Zac dawson- offered 1 week?? - Kosi 1

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

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

Post: # 779340Post plugger66 »

So some on here think that we get a bad deal from the tribunal by coomparing incidents. That is only an opinion. Lets get some facts to see if we get a bad deal. Anyone got this year and last years reports and weeks missed by our club compared to every other club. If someone has can they please post to see how we are going.


chook23
Saintsational Legend
Posts: 7345
Joined: Tue 09 Mar 2004 9:31am
Has thanked: 12 times
Been thanked: 147 times

Post: # 779347Post chook23 »

Have watched the Dawson bump a number of times......

Should challenge


saint4life
User avatar
Dan Warna
Saintsational Legend
Posts: 12846
Joined: Tue 09 Mar 2004 12:56am
Location: melbourne

Post: # 779348Post Dan Warna »

Zippy wrote:
Dan Warna wrote:should just belt someone in the face, you only get two weeks for that...no wait thats just barry hall + a track record :roll:
Good thought -we should try it :twisted: . Zac just needs to put on a Swans tracksuit and a gorilla mask.
nah gorilla's have many redeeming features, and are far better looking.


Bewaire krime, da krimson bolt is comeing to yure nayborhood to smach krime

SHUT UP KRIME!
BonoRocks
Club Player
Posts: 283
Joined: Thu 10 Jun 2004 6:26pm
Location: Home
Has thanked: 10 times
Been thanked: 10 times

Post: # 779366Post BonoRocks »

accept them both, bulldogs have small forward line anyway, max should come back to play on one of them anyway.

If fit bring in gardi, goose and max

For Dawson, Kosi and McEvoy

That way we have kosi and dawson back for the game against the hawks

If dawson is ever going to miss a week this is a good week for it to happen against the fleet footed bulldogs..

They put minson up forward, surely one of our others can play on him when he happens to go forward.

Goose to play out of the square and can hopefully bust a pack and bring the ball to ground in kosi's absence. Maybe catch a few and kick a couple of goals..


User avatar
degruch
Saintsational Legend
Posts: 8948
Joined: Mon 19 May 2008 4:29pm
Location: Croydonia
Has thanked: 146 times
Been thanked: 237 times

Post: # 779367Post degruch »

So...anyone know when we find out? Before 5pm today?


saintsrus
SS Hall of Fame
Posts: 2324
Joined: Sat 01 Oct 2005 5:10pm
Location: F.K.A. saintsforlife
Been thanked: 3 times

Post: # 779370Post saintsrus »

degruch wrote:So...anyone know when we find out? Before 5pm today?
i think we have to make a decision by midday?


Before Im 85
remboy
SS Hall of Fame
Posts: 2133
Joined: Fri 22 Jul 2005 9:27am
Location: Rockville
Has thanked: 587 times
Been thanked: 178 times

Post: # 779371Post remboy »

I think they have to decide this morning if they are going to challenge. Kosi deserved a week - you can't come in late with a round arm to the back of the head and pretend you are trying to spoil.
Zac's penalty, on the other hand, we must challenge. And if the tribunal don't chuck it out - appeal. The umpire called play on, so the Crows player was fair game. The bump wasn't excessive so I still can't see what the punishment is for.


User avatar
St Chris
SS Hall of Fame
Posts: 2153
Joined: Wed 05 Apr 2006 2:20pm
Has thanked: 4 times
Been thanked: 41 times

Post: # 779390Post St Chris »

The general consensus seems to be accept Kosi's ban, and fight Dawsons.

I think we should fight them both. Dawsons is pretty self explanitory - nothing in it, not reportable offence etc....

Kosi's should be fought on the basis that the charge is wrong. He has been charged with high contact, but he clearly made contact to the back of Douglas, not his head. He might not escape suspension all together becuase of his previous points, but he'll certainly have less carry over points for Round 16 next year!!!

We've gotta have one of these technicality-type reports go in our favor one day.


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

Post: # 779402Post saint75 »

plugger66 wrote:So some on here think that we get a bad deal from the tribunal by coomparing incidents. That is only an opinion. Lets get some facts to see if we get a bad deal. Anyone got this year and last years reports and weeks missed by our club compared to every other club. If someone has can they please post to see how we are going.
Baker getting 8 weeks for an incident with no footage. Incident before the tribunal this week was thrown out due to lack of video evidence. What the?

Kosi's tripping charge - 2 weeks

Fraser's tummy tap - 2 weeks

Do I need to go on?

Then there are incidents against our players where the opposition gets off (Xavier Clarke and Kosi) yet when it is one of our players doing the same thing, we get weeks.

Do you need anything else?

St Kilda have to fight the Zac Dawson penalty. Kosi's one will depend on whether he was going to play this week or not. If he was going to be out anyway, let it go.


Fortius Quo Fidelius
Stjohn
Club Player
Posts: 363
Joined: Tue 09 Mar 2004 4:17pm

Didn't Bakes...

Post: # 779473Post Stjohn »

get rubbed out for an attempted punch because of high impact???


" I am a loyal person and at the end of my career it will be great to look back and know I am a St Kilda person for life. That was something that has heavily influenced my decision.â€
User avatar
yipper
SS Life Member
Posts: 3967
Joined: Wed 10 Mar 2004 8:18am
Location: Gippsland
Been thanked: 10 times

Post: # 779480Post yipper »

Get rubbed out when you were trying to get a 100kg ruckman off your foot!!


