David Swartz Hangs King for four weeks on SEN

This unofficial St Kilda Saints fan forum is for people of all ages to chat Saints Footy and all posts must be respectful.

Moderators: Saintsational Administrators, Saintsational Moderators

plugger66
Saintsational Legend
Posts: 50626
Joined: Mon 26 Feb 2007 8:15pm
Location: oakleigh

Post: # 753898Post plugger66 »

SaintDippa wrote:If King goes due to the accidential contact is Raph also in trouble ? Head contact and the bloke is off and in hospital.

Does Raph owe a duty of care?

Why no hysteria?
He had the ball. Not sure King had the ball. I think there may be a little difference.


User avatar
ace
Saintsational Legend
Posts: 10734
Joined: Sun 16 Dec 2007 3:28pm
Location: St Kilda
Has thanked: 30 times
Been thanked: 819 times

Post: # 753905Post ace »

plugger66 wrote:Surely someone can work out the points. Does he have a 5 year good record?
Steven King, St Kilda, has been charged with a Level Two striking offence against Ashley Hansen, West Coast, during the fourth quarter of the Round Three match between St Kilda and West Coast, played at Docklands on Saturday April 11, 2009.

In summary, his five-year good record means he can accept a reprimand and 70.31 points towards his future record.

The incident was assessed as reckless conduct (two points), low impact (one point) and high contact (two points). This is a total of five activation points, resulting in a classification of a Level Two offence, drawing 125 demerit points and a one-match sanction. He has an existing five-year good record, which reduces the penalty by 25 per cent to a reprimand and 93.75 points towards his future record. An early plea reduces the penalty by 25 per cent to a reprimand and 70.31 points towards his future record.
Steven King, St Kilda, has accepted a reprimand and 70.31 points towards his future record for striking Ashley Hansen, West Coast, during the fourth quarter of the round three match between St Kilda and West Coast.
Far from having a good record, accepting that reprimand gives him a bad record including the bonus penalties that come with a bad record plus 70.31 points already on his record.


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
User avatar
SaintDippa
Club Player
Posts: 871
Joined: Sun 20 Aug 2006 10:28pm
Location: Mean Streets of Ringwood North
Has thanked: 186 times
Been thanked: 116 times

Post: # 753906Post SaintDippa »

Plugger, you seem to know all. If King was blocking for Gram's space, at what point is he able to make body contact? 5m?


User avatar
ace
Saintsational Legend
Posts: 10734
Joined: Sun 16 Dec 2007 3:28pm
Location: St Kilda
Has thanked: 30 times
Been thanked: 819 times

Post: # 753907Post ace »

SaintDippa wrote:If King goes due to the accidential contact is Raph also in trouble ? Head contact and the bloke is off and in hospital.

Does Raph owe a duty of care?

Why no hysteria?
Raph is safe, he had the ball and did not "don't argue".
The opponent lowered his head to make a rugby style tackle.
It is that player who owes himself a duty of care.


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
plugger66
Saintsational Legend
Posts: 50626
Joined: Mon 26 Feb 2007 8:15pm
Location: oakleigh

Post: # 753909Post plugger66 »

SaintDippa wrote:Plugger, you seem to know all. If King was blocking for Gram's space, at what point is he able to make body contact? 5m?
He is able to block within 5 metres but the rule was changed this year that you are responsible for any damage that occurs. That is the problem. He accidently knocked out a guy off the ball so he takes the responsibilty for that. If nothing had happened the AFL would have let it go even though it is further than 5 metres away.

His bad record will probably mean an extra 2 weeks which is the real problem.


User avatar
Mr Magic
Saintsational Legend
Posts: 12753
Joined: Fri 04 May 2007 9:38am
Has thanked: 762 times
Been thanked: 423 times

Post: # 753913Post Mr Magic »

plugger66 wrote:
SaintDippa wrote:Plugger, you seem to know all. If King was blocking for Gram's space, at what point is he able to make body contact? 5m?
He is able to block within 5 metres but the rule was changed this year that you are responsible for any damage that occurs. That is the problem. He accidently knocked out a guy off the ball so he takes the responsibilty for that. If nothing had happened the AFL would have let it go even though it is further than 5 metres away.

His bad record will probably mean an extra 2 weeks which is the real problem.
I wonder if the video footage would support the notion that Power initiated the contact by running at/into King?

If so, then there would be, IMO, no case for King to answer in that he didn't initiate any contact.

AFAIK there is no rule that says you must get out of the way of someone running at you?


plugger66
Saintsational Legend
Posts: 50626
Joined: Mon 26 Feb 2007 8:15pm
Location: oakleigh

Post: # 753917Post plugger66 »

Mr Magic wrote:
plugger66 wrote:
SaintDippa wrote:Plugger, you seem to know all. If King was blocking for Gram's space, at what point is he able to make body contact? 5m?
He is able to block within 5 metres but the rule was changed this year that you are responsible for any damage that occurs. That is the problem. He accidently knocked out a guy off the ball so he takes the responsibilty for that. If nothing had happened the AFL would have let it go even though it is further than 5 metres away.

