Murphy Pleads GUILTY!!!!
Moderators: Saintsational Administrators, Saintsational Moderators
Murphy Pleads GUILTY!!!!
THE Bulldogs will be without key forward Robert Murphy after he accepted a one-match ban for making head-high contact.
Murphy was charged with engaging in rough conduct against Hawk Xavier Ellis during the Dogs win in Launceston on Saturday. His decision means he will miss the Bullies' clash with the Saints this weekend.
Murphy was charged with engaging in rough conduct against Hawk Xavier Ellis during the Dogs win in Launceston on Saturday. His decision means he will miss the Bullies' clash with the Saints this weekend.
- Saints Premiers 2008
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 4335
- Joined: Thu 27 Oct 2005 11:21pm
- Location: Brisbane
more than a bit rough...thats a terrible decision however i guess its what happens when the afl is run by a nancy-boy lawyer (no offence to lawyers out there...i just dont see the corrleation...lawyer...afl...rules???huh???)
another thing that made the blood boil was demitriou criticizes matthew llyod's comments yesterday...
who gave him the right to criticize someone's opinion and flatly denying it as wrong and demand a please explain??
if he had substance behind his criticism of llyod's comments then it could be justified except he didn't...it was almost child like in the way he shot his opinion down when infact llyod would actually do a better job of running the show than him...and i detest llyod so that is saying something
dimwit's kids must cop heaps of s*** at school...suffer...
another thing that made the blood boil was demitriou criticizes matthew llyod's comments yesterday...
who gave him the right to criticize someone's opinion and flatly denying it as wrong and demand a please explain??
if he had substance behind his criticism of llyod's comments then it could be justified except he didn't...it was almost child like in the way he shot his opinion down when infact llyod would actually do a better job of running the show than him...and i detest llyod so that is saying something
dimwit's kids must cop heaps of s*** at school...suffer...
"It's a work in progress," Lyon said.
-
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 25303
- Joined: Tue 01 Feb 2005 4:25pm
- Location: Trump Tower
- Has thanked: 142 times
- Been thanked: 284 times
Dimwit is a clown, that's stating the obvious.degruch wrote:Oh yeah...don't get me started on Dimwit...he's gonna hurt AFL footy big time, his daft money making plans will set the game back 50 years.
Compare Murphy's hit with the one on X a month ago!
The AFL got it right on this one.
It's about time fortune favoured us, we now need to make the most of the opportunity is gives us!
i am Melbourne Skies - sometimes Blue Skies, Grey Skies, even Partly Cloudy Skies.
- TassieJones
- Club Player
- Posts: 276
- Joined: Mon 19 May 2008 9:17pm
- Location: The NCR
Absolute joke he went for that, it was a good bump and I enjoyed seeing it. Almost as big a joke that Lloyd was fined for summing up the sentiments of the greater football community and questioning whether players should even bother with the hip and shoulder.
But it certainly helps our chances at least
But it certainly helps our chances at least
I recon he deserved to go for it... it was a pointless, wreckless hit..
Watch the replay again... The balled spilled free half a meter away and Murphy went the player... Why not go for the loose ball...
When you want to know the correct (and fair) way to go about it, look at it like this.. In the exact same situation, what would Harvey have done?!!
He would have turned his body, collected the ball and either taken the hit with possession or dished it out.. simple..
Watch the replay again... The balled spilled free half a meter away and Murphy went the player... Why not go for the loose ball...
When you want to know the correct (and fair) way to go about it, look at it like this.. In the exact same situation, what would Harvey have done?!!
He would have turned his body, collected the ball and either taken the hit with possession or dished it out.. simple..
- MCG-Unit
- SS Life Member
- Posts: 3149
- Joined: Thu 11 Mar 2004 4:04pm
- Location: Land of the Giants
- Has thanked: 536 times
- Been thanked: 20 times
I agree he deserved it - on the replay, he didn't even look at the ball, just went straight for the player, and collected his headSobraz wrote:I recon he deserved to go for it... it was a pointless, wreckless hit..
Watch the replay again... The balled spilled free half a meter away and Murphy went the player... Why not go for the loose ball...
When you want to know the correct (and fair) way to go about it, look at it like this.. In the exact same situation, what would Harvey have done?!!
He would have turned his body, collected the ball and either taken the hit with possession or dished it out.. simple..
![Shocked :shock:](./images/smilies/icon_eek.gif)
No Contract, No contact ![Shocked :shock:](./images/smilies/icon_eek.gif)
![Shocked :shock:](./images/smilies/icon_eek.gif)
- perfectionist
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 9040
- Joined: Mon 30 Jul 2007 3:06pm
- Has thanked: 60 times
- Been thanked: 350 times
- Eastern
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 14357
- Joined: Tue 09 Mar 2004 1:46pm
- Location: 3132
- Been thanked: 1 time
I thought;perfectionist wrote:Deserved at least two, which he got. They play the Lions the following week, so they figure a week against us won't matter which, on form, is probably right. But our chances have improved.
Would the Bulldogs have made the same decision if they were playing Brisbane this week and us next week? Should we ring their "Forwards Coach" on SEN and ask?
