MRP: Kosi 1 week, Fiora Reprimand
Moderators: Saintsational Administrators, Saintsational Moderators
- saintsRrising
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 30089
- Joined: Mon 15 Mar 2004 11:07am
- Location: Melbourne
- Has thanked: 711 times
- Been thanked: 1233 times
RedWhiteBlack has posted all the details in the oroginal string if you want the full wording.
http://www.saintsational.com/forum/view ... 8&start=25
http://www.saintsational.com/forum/view ... 8&start=25
Flying the World in comfort thanks to FF Points....
- RedWhiteBlack
- Club Player
- Posts: 234
- Joined: Thu 03 Jul 2008 4:27pm
- Location: Melbourne
- Sainter_Dad
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 6285
- Joined: Thu 05 Jun 2008 1:04pm
- Has thanked: 260 times
- Been thanked: 1097 times
Did the MRP take into account that Osbourne followed the play (was not involved) and shoved Kosi into the interchange area after the ball was out. It was probably unexpected by Kosi. Again the retaliator gets done for reacting.
This kind of dog act is becoming more prevalent. It will result in someone being injured as they get pushed into the fence after a hard chase.
This kind of dog act is becoming more prevalent. It will result in someone being injured as they get pushed into the fence after a hard chase.
-
- Club Player
- Posts: 99
- Joined: Wed 11 Jun 2008 10:39am
- Sainter_Dad
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 6285
- Joined: Thu 05 Jun 2008 1:04pm
- Has thanked: 260 times
- Been thanked: 1097 times
- Selhurst Saint
- Club Player
- Posts: 1761
- Joined: Thu 19 Aug 2004 9:09am
- Location: I do like to be beside the seaside
- Been thanked: 35 times
Because there is no reduction for an early plea does that mean we can go to the tribunal without any fear of making things worse??
"...If there has been one recurring theme through this whole shocking mess, it has been the misguided, inflated egos and their ill-judged determination to cling to long-standing old boy friendships. The bad advice that has guided the selfish and culpable James Hird has not only punctuated this saga but symbolised it..."
- Mr Magic
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 12753
- Joined: Fri 04 May 2007 9:38am
- Has thanked: 762 times
- Been thanked: 423 times
The report I heard on SEN mentioned that if he chooses to go to the tribunal then he would be risking a 2 match penalty, so he must have been assessed as a two game reducing to a 1 game with an early plea.Selhurst Saint wrote:Because there is no reduction for an early plea does that mean we can go to the tribunal without any fear of making things worse??
That makes his charge equivalent to Hall's 'attempted hit' on Wakelin based on penalty!
That seems fair.
One was an attempt to knock a bloke out by a bloke who had just come back from a 7 week penalty.
the other was .....?
Good to see that the system is keeping up its record of consistancy.
![Rolling Eyes :roll:](./images/smilies/icon_rolleyes.gif)
- perfectionist
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 9022
- Joined: Mon 30 Jul 2007 3:06pm
- Has thanked: 60 times
- Been thanked: 347 times
Correct - He gets two weeks for doing what fifty other players have done this year and in previous years and received no penalty.
On a completely unrelated matter, the Saints are threatening Sydney for fourth spot - can't have that!
Also, as Kosi was coming from the ground Osborne charged him. Umpires everywhere and not one saw it.
The MRP commented on the head whack to Ball and excused it by saying he was going for the ball. Bull. But even if that was true, why was there no 50 metre penalty?
On a completely unrelated matter, the Saints are threatening Sydney for fourth spot - can't have that!
Also, as Kosi was coming from the ground Osborne charged him. Umpires everywhere and not one saw it.
The MRP commented on the head whack to Ball and excused it by saying he was going for the ball. Bull. But even if that was true, why was there no 50 metre penalty?
-
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 7282
- Joined: Tue 09 Mar 2004 9:31am
- Has thanked: 11 times
- Been thanked: 142 times
had a loading added of 10%(suspended last 3 years) of initial finding......Mr Magic wrote:The report I heard on SEN mentioned that if he chooses to go to the tribunal then he would be risking a 2 match penalty, so he must have been assessed as a two game reducing to a 1 game with an early plea.Selhurst Saint wrote:Because there is no reduction for an early plea does that mean we can go to the tribunal without any fear of making things worse??
That makes his charge equivalent to Hall's 'attempted hit' on Wakelin based on penalty!
That seems fair.
