Zak Jones charged, fined
Moderators: Saintsational Administrators, Saintsational Moderators
- kosifantutti
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 8581
- Joined: Fri 21 Jan 2005 9:06am
- Location: Back in town
- Has thanked: 526 times
- Been thanked: 1527 times
- D.B.Cooper
- Club Player
- Posts: 1926
- Joined: Sun 24 Oct 2021 5:50pm
- Has thanked: 726 times
- Been thanked: 673 times
Re: Zak Jones charged, fined
Oliver should have been fined for taking a dive.
There's only one rule in the jungle! When the LYON's hungry, he eats!
-
- Club Player
- Posts: 128
- Joined: Tue 13 Sep 2011 3:55pm
- Location: East Bentleigh
- Has thanked: 2 times
- Been thanked: 10 times
-
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 4304
- Joined: Fri 17 Nov 2006 1:05am
- Has thanked: 46 times
- Been thanked: 240 times
Re: Zak Jones charged, fined
Yes
And once again highlights what a joke the mrp is .
Jones' raised elbow gets a fine .
A day earlier gws hogan elbows a cats player about to tackle him , proper elbow delivered with force . Mrp says action was not unreasonable and no fine .
If you were shown the two incidences together and asked which one got a fine and who got off pretty sure most people would say jones would get off .
And most people would probably say that Oliver took a dive .
In red white and black from 73
- ace
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 10734
- Joined: Sun 16 Dec 2007 3:28pm
- Location: St Kilda
- Has thanked: 30 times
- Been thanked: 819 times
Re: Zak Jones charged, fined
Christian had to fine Jones to protect the reputation of the dumb ar$e umpire who fell for Oliver's staging.
No way Christian could offer a suspension, he would be laughed out of the tribunal.
No way Christian could offer a suspension, he would be laughed out of the tribunal.
The more you know, the more you know you don't know.
When I was a young child, I knew that I knew so much about so much.
Now that I am old and know so much more, I know that I know so much about so little, and so little about so much.
If you are not engaging AI actively and aggressively, you are doing it wrong.
You are not going to lose your job to AI.
You are going lose your job to somebody who uses AI.
Your company is not going to go out of business because of AI.
Your company is going to go out of business because another company used AI.
- Jensen Huang, CEO of NVIDIA
When I was a young child, I knew that I knew so much about so much.
Now that I am old and know so much more, I know that I know so much about so little, and so little about so much.
If you are not engaging AI actively and aggressively, you are doing it wrong.
You are not going to lose your job to AI.
You are going lose your job to somebody who uses AI.
Your company is not going to go out of business because of AI.
Your company is going to go out of business because another company used AI.
- Jensen Huang, CEO of NVIDIA
-
- SS Life Member
- Posts: 2730
- Joined: Sun 25 Apr 2021 9:43pm
- Has thanked: 691 times
- Been thanked: 773 times
- mad saint guy
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 7064
- Joined: Tue 26 Jul 2005 9:44pm
- Location: Melbourne
- Has thanked: 52 times
- Been thanked: 355 times
Re: Zak Jones charged, fined
The squealing pink pig is absolutely the only one who should have been fined there. Cop a shove to the chest and your head flings back first?
Re: Zak Jones charged, fined
In the meantime Steele leaves the field bleeding profusely from a hit to the head, but no-one saw anything.
-
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 11551
- Joined: Sun 11 Sep 2011 2:26pm
- Has thanked: 3522 times
- Been thanked: 2464 times
Re: Zak Jones charged, fined
Tom Hawkins broke Steven May's eye socket with an elbow and it was deemed fair. No case to answermr six o'clock wrote: ↑Mon 09 May 2022 11:02pmYes
And once again highlights what a joke the mrp is .
Jones' raised elbow gets a fine .
A day earlier gws hogan elbows a cats player about to tackle him , proper elbow delivered with force . Mrp says action was not unreasonable and no fine .
If you were shown the two incidences together and asked which one got a fine and who got off pretty sure most people would say jones would get off .
And most people would probably say that Oliver took a dive .
https://wwos.nine.com.au/afl/afl-news-2 ... 58aa82cf82
https://www.theage.com.au/sport/afl/i-d ... 57wkd.html
https://7news.com.au/sport/afl/afl-vill ... -c-2568030
-
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 11551
- Joined: Sun 11 Sep 2011 2:26pm
- Has thanked: 3522 times
- Been thanked: 2464 times
Re: Zak Jones charged, fined
It was a good lesson for us. We need to be brutal at contests. Not only were they hungrier for the footy and beat us at stoppage and were cleaner with ball use, but they were more physical than us when it came to winning loose ground balls.