Deserved what he got under the rules of today. Whether those rules are right is another issue. Also Lloyd didnt get fined but does make your story better.TassieJones wrote:Absolute joke he went for that, it was a good bump and I enjoyed seeing it. Almost as big a joke that Lloyd was fined for summing up the sentiments of the greater football community and questioning whether players should even bother with the hip and shoulder.
But it certainly helps our chances at least
-
- Club Player
- Posts: 1701
- Joined: Fri 18 May 2007 11:13am
- Been thanked: 7 times
- starsign
- Club Player
- Posts: 1854
- Joined: Sat 12 Apr 2008 8:45am
- Has thanked: 2 times
- Been thanked: 24 times
good decision all round!
And don't be surprized if the Doggies have an off day
They are due for it and I'm basing this on current history which indicates the difficulty of playing at the top of you game week in and out for any great length of time in this modern game
Geelong and the Hawks have had theirs and the Dogs are due
One or 2 good players out and or off the boil, and taking the opposition a little lightly as well can set the scene for a turn-up , particularly if we can up the tempo even more on our intense tackling and pressure sustained over the 4 quarters
I've got a gut feeling! ...
BUT We get in right from the start with the close checking ,hard tackling stuff, and if our tall marking forwards can keep taking grabs for 4 quarters (And start converting better)we could be just the team to give them the surprize they aren't suspecting, especially if they are a bit off their game , and as I said they're due!
lots of IFS in this scenario but it could well be on!
Think how hard it is to pick 8 winners ....well its our turn to provide the upset this week!
Hows that for optimism!
And don't be surprized if the Doggies have an off day
They are due for it and I'm basing this on current history which indicates the difficulty of playing at the top of you game week in and out for any great length of time in this modern game
Geelong and the Hawks have had theirs and the Dogs are due
One or 2 good players out and or off the boil, and taking the opposition a little lightly as well can set the scene for a turn-up , particularly if we can up the tempo even more on our intense tackling and pressure sustained over the 4 quarters
I've got a gut feeling! ...
easilyWe'll miss Murphy but we should winNo worries the Saints are ordinary, they only beat Melbourne last week , and we ran over them easily earlier on.
BUT We get in right from the start with the close checking ,hard tackling stuff, and if our tall marking forwards can keep taking grabs for 4 quarters (And start converting better)we could be just the team to give them the surprize they aren't suspecting, especially if they are a bit off their game , and as I said they're due!
lots of IFS in this scenario but it could well be on!
Think how hard it is to pick 8 winners ....well its our turn to provide the upset this week!
Hows that for optimism!
- Mr Magic
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 12775
- Joined: Fri 04 May 2007 9:38am
- Has thanked: 784 times
- Been thanked: 425 times
Soft as in West's block/shepherd/hit on X?bergsone wrote:Wonder if it was a saint who laid that bump what some on here would be saying now SOFT decision ,made by SOFT people who are trying to make it a SOFT game.fair dinkum dont watch slow motion replays if you do ,your kidding yourself
Soft as in Burgoyne's block/shepherd/hit on Hayes last year?
I'll tell you what is 'soft' -
When you run past the ball and 'bump' an unsuspecting player who only has eyes for the ball in an attempt to 'hurt' him.
It takes a real 'tough guy' to 'take out' an unsuspecting opponent. How come the real hard at it 'in and under type players' very rarely lay a bump? They mainly tackle their opponents because they know that's how you get the ball.
Now, in relation to Murphy, it would appear from the replays I've seen that he didn't deliberately try to take out his opponent.
BUT the rules state quite clearly that if you choose to lay a bump/shepherd you have a 'duty of care' not to 'hit' your opponent's head, whether intentionally or accidentally.
Therefore when Murphy's shoulder struck his opponent's head he was always going to be in trouble. The only question, under the current rules, is the degree of severity.
- Mr Magic
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 12775
- Joined: Fri 04 May 2007 9:38am
- Has thanked: 784 times
- Been thanked: 425 times
Nobody's taking the bump out.bergsone wrote:So we take the bump out completely,fail to see how Murphy deliberatelytried to hurt the other player,IMO free kick and get on with it,was their a free kick paid?Was he reported at the time?IMO Soft
All they're saying is if you choose to bump and hit your opponent in the head then you should expect repurcussions. If it's a 'soft' collision then the MRP finds it 'insufficient force to constitute a strike' and no penalty occurs.
You obvioously think it's ok to 'hit' your opponent in the head with a bump, as long as it's an accident.
I'm sure that Trent West didn't mean to connect with X's head when he 'bumped' him earlier this year. But he did, and with sufficient force to cause X to be 'stretchered off'. Was that also 'soft'?
And when Burgoyne took Lenny out last year? Was that also 'soft' because maybe Burgoyne hit him in the head accidentally?
I have a real problem with the use of the term 'soft'. It has a connotation of 'weakness' and IMHO there is no courage being shown by a player choosing to 'hit' an unsuspecting opponent. In most cases it is just a 'cheap shot'.