One was an attempt to knock a bloke out by a bloke who had just come back from a 7 week penalty.
the other was .....?
Good to see that the system is keeping up its record of consistancy.
but what hurt him suspended in last 12 months as per AFL definition...
was suspended in round 16 last year
there fore if had been one round later this year or his suspension had been one round ealier last year he would have NOT HAD ADDED
68.75 they would have lapsed
just our luck
but it was undiciplined
Last edited by chook23 on Mon 21 Jul 2008 6:38pm, edited 1 time in total.
saint4life
- Mr Magic
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 12753
- Joined: Fri 04 May 2007 9:38am
- Has thanked: 762 times
- Been thanked: 423 times
So the AFL definitiion of 12 months is obviously 12 months plus a round?
I mean a season is 22 rounds (forgetting finals and NAB Cup) yet the AFL version of a footy year is 23 rounds (forgetting finals and NAB Cup)?
It must be if they are counting 'penalty points' from Round 16 as part of a penalty incurred in Round 16 of the following season.
I mean a season is 22 rounds (forgetting finals and NAB Cup) yet the AFL version of a footy year is 23 rounds (forgetting finals and NAB Cup)?
It must be if they are counting 'penalty points' from Round 16 as part of a penalty incurred in Round 16 of the following season.
-
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 18579
- Joined: Thu 11 Mar 2004 1:36am
- Has thanked: 1902 times
- Been thanked: 839 times
-
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 7282
- Joined: Tue 09 Mar 2004 9:31am
- Has thanked: 11 times
- Been thanked: 142 times
The definition isMr Magic wrote:So the AFL definitiion of 12 months is obviously 12 months plus a round?
I mean a season is 22 rounds (forgetting finals and NAB Cup) yet the AFL version of a footy year is 23 rounds (forgetting finals and NAB Cup)?
It must be if they are counting 'penalty points' from Round 16 as part of a penalty incurred in Round 16 of the following season.
this offence Round 16 2008.....
any points carrying over from Round 16 2007 on count
not 12 months by date
22 rounds following the offence round of round 16, 2007
started 17
meaning finishing round 16 this year
saint4life
- Mr Magic
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 12753
- Joined: Fri 04 May 2007 9:38am
- Has thanked: 762 times
- Been thanked: 423 times
I've just seen the vision of Kosi's 'hit' on CH10 News and I am flabbergasted at this.
How can this be worth 1 week?
I've also just watched the highlight package APU put up on YouTube and the 'crunch' Croad gave Roo (resulted in his third goal for the 3rd qtr) was absolutely disgusting.
He deliberately charged at him and jumped into his unprotected ribs with his knee.
What is the definition of 'unduly rough play'?
IMHO how Kosi can cop a week for what he did and yet no mention is made of Croad is simply mind-boggling?
How can this be worth 1 week?
I've also just watched the highlight package APU put up on YouTube and the 'crunch' Croad gave Roo (resulted in his third goal for the 3rd qtr) was absolutely disgusting.
He deliberately charged at him and jumped into his unprotected ribs with his knee.
What is the definition of 'unduly rough play'?
IMHO how Kosi can cop a week for what he did and yet no mention is made of Croad is simply mind-boggling?
Last edited by Mr Magic on Mon 21 Jul 2008 7:28pm, edited 1 time in total.
You are consistant. Even have a whinge about the commentators today.Mr Magic wrote:The report I heard on SEN mentioned that if he chooses to go to the tribunal then he would be risking a 2 match penalty, so he must have been assessed as a two game reducing to a 1 game with an early plea.Selhurst Saint wrote:Because there is no reduction for an early plea does that mean we can go to the tribunal without any fear of making things worse??
That makes his charge equivalent to Hall's 'attempted hit' on Wakelin based on penalty!
That seems fair.
One was an attempt to knock a bloke out by a bloke who had just come back from a 7 week penalty.
the other was .....?
Good to see that the system is keeping up its record of consistancy.
- Mr Magic
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 12753
- Joined: Fri 04 May 2007 9:38am
- Has thanked: 762 times
- Been thanked: 423 times
See Pugger, you thought your position as worst poster had been usurped.plugger66 wrote:You are consistant. Even have a whinge about the commentators today.Mr Magic wrote:The report I heard on SEN mentioned that if he chooses to go to the tribunal then he would be risking a 2 match penalty, so he must have been assessed as a two game reducing to a 1 game with an early plea.Selhurst Saint wrote:Because there is no reduction for an early plea does that mean we can go to the tribunal without any fear of making things worse??
