APPEAL RESULT?

hotdish · Post: # 440137Post **hotdish** » Thu 23 Aug 2007 12:47am

I've read on the news sites, on here and on Bigfooty - but i still can't find info on the appeal.

Surely it isn't still going?

I pressume they just dismissed it?

Grimfang · Post: # 440139Post **Grimfang** » Thu 23 Aug 2007 12:50am

The appeal is on Thursday night at 5:30pm, Melbourne time.

hotdish · Post: # 440141Post **hotdish** » Thu 23 Aug 2007 12:59am

Grimfang wrote:The appeal is on Thursday night at 5:30pm, Melbourne time.

That would explain it then!

Thanks.

Otiman · Post: # 440144Post **Otiman** » Thu 23 Aug 2007 1:10am

With the result coinciding with the footy show, a co-incidence I think not!

Saints94 · Post: # 440189Post **Saints94** » Thu 23 Aug 2007 9:56am

Grimfang wrote:The appeal is on Thursday night at 5:30pm, Melbourne time.

i will be watching ten news at 5:40

Dan Warna · Post: # 440211Post **Dan Warna** » Thu 23 Aug 2007 10:24am

it will probably take a couple of hours if they are fair dinkum or they want to fake being fair dinkum.

RooandKosi · Thu 23 Aug 2007 10:29am

Not a chance guys please dont get ya hopes up!!

This is ALL OUR fault... Baker dobbed HIMSELF in. All baker had to do was say he was looking at the ball and running towards the defense and theyd be NO 7 weeks.

Even Farmer said he didnt know what happened. It was ALL bakers evidence F***!!!!!

Illegal bloke that broke the nose of Farmer how do we get round that???

I hope we do!! We need Baker is in top 10 IMPORTANT Players for US!!

Baker Off = Stkilda Win

yipper · Post: # 440215Post **yipper** » Thu 23 Aug 2007 10:33am

Bakes was told (correctly) to tell the truth. His testimony was corroborated by an independant witness - and that it was emphasised that NOTHING untoward had happened. It was an accidental clash of heads - that could not have possibly been forseen or expected under the circumstances.

Dan Warna · Post: # 440219Post **Dan Warna** » Thu 23 Aug 2007 10:41am

if everytime some one steps inside dal santo not only should dal get a free kick the person should get reported...

this suspension is a one off, and wont be replicated, because otherwise its the end of the game for ALL taggers/defenders.

riccardo · Post: # 440222Post **riccardo** » Thu 23 Aug 2007 10:45am

Brett Kirk would never be treated this way.

My conspiricy theory is to look at who we are playing this week. Who does Baker play on (and destroy) every time we play them? And who is the latest butt buddy of the AFL?

Makes sense, no?

RooandKosi · Thu 23 Aug 2007 11:00am

yipper wrote:Bakes was told (correctly) to tell the truth. His testimony was corroborated by an independant witness - and that it was emphasised that NOTHING untoward had happened. It was an accidental clash of heads - that could not have possibly been forseen or expected under the circumstances.

thats sounds great and hope that uis an outcome BUT baker said he BLOCKED Farmer which means he was focused on him and seen the ball was 50m away it was deemed illegal and SEEN farmer has broken his nose then Baker is guilty. Baker under NO circumstances should Baker have said I blocked Farmer what the hell was anyone thinking???? simply shouldve said I looking at the ball!!!!

GOD DAMN any hope of a flag goes with Baker!!