Should we bring in a Sin Bin?
Moderators: Saintsational Administrators, Saintsational Moderators
- GrumpyOne
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 8163
- Joined: Wed 17 Mar 2010 9:25am
- Location: Kicked out of the Coffee Shop, Settlement Pub, Cranbourne
Should we bring in a Sin Bin?
The felling of Mav Weller got me thinking.
That action had the potential of having the Saints down one player for all but ten seconds of the entire match. Yet the punishment benefits all the teams that the Filth play in the next two or three rounds, and not the Saints. Where is the justice in that?
It was only by chance that the odds were evened up by the injury to Maxwell later in the quarter.
There should be a more immediate punishment given when a player is put out of the game by a reportable act. My suggestion is that the responsible player has to serve say a ten minute spell in the Sin Bin, whilst his team is forced to play one player short for that period of time.
Any comments?
That action had the potential of having the Saints down one player for all but ten seconds of the entire match. Yet the punishment benefits all the teams that the Filth play in the next two or three rounds, and not the Saints. Where is the justice in that?
It was only by chance that the odds were evened up by the injury to Maxwell later in the quarter.
There should be a more immediate punishment given when a player is put out of the game by a reportable act. My suggestion is that the responsible player has to serve say a ten minute spell in the Sin Bin, whilst his team is forced to play one player short for that period of time.
Any comments?
Australia...... Live it like we stole it....... Because we did.
- saintbrat
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 44575
- Joined: Tue 09 Mar 2004 4:11pm
- Location: saints zone
- Has thanked: 6 times
- Been thanked: 188 times
Re: Should we bring in a Sin Bin?
as supporters we like to see incidences that occcur to our players be subjected to retribution - but it's never to the benefit of the team playing on the occasion.- would be nice to have some way that it benefits the team the offence was enacted on
StReNgTh ThRoUgH LoYaLtY
Rejoicing in hope, patient in tribulation, continuing steadfastly..!!
MEMBERSHIP 2014 31,134 Membership 2015 32,746 MEMBERSHIP 2016 - 38,101
MEMBERSHIP 2017 42,095 , Membership 2018 46,998
MEMBERSHIP 2019 43,106 http://saintsational.net/viewtopic.php? ... 9#p1816890
MEMBERSHIP 2020 48,588 http://saintsational.net/viewtopic.php?f=1&t=100107
Rejoicing in hope, patient in tribulation, continuing steadfastly..!!
MEMBERSHIP 2014 31,134 Membership 2015 32,746 MEMBERSHIP 2016 - 38,101
MEMBERSHIP 2017 42,095 , Membership 2018 46,998
MEMBERSHIP 2019 43,106 http://saintsational.net/viewtopic.php? ... 9#p1816890
MEMBERSHIP 2020 48,588 http://saintsational.net/viewtopic.php?f=1&t=100107
-
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 25303
- Joined: Tue 01 Feb 2005 4:25pm
- Location: Trump Tower
- Has thanked: 142 times
- Been thanked: 284 times
Re: Should we bring in a Sin Bin?
Great idea. Problem is many umps are either blind or incompetent or both. So that by definition means it would have to be the third umpires call, which currently is inconclusive 99% of the time. The whole way umpiring is run is too slip shod for a proper sin bin system to come into place. The only real option would be if a player gave away 5 frees in a game he'd be sin binned for 10 minutes with no replacement. But that doesn't help dog acts.
i am Melbourne Skies - sometimes Blue Skies, Grey Skies, even Partly Cloudy Skies.
- Enrico_Misso
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 11662
- Joined: Tue 13 Jun 2006 12:11am
- Location: Moorabbin Chapter of The Royal Society of Hagiographers
- Has thanked: 315 times
- Been thanked: 720 times
Re: Should we bring in a Sin Bin?
Maybe the club on the receiving end could elect to
- have the offending opposition player serve all their suspension in the immediate matches as normal
- or defer 1 week of the suspension till the next time we play them
- have the offending opposition player serve all their suspension in the immediate matches as normal
- or defer 1 week of the suspension till the next time we play them
The rest of Australia can wander mask-free, socialise, eat out, no curfews, no zoning, no police rings of steel, no illogical inconsistent rules.
They can even WATCH LIVE FOOTY!
They can even WATCH LIVE FOOTY!
-
- Club Player
- Posts: 1209
- Joined: Tue 25 Sep 2007 3:45am
- Has thanked: 32 times
- Been thanked: 40 times
Re: Should we bring in a Sin Bin?
Just saw the bump on Weller on the AFL site.
If that Sidebottom does not get at least 4 weeks, then the AFL is full of sh*t.
Put bluntly if it was Baker, it would be a minimum of 7 weeks.
If that Sidebottom does not get at least 4 weeks, then the AFL is full of sh*t.
Put bluntly if it was Baker, it would be a minimum of 7 weeks.
-
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 25303
- Joined: Tue 01 Feb 2005 4:25pm
- Location: Trump Tower
- Has thanked: 142 times
- Been thanked: 284 times
Re: Should we bring in a Sin Bin?
