quango.
Your missing the point Thommo. He has a good record though.
![Wink :wink:](./images/smilies/icon_wink.gif)
- super dooper
- Club Player
- Posts: 858
- Joined: Sat 20 Mar 2004 12:24am
-
- Club Player
- Posts: 1224
- Joined: Mon 04 Oct 2010 11:34pm
- Has thanked: 14 times
- Been thanked: 16 times
Re: Boyd targetting Harvey's hand
How right you are.DWOODROW wrote:There is difference, Boyd plays for Bulldogs and not ST Kilda.Harvey To Hayes wrote:http://www.heraldsun.com.au/sport/afl/b ... 6097271727
They showed footage On The Couch of Boyd taking cheap shots at Harvey's broken thumb - isn't this exactly the same thing that Bakes did to Johnson and later (from video footage) got reported and harangued by that Tilley dickead for being weak and "against the spirit of the game" before being suspended?
Is there a difference between the two incidents that I'm overlooking? Surely if they're both on the ground and deemed fit to play then there can be no distinctions on the severity of the injuries or anything?![]()
Only ST Kilda players are weak apparently
-
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 18579
- Joined: Thu 11 Mar 2004 1:36am
- Has thanked: 1905 times
- Been thanked: 841 times
Re: Boyd targetting Harvey's hand
Yes he did. 2 weeks for that, among the 4 reports from the match.bigcarl wrote:did bakes actually get weeks for targetting johnson's injury?
3 weeks for Striking
2 weeks for Striking
2 weeks for Striking
2 weeks for Unreasonable & Unnecessary Contact with an Injured Player
-
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 6043
- Joined: Mon 21 May 2007 5:31pm
- Location: Currumbin, Quoinslairnd
I may be getting on, but that footage was pretty grainy. Could you actually see contact? All I could see was a couple of blokes jostling.
If contact was clear, then it's outrageous the situation was taken so lightly...
If contact was clear, then it's outrageous the situation was taken so lightly...
"The inches we need are everywhere around us. They're in every break in the game. Every minute, every second. On this team we fight for that inch. On this team we tear ourselves and everyone around us to pieces for that inch. We claw with our fingernails for that inch. Because we know when we add up all those inches that's gonna make the f***in' difference between winning and losing! Between living and dying!'
-
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 18579
- Joined: Thu 11 Mar 2004 1:36am
- Has thanked: 1905 times
- Been thanked: 841 times
Re: Boyd targetting Harvey's hand
thanks.Liam_G wrote:Yes he did. 2 weeks for that, among the 4 reports from the match.bigcarl wrote:did bakes actually get weeks for targetting johnson's injury?
3 weeks for Striking
2 weeks for Striking
2 weeks for Striking
2 weeks for Unreasonable & Unnecessary Contact with an Injured Player
-
- Club Player
- Posts: 553
- Joined: Mon 04 Aug 2008 7:46pm
- Been thanked: 7 times
Re: Boyd targetting Harvey's hand
Where are the people like Gary "the sniper" Hocking making comments about Boyd now, like he did Baker? That was so ironic, the biggest snipper ever who runs past the past to take out Robert Harvey down at Geelong having a go at Baker! I had a chuckle at that last year!Harvey To Hayes wrote:http://www.heraldsun.com.au/sport/afl/b ... 6097271727
They showed footage On The Couch of Boyd taking cheap shots at Harvey's broken thumb - isn't this exactly the same thing that Bakes did to Johnson and later (from video footage) got reported and harangued by that Tilley dickead for being weak and "against the spirit of the game" before being suspended?
Is there a difference between the two incidents that I'm overlooking? Surely if they're both on the ground and deemed fit to play then there can be no distinctions on the severity of the injuries or anything?
When Harvey played his first game in 1988, I was a 12yo wearing short pants and struggling with my readin', writin' and 'rithmetic in grade eight. Now, I'm a father of three and a retired AFL player. And he's still going. Amazing! - Michael Voss