His bad record will probably mean an extra 2 weeks which is the real problem.
I wonder if the video footage would support the notion that Power initiated the contact by running at/into King?

If so, then there would be, IMO, no case for King to answer in that he didn't initiate any contact.

AFAIK there is no rule that says you must get out of the way of someone running at you?
No doubt if Power ran into King he would have no case to answer but I have seen it at least 5 times and to me and a few others on here and it seems just about everyone else in the media it is clearly King who initiates contact. That is where the problem lies.


User avatar
ace
Saintsational Legend
Posts: 10734
Joined: Sun 16 Dec 2007 3:28pm
Location: St Kilda
Has thanked: 30 times
Been thanked: 819 times

Post: # 753919Post ace »

saint patrick wrote:
Eastern wrote:Ox & Mark Robinson are doing their bit to hang Kingy on "Game Day" !!
Robbo reckons 5 weeks :shock:

...its a complete joke... :x

everytime its shown it looks a regulation bump with elbow tucked in...

Joey said Kingy has a bruise on his face from a clash of heads in the contact...

if King goes for this will prove that trial by boofheads in the media exists...

doesn't deserve any suspension.
Ouch! King had a duty of care to avoid head high contact even if it was with his head.


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
SainterK
Saintsational Legend
Posts: 21057
Joined: Thu 14 Aug 2008 9:53pm
Location: Melb

Post: # 753922Post SainterK »

Is it possible that the majority of damage was done when his head hit the ground? I get that King is a solid guy, but the footage actually doesn't look as bad as everyone is making out?


plugger66
Saintsational Legend
Posts: 50626
Joined: Mon 26 Feb 2007 8:15pm
Location: oakleigh

Post: # 753925Post plugger66 »

ohwhenthesaints! wrote:Is it possible that the majority of damage was done when his head hit the ground? I get that King is a solid guy, but the footage actually doesn't look as bad as everyone is making out?
They showed in on Channel 9 and he was clearly knocked out before he hit the ground so we cannot even use that. It was an accidental clash of heads initiated by King off the ball and that is where the problem lies plus of course his poor record this year.


User avatar
Mr Magic
Saintsational Legend
Posts: 12753
Joined: Fri 04 May 2007 9:38am
Has thanked: 762 times
Been thanked: 423 times

Post: # 753931Post Mr Magic »

plugger66 wrote:
Mr Magic wrote:
plugger66 wrote:
SaintDippa wrote:Plugger, you seem to know all. If King was blocking for Gram's space, at what point is he able to make body contact? 5m?
He is able to block within 5 metres but the rule was changed this year that you are responsible for any damage that occurs. That is the problem. He accidently knocked out a guy off the ball so he takes the responsibilty for that. If nothing had happened the AFL would have let it go even though it is further than 5 metres away.

His bad record will probably mean an extra 2 weeks which is the real problem.
I wonder if the video footage would support the notion that Power initiated the contact by running at/into King?

If so, then there would be, IMO, no case for King to answer in that he didn't initiate any contact.

AFAIK there is no rule that says you must get out of the way of someone running at you?
No doubt if Power ran into King he would have no case to answer but I have seen it at least 5 times and to me and a few others on here and it seems just about everyone else in the media it is clearly King who initiates contact. That is where the problem lies.
Well if that is the case then I suggest we go out now and employ David Grace QC who seems to have an unmatched record at the Tribunal in controversial cases.
Afterall he managed to get Adam Selwood and Des Headland off charges even when the Tribunal deemed Selwood never said what Headland heard which caused him to chase and punch Selwood.

If there is no defence to the charges then we have to get as clever as the other Clubs who have successfully argued similar open/shut cases.

The admin need to demonstrate that the 'amateur hour' process the previous board seemed to provide in such cases is now consigned to history.


JABBER
Club Player
Posts: 548
Joined: Wed 18 Feb 2009 5:50pm
Location: endeavour hills

david swartz hangs king

Post: # 754567Post JABBER »

David got it right


trevor barker
User avatar
saint75
SS Hall of Fame
Posts: 2101
Joined: Sun 28 Sep 2008 2:05pm
Location: Melbourne

Post: # 754625Post saint75 »

Gotta say, the commentary between Schwarze and Brownless yesterday was some of the worst I have had the misfortune to hear. The open bias shown towards commentators and their 'clubs' is getting ridiculous. Eddie MacGuire was slammed for his commentary and bias towards Collingwood when he was calling there games and I have to say that he was/is nowhere near as bad as some of the commentators we have presently.

The 2 commentators I actually enjoy listening to are Nathan Thompson and James Hird. Great insights to the game and they leave their loyalties at the door. A few AFL media commentators need to take a leaf out of their books.


Post Reply