Great idea and easy to implement.Enrico_Misso wrote:Maybe the club on the receiving end could elect to
- have the offending opposition player serve all their suspension in the immediate matches as normal
- or defer 1 week of the suspension till the next time we play them
i am Melbourne Skies - sometimes Blue Skies, Grey Skies, even Partly Cloudy Skies.
-
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 25303
- Joined: Tue 01 Feb 2005 4:25pm
- Location: Trump Tower
- Has thanked: 142 times
- Been thanked: 284 times
Re: Should we bring in a Sin Bin?
Was it reckless or intentional? Medium or high impact?ROLS-LEE wrote:Just saw the bump on Weller on the AFL site.
If that Sidebottom does not get at least 4 weeks, then the AFL is full of sh*t.
Put bluntly if it was Baker, it would be a minimum of 7 weeks.
Cut the hysterics and understand the system.
He will most likely get 3 reduced to 2 with early plea for reckless medium impact IMO.
i am Melbourne Skies - sometimes Blue Skies, Grey Skies, even Partly Cloudy Skies.
-
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 11941
- Joined: Sun 11 Sep 2011 2:26pm
- Has thanked: 3650 times
- Been thanked: 2548 times
Re: Should we bring in a Sin Bin?
Tom Harley and Luke Darcy also saw it that way and I think Watson said same. It used to be that whatever Robert Walls saw or commented on was gospel and now it's the 3 stoogessaintspremiers wrote:
He will most likely get 3 reduced to 2 with early plea for reckless medium impact IMO.
I know they are paid to give comments but it sh!ts me that they have such an influence on public opinion.
And I vote No to a Sin Bin.
-
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 4321
- Joined: Fri 17 Nov 2006 1:05am
- Has thanked: 55 times
- Been thanked: 244 times
-
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 4321
- Joined: Fri 17 Nov 2006 1:05am
- Has thanked: 55 times
- Been thanked: 244 times
-
- SS Hall of Fame
- Posts: 2203
- Joined: Wed 19 Aug 2009 10:32pm
- Location: Del Mar, California
- Has thanked: 34 times
- Been thanked: 237 times
Re: Should we bring in a Sin Bin?
If it was Baker he'd get time in Barwon prisonROLS-LEE wrote:Just saw the bump on Weller on the AFL site.
If that Sidebottom does not get at least 4 weeks, then the AFL is full of sh*t.
Put bluntly if it was Baker, it would be a minimum of 7 weeks.
- samuraisaint
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 5914
- Joined: Sun 25 Sep 2011 3:23pm
- Location: M32
- Has thanked: 856 times
- Been thanked: 798 times
-
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 25303
- Joined: Tue 01 Feb 2005 4:25pm
- Location: Trump Tower
- Has thanked: 142 times
- Been thanked: 284 times
Re: Should we bring in a Sin Bin?
Based on what?samuraisaint wrote:He'll get four.
What you'd like him to get or do you think it will be classed as intentional?
i am Melbourne Skies - sometimes Blue Skies, Grey Skies, even Partly Cloudy Skies.
Re: Should we bring in a Sin Bin?
saintspremiers wrote:Was it reckless or intentional? Medium or high impact?ROLS-LEE wrote:Just saw the bump on Weller on the AFL site.
If that Sidebottom does not get at least 4 weeks, then the AFL is full of sh*t.
Put bluntly if it was Baker, it would be a minimum of 7 weeks.
Cut the hysterics and understand the system.
He will most likely get 3 reduced to 2 with early plea for reckless medium impact IMO.
it was intentional afaic....cut out this crap about being negligent.......it was a f****** deliberate attempt to maim a player...if i was weller i would have decked the animal when he came to shake my hand at the end of the match with a smirk from ear to ear...it's alright for that prick...has a permanent place in the fllth side...not so poor mav......
.everybody still loves lenny....and we always will
"Freedom of expression is the cornerstone of a free society,"
However, freedom of expression is not encouraged in certain forums.
"Freedom of expression is the cornerstone of a free society,"
However, freedom of expression is not encouraged in certain forums.
-
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 5018
- Joined: Sun 14 Mar 2004 10:42am
- Location: Bayside
- Has thanked: 9 times
- Been thanked: 92 times
Re: Should we bring in a Sin Bin?
Intentional and highsaintspremiers wrote:Was it reckless or intentional? Medium or high impact?ROLS-LEE wrote:Just saw the bump on Weller on the AFL site.
If that Sidebottom does not get at least 4 weeks, then the AFL is full of sh*t.
Put bluntly if it was Baker, it would be a minimum of 7 weeks.
Cut the hysterics and understand the system.
He will most likely get 3 reduced to 2 with early plea for reckless medium impact IMO.
what does that get him?
-
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 6603
- Joined: Sat 11 Jun 2011 4:52pm
- Location: Here
- Has thanked: 1309 times
- Been thanked: 467 times
Re: Should we bring in a Sin Bin?