It's ok to elbow your opponent when you're getting tackled (Hawkins and Franklin and others have been doing it for years). We need our players to want to hurt the opposition physically. We need Max King and Rowan Marshall and Ryder to use their knee a lot more when going for marks in the forward line
-
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 10120
- Joined: Fri 16 Feb 2007 3:24pm
- Location: WARBURTON
- Has thanked: 145 times
- Been thanked: 1299 times
Re: Zak Jones charged, fined
Umpire saw it and actually called play on. Basically had his head ripped off.
NO IFS OR BUTS HARVS IS KING OF THE AFL
- Life Long Saint
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 5509
- Joined: Tue 09 Mar 2004 12:54pm
- Has thanked: 62 times
- Been thanked: 480 times
- Contact:
Re: Zak Jones charged, fined
"The incident was assessed as intentional conduct, low impact and body contact."
You could mount a case that contact was so low that it didn't meet the criteria for a report.
You could mount a case that contact was so low that it didn't meet the criteria for a report.
-
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 23010
- Joined: Wed 10 Mar 2004 3:53pm
- Has thanked: 8902 times
- Been thanked: 3883 times
Re: Zak Jones charged, fined
I have a mate who used to sit on the VFL Tribunal.
He told me he took an instant dislike to Oliver who he described as a real smart arse jerk.
He told me he took an instant dislike to Oliver who he described as a real smart arse jerk.
- kosifantutti
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 8581
- Joined: Fri 21 Jan 2005 9:06am
- Location: Back in town
- Has thanked: 526 times
- Been thanked: 1527 times
Re: Zak Jones charged, fined
I think this is what caused the bleeding.
Steele bending over to pick up the ball and Spargo makes front on contact with knee/thigh/hip. Play on!
![Image](http://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20220510/77636a5f2ec107449384ce53fb56f49f.jpg)
Macquarie Dictionary Word of the Year for 2023 "Kosi Lives"
-
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 10120
- Joined: Fri 16 Feb 2007 3:24pm
- Location: WARBURTON
- Has thanked: 145 times
- Been thanked: 1299 times
Re: Zak Jones charged, fined
Umpire had clear vision and called play on. Why would you ignore that?kosifantutti wrote: ↑Tue 10 May 2022 1:26pmI think this is what caused the bleeding.
Steele bending over to pick up the ball and Spargo makes front on contact with knee/thigh/hip. Play on!
![]()
NO IFS OR BUTS HARVS IS KING OF THE AFL
-
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 11551
- Joined: Sun 11 Sep 2011 2:26pm
- Has thanked: 3522 times
- Been thanked: 2464 times
Re: Zak Jones charged, fined
Umpire DIDN’T have clear vision.
Note that Spargo is boundary side of the ball and Steele’s head and torso are blind siding the umpire from seeing the point of impact…
In any case, as soon as the collision or the contact occurred there is no reason why the umpire can not call it a free kick to Steele. One of the central umpires we had looked like a newbie. An experienced umpire would know that Steele is not a stager or an actor when it comes to physical contact.
You are just making up stuff by assuming the umpire had clear vision. He made an error imho, and didn’t have a feel for the game and he chose to ignore common sense and ignore his instinct
Stevic was probably not the controlling umpire and you’ll notice that they try not to over rule each other. I think they don’t want to dent the confidence of some of the newbies, so they let a few mistakes go and try and educate them as they get games experience.
Note that Spargo is boundary side of the ball and Steele’s head and torso are blind siding the umpire from seeing the point of impact…
In any case, as soon as the collision or the contact occurred there is no reason why the umpire can not call it a free kick to Steele. One of the central umpires we had looked like a newbie. An experienced umpire would know that Steele is not a stager or an actor when it comes to physical contact.
You are just making up stuff by assuming the umpire had clear vision. He made an error imho, and didn’t have a feel for the game and he chose to ignore common sense and ignore his instinct
Stevic was probably not the controlling umpire and you’ll notice that they try not to over rule each other. I think they don’t want to dent the confidence of some of the newbies, so they let a few mistakes go and try and educate them as they get games experience.
-
- Club Player
- Posts: 1860
- Joined: Thu 01 May 2008 6:30pm
- Location: Mentone
- Has thanked: 17 times
- Been thanked: 263 times
Re: Zak Jones charged, fined
He has a very punchable head along with Petracca who I cannot stand.
