St DAC wrote:Joffa, the fact that Baker was royally shafted doesn't make Whelan's hit on Ball any less legal. My take? The difference between them is the distance off the ball. Baker's was clearly not in play, Whelan's was. Other than that who can say what part of Baker hit what part of Farmer? I certainly can't, and I'm buggered if I know how the tribunal were able to draw the conclusion they did without any vision. So, yes, Bakes was shafted bigtime, no argument from me on that.
Never said that Whelans hit was illegal. At the time I spoke to you and we both agreed that it seemed fair but an accidental head clash.
No the point is that the AFL choses to ignore some accidental clashes and then shafts other players with no video evidence and gives them 4 weeks.
It is a denial of natural justice, however the tribunal is not a court of law.
St DAC wrote:On the club not taking the matter to court I agree with them. Clearly, we would struggle to win the case; we'd have the AFL offside (yet again) for no tangible gain, and it would cost us a fortune better spent on developing the players, rather than making some lawyer richer. At some point you have to cut your losses; IMO that's what the club did, and IMO it was the right call given all the circumstances involved.
Not it is not clear that we would have lost. A court of law works on different principles to the tribunal and arguments could be much different especially on points of law and precedent.
No tangible gain you say???? To win a court case against the incompenent or corrupt AFL would indeed be a tangible gain. The injustice of the tribunal and its biased and corrupt findings (Barry Hall, Daniel kerr anybody????) would be great for the credibility of the game and show Dimwit and his monkey that the AFl is not his little fiefdom.
As for cut our losses. We had two points taken off us last year, ultimately costing us a top four spot. Now that is cutting our losses. If the club exists to win premierships, the AFl in cheating us out of 2 competition points after changing the rules certainly cost us a chance of going forthe flag last season.
So we cut our losses, we dont upset the commission, we dont rock the boat, all the time the AFL knows it can F*** us over while our players get fractured skulls and bruised brains with no case to answer, they vindictively pull out a 7 week suspension because Baker made a fool of their system earlier in the year.
Its better to die on your feet than live on your knees.
The action of our gutless, spineless board has cost them $500 of my money for next season. If the new ticket guarantees it will protect the name of our players and the integrity of the club, it now has my vote.
You may not want to rock the boat, and accept the club can be the AFL whipping boy and allow the AFl to blatantly apply rules to the Saints but not to others, but I, in all consciousness cannot.
I try to teach my children the meaning and essence of pride, integrity, decency, and self esteem. The STKFC shows that it has none of these attributes.
how can I financially support an organisation that is so timmid that it allows itself to be walked over to the point where the AFl is laughing at it?
Tell me.