He hit him intentionally and it was high. It was also the biggest impact you could have against another player on the field and that is that player not coming back onto the field - for the whole match in this instance.saintspremiers wrote:Was it reckless or intentional? Medium or high impact?ROLS-LEE wrote:Just saw the bump on Weller on the AFL site.
If that Sidebottom does not get at least 4 weeks, then the AFL is full of sh*t.
Put bluntly if it was Baker, it would be a minimum of 7 weeks.
Cut the hysterics and understand the system.
He will most likely get 3 reduced to 2 with early plea for reckless medium impact IMO.
Definite case to SIN BIN HIM
As ex-president Peter Summers said:
“If we are going to be a contender, we may as well plan to win the bloody thing.”
St Kilda - At least we have a Crest!
“If we are going to be a contender, we may as well plan to win the bloody thing.”
St Kilda - At least we have a Crest!
Re: Should we bring in a Sin Bin?
Would only be workable if it was for the most blatant of acts ala Barry Hall decking Staker.
If there was even a hint of an argument of justification it would be too controversial in an important game.
If there was even a hint of an argument of justification it would be too controversial in an important game.
- Life Long Saint
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 5518
- Joined: Tue 09 Mar 2004 12:54pm
- Has thanked: 62 times
- Been thanked: 481 times
- Contact:
Re: Should we bring in a Sin Bin?
The Sidebottom incident will (should) be assessed as Reckless conduct (2), high contact (2) and high impact (3) for 7 activation points and a level four offence.
He has been reported for Rough Conduct and that attracts 425 demerit points.
He has no good or bad record and with an early plea can accept a three week penalty.
That's how it should be assessed...So a four week ban but three with an early plea.
Sounds about right to me.
He has been reported for Rough Conduct and that attracts 425 demerit points.
He has no good or bad record and with an early plea can accept a three week penalty.
That's how it should be assessed...So a four week ban but three with an early plea.
Sounds about right to me.
Re: Should we bring in a Sin Bin?
Life Long Saint wrote:The Sidebottom incident will (should) be assessed as Reckless conduct (2), high contact (2) and high impact (3) for 7 activation points and a level four offence.
He has been reported for Rough Conduct and that attracts 425 demerit points.
He has no good or bad record and with an early plea can accept a three week penalty.
That's how it should be assessed...So a four week ban but three with an early plea.
Sounds about right to me.
First 2 for sure. Im thinking it may be graded as medium impact though. It will depend on the medical report from the Saints. Obviously you have found out he has a report somewhere in the last 5 years but not the last 3 years.
-
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 5018
- Joined: Sun 14 Mar 2004 10:42am
- Location: Bayside
- Has thanked: 9 times
- Been thanked: 92 times
Re: Should we bring in a Sin Bin?
Yeah imagine, don't know how the biggest sport in the world copes.plugger66 wrote:Never. Imagine the uproar in a GF if they got it wrong.
Re: Should we bring in a Sin Bin?
Ok lets follow their rules because its a big sport. It is a stupid thing. Obviously you like the idea. I dont and dont see a need for it. I am involved in the ammos and they have it. many times the player then goes to the tribunal and gets off. Bad luck for you that he and the side have already been penalised.maverick wrote:Yeah imagine, don't know how the biggest sport in the world copes.plugger66 wrote:Never. Imagine the uproar in a GF if they got it wrong.
-
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 5018
- Joined: Sun 14 Mar 2004 10:42am
- Location: Bayside
- Has thanked: 9 times
- Been thanked: 92 times
Re: Should we bring in a Sin Bin?
How can it not be intentional?
Ran past the ball and tried to take Pendles tag out.
Can't see how it's not high impact as well when the bloke hit misses the whole game.
Ran past the ball and tried to take Pendles tag out.
Can't see how it's not high impact as well when the bloke hit misses the whole game.
-
- SS Life Member
- Posts: 3602
- Joined: Wed 14 May 2014 7:45pm
- Been thanked: 1 time
Re: Should we bring in a Sin Bin?
Why medium impact? His action has caused concussion of the player who may well miss the following week.plugger66 wrote:Life Long Saint wrote:The Sidebottom incident will (should) be assessed as Reckless conduct (2), high contact (2) and high impact (3) for 7 activation points and a level four offence.
He has been reported for Rough Conduct and that attracts 425 demerit points.
He has no good or bad record and with an early plea can accept a three week penalty.
That's how it should be assessed...So a four week ban but three with an early plea.
Sounds about right to me.
First 2 for sure. Im thinking it may be graded as medium impact though. It will depend on the medical report from the Saints. Obviously you have found out he has a report somewhere in the last 5 years but not the last 3 years.
In blatant actions such as Sidebottoms he should be off the field as long as the player he took out. If thats 20 minutes for the concussion rule so be it. If it was like Wellers case, the whole game. I would also consider that if the player is not subbed out, Collingwood could not use their sub for Sidebottom until the Saints use their sub. This means they are down a rotation until the Saints use their sub or Weller comes back on.
I think it is appalling Sidebottom can jump in the air, elbow a player flush on the jaw and then run about in that game getting 10 posessions in the first quarter. Absolutely unfair for the affected team
You are garbage - Enough said