Together they help to make Melbourne high on my most hated list
One year will be our year
-
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 10120
- Joined: Fri 16 Feb 2007 3:24pm
- Location: WARBURTON
- Has thanked: 145 times
- Been thanked: 1299 times
Re: Zak Jones charged, fined
Scollop wrote: ↑Tue 10 May 2022 2:26pm Umpire DIDN’T have clear vision.
Note that Spargo is boundary side of the ball and Steele’s head and torso are blind siding the umpire from seeing the point of impact…
In any case, as soon as the collision or the contact occurred there is no reason why the umpire can not call it a free kick to Steele. One of the central umpires we had looked like a newbie. An experienced umpire would know that Steele is not a stager or an actor when it comes to physical contact.
You are just making up stuff by assuming the umpire had clear vision. He made an error imho, and didn’t have a feel for the game and he chose to ignore common sense and ignore his instinct
Stevic was probably not the controlling umpire and you’ll notice that they try not to over rule each other. I think they don’t want to dent the confidence of some of the newbies, so they let a few mistakes go and try and educate them as they get games experience.
What the hell are you talking about? Steele is boundary side and Spargo has come front on the umpire is behind Spargo.
NO IFS OR BUTS HARVS IS KING OF THE AFL
-
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 11551
- Joined: Sun 11 Sep 2011 2:26pm
- Has thanked: 3522 times
- Been thanked: 2464 times
Re: Zak Jones charged, fined
Sorry my bad. You are right. I still think it’s an assumption to say ‘he had clear vision’ when there is congestion and stoppages. Jack copped the hit and still managed to get his hands on the footy and get the handball out. Steele and the rest of our players just have to learn to throw the head back and attract a free if it’s warranted.CURLY wrote: ↑Tue 10 May 2022 2:49pmScollop wrote: ↑Tue 10 May 2022 2:26pm Umpire DIDN’T have clear vision.
Note that Spargo is boundary side of the ball and Steele’s head and torso are blind siding the umpire from seeing the point of impact…
In any case, as soon as the collision or the contact occurred there is no reason why the umpire can not call it a free kick to Steele. One of the central umpires we had looked like a newbie. An experienced umpire would know that Steele is not a stager or an actor when it comes to physical contact.
You are just making up stuff by assuming the umpire had clear vision. He made an error imho, and didn’t have a feel for the game and he chose to ignore common sense and ignore his instinct
Stevic was probably not the controlling umpire and you’ll notice that they try not to over rule each other. I think they don’t want to dent the confidence of some of the newbies, so they let a few mistakes go and try and educate them as they get games experience.
What the hell are you talking about? Steele is boundary side and Spargo has come front on the umpire is behind Spargo.
I also got the Stevic versus Newbie thing wrong. It was umpire number nine which is Stevic who was closest. I watched the replay just now and it seems like the front on contact might have been enough to pay the free, but it’s not an easy game to umpire and I’d prefer they pay what they ‘see’ rather that just guessing
- kosifantutti
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 8581
- Joined: Fri 21 Jan 2005 9:06am
- Location: Back in town
- Has thanked: 526 times
- Been thanked: 1527 times
Re: Zak Jones charged, fined
Actually Steele had a real tough time at the end of the third quarter. It could have happened with clashes with Oliver and Long within 2 seconds.
![Image](//uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20220510/37889c70a62fff329e56f417a982c3e6.jpg)
![Image](//uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20220510/78048caf23dbe638c095f3a889517edf.jpg)
![Image](//uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20220510/19636eae26e531a9407bb5d91715a73b.jpg)
![Image](http://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20220510/37889c70a62fff329e56f417a982c3e6.jpg)
![Image](http://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20220510/78048caf23dbe638c095f3a889517edf.jpg)
![Image](http://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20220510/19636eae26e531a9407bb5d91715a73b.jpg)
Macquarie Dictionary Word of the Year for 2023 "Kosi Lives"
-
- Club Player
- Posts: 919
- Joined: Sun 29 Jan 2012 12:37pm
- Has thanked: 3 times
- Been thanked: 94 times
Re: Zak Jones charged, fined
Hey Dud, your thoughts on Jones fine...this MRP is not something that only has split second decision.
Personally I'm sick of others not being charged by MRO that are worse with statements of "the player ran into the tackler" or "action not unreasonable" only for these statements to be short-lived and Paddy and Jones charged a week later.
I know I'm biased but are we an easy target for MRO etc
Personally I'm sick of others not being charged by MRO that are worse with statements of "the player ran into the tackler" or "action not unreasonable" only for these statements to be short-lived and Paddy and Jones charged a week later.
I know I'm biased but are we an easy target for MRO etc