That makes his charge equivalent to Hall's 'attempted hit' on Wakelin based on penalty!
That seems fair.
One was an attempt to knock a bloke out by a bloke who had just come back from a 7 week penalty.
the other was .....?
Good to see that the system is keeping up its record of consistancy.
Not a chance.
Can you please enlighten us all on the official AFL version of the Kosi report and their 23 Round/12 month definition of a year?
Wouldnt have a clue but if it wrong then the Saints will challenge. Worst poster pot kettle black. Look at a few of yours today. Its either we are getting picked on without using those words or continuing the RL v GT threads with Rogerfox.Mr Magic wrote:See Pugger, you thought your position as worst poster had been usurped.plugger66 wrote:You are consistant. Even have a whinge about the commentators today.Mr Magic wrote:The report I heard on SEN mentioned that if he chooses to go to the tribunal then he would be risking a 2 match penalty, so he must have been assessed as a two game reducing to a 1 game with an early plea.Selhurst Saint wrote:Because there is no reduction for an early plea does that mean we can go to the tribunal without any fear of making things worse??
That makes his charge equivalent to Hall's 'attempted hit' on Wakelin based on penalty!
That seems fair.
One was an attempt to knock a bloke out by a bloke who had just come back from a 7 week penalty.
the other was .....?
Good to see that the system is keeping up its record of consistancy.
Not a chance.
Can you please enlighten us all on the official AFL version of the Kosi report and their 23 Round/12 month definition of a year?
Kosi did it and yes there wasnt alot any it but the points say he gets what he gets. Not sure the match review panel compare every decision to Hall or Bakes but maybe you should suggest that to them.
- Mr Magic
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 12753
- Joined: Fri 04 May 2007 9:38am
- Has thanked: 762 times
- Been thanked: 423 times
plugger66 wrote:[
Wouldnt have a clue but if it wrong then the Saints will challenge. Worst poster pot kettle black. Look at a few of yours today. Its either we are getting picked on without using those words or continuing the RL v GT threads with Rogerfox.
Kosi did it and yes there wasnt alot any it but the points say he gets what he gets. Not sure the match review panel compare every decision to Hall or Bakes but maybe you should suggest that to them.
Sheesh you're hard to please Plugger66.
Here I am being nice to you and yet you come back with your typical sarcastic bs.
Do you recognize this post of yours from earlier today?
If not I'll remind you - it was you to Top4King in a thread on the Opposition Forum.plugger66 wrote: I may have had the worst posts on here but congratulations you are now the clear leader.
Now, to the gist of your accusations.
I don't believe i've actually responded to rodgerfox today, as you alleged. I stopped responding to him last night.
Please feel free to post where I am wrong/mistaken on tis. But I know you won't because you never do when challenged to do so.
On the other hand, since you are an unofficial AFL spokesperson and if a year can be 23 rounds (as they apparently define it) then I suppose today could also include last night?
Firstly it didnt sound like you were being nice to me. Second I said I had the woest post on here not I am the worst poster. I have already said I wouldnt have a clue on the other question and if it is wrong the Saints will challenge. How many times can I answer that. And lastly sorry I got that wrong should have said 2 days of either posting to Roger about RL and Gt or we are getting picked on posts. Hope that answers your questions.Mr Magic wrote:plugger66 wrote:[
Wouldnt have a clue but if it wrong then the Saints will challenge. Worst poster pot kettle black. Look at a few of yours today. Its either we are getting picked on without using those words or continuing the RL v GT threads with Rogerfox.
Kosi did it and yes there wasnt alot any it but the points say he gets what he gets. Not sure the match review panel compare every decision to Hall or Bakes but maybe you should suggest that to them.
Sheesh you're hard to please Plugger66.
Here I am being nice to you and yet you come back with your typical sarcastic bs.
Do you recognize this post of yours from earlier today?
If not I'll remind you - it was you to Top4King in a thread on the Opposition Forum.plugger66 wrote: I may have had the worst posts on here but congratulations you are now the clear leader.
Now, to the gist of your accusations.
I don't believe i've actually responded to rodgerfox today, as you alleged. I stopped responding to him last night.
Please feel free to post where I am wrong/mistaken on tis. But I know you won't because you never do when challenged to do so.
On the other hand, since you are an unofficial AFL spokesperson and if a year can be 23 rounds (as they apparently define it) then I suppose today could also include last night?