I want to stand for something. I'm a loyal person and I think at the end of my career it will be great to look back and know that I'm a St Kilda person for life.
- Nick Riewoldt. May 19th 2009.
User avatar
saint75
SS Hall of Fame
Posts: 2101
Joined: Sun 28 Sep 2008 2:05pm
Location: Melbourne

Post: # 779492Post saint75 »

yipper wrote:Get rubbed out when you were trying to get a 100kg ruckman off your foot!!
I forgot the classic Steven Baker tribunal decision. We all surely remember him being rubbed out for 'attempting' to strike!!!


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

Post: # 779527Post plugger66 »

saint75 wrote:
plugger66 wrote:So some on here think that we get a bad deal from the tribunal by coomparing incidents. That is only an opinion. Lets get some facts to see if we get a bad deal. Anyone got this year and last years reports and weeks missed by our club compared to every other club. If someone has can they please post to see how we are going.
Baker getting 8 weeks for an incident with no footage. Incident before the tribunal this week was thrown out due to lack of video evidence. What the?

Kosi's tripping charge - 2 weeks

Fraser's tummy tap - 2 weeks

Do I need to go on?

Then there are incidents against our players where the opposition gets off (Xavier Clarke and Kosi) yet when it is one of our players doing the same thing, we get weeks.

Do you need anything else?

St Kilda have to fight the Zac Dawson penalty. Kosi's one will depend on whether he was going to play this week or not. If he was going to be out anyway, let it go.
That isnt what asked for. Just about every club could come up with stupid Trbunal decisions. Ask the pies when Cloke was rubbed out for a GF. They could say it cost them the GF which is a fairly important game. No one has stats for the last 2 years to see how we fair.


bergholt
Saintsational Legend
Posts: 7356
Joined: Wed 11 Aug 2004 9:25am

Post: # 779529Post bergholt »

Consensus here was correct:

http://news.realfooty.com.au/breaking-n ... -drg6.html

Dawson to challenge, Kosi to accept.


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

Post: # 779531Post saint75 »

plugger66 wrote:
saint75 wrote:
plugger66 wrote:So some on here think that we get a bad deal from the tribunal by coomparing incidents. That is only an opinion. Lets get some facts to see if we get a bad deal. Anyone got this year and last years reports and weeks missed by our club compared to every other club. If someone has can they please post to see how we are going.
Baker getting 8 weeks for an incident with no footage. Incident before the tribunal this week was thrown out due to lack of video evidence. What the?

Kosi's tripping charge - 2 weeks

Fraser's tummy tap - 2 weeks

Do I need to go on?

Then there are incidents against our players where the opposition gets off (Xavier Clarke and Kosi) yet when it is one of our players doing the same thing, we get weeks.

Do you need anything else?

St Kilda have to fight the Zac Dawson penalty. Kosi's one will depend on whether he was going to play this week or not. If he was going to be out anyway, let it go.
That isnt what asked for. Just about every club could come up with stupid Trbunal decisions. Ask the pies when Cloke was rubbed out for a GF. They could say it cost them the GF which is a fairly important game. No one has stats for the last 2 years to see how we fair.
So you don't think that CONSISTENT bad decisions against St Kilda players shows a pattern in the rough deal we get from the tribunal? What do you define as a bad deal then? Hawthorn are lauded for their 'unsociable' football and our players are called reckless and stupid when we do the same.


Fortius Quo Fidelius
bergholt
Saintsational Legend
Posts: 7356
Joined: Wed 11 Aug 2004 9:25am

Post: # 779533Post bergholt »

saint75 wrote:So you don't think that CONSISTENT bad decisions against St Kilda players shows a pattern in the rough deal we get from the tribunal? What do you define as a bad deal then? Hawthorn are lauded for their 'unsociable' football and our players are called reckless and stupid when we do the same.
can't speak for him, but i reckon you're being a sook.


oneteam
Club Player
Posts: 299
Joined: Tue 21 Jul 2009 1:54pm
Location: Melb

Post: # 779536Post oneteam »

saint75 wrote:[So you don't think that CONSISTENT bad decisions against St Kilda players shows a pattern in the rough deal we get from the tribunal? What do you define as a bad deal then? Hawthorn are lauded for their 'unsociable' football and our players are called reckless and stupid when we do the same.
Hi , newbie poster, but just wanted to say i agree saint 75 that we seem to get a really bad run from the MRP. look at the Montagna charge from round 4 . ( great player Joey). We challenged it and it was thrown out completely, as it should have been. Why was he even charged?

dawson the same.


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

Post: # 779538Post plugger66 »

saint75 wrote:
plugger66 wrote:
saint75 wrote:
plugger66 wrote:So some on here think that we get a bad deal from the tribunal by coomparing incidents. That is only an opinion. Lets get some facts to see if we get a bad deal. Anyone got this year and last years reports and weeks missed by our club compared to every other club. If someone has can they please post to see how we are going.
Baker getting 8 weeks for an incident with no footage. Incident before the tribunal this week was thrown out due to lack of video evidence. What the?

Kosi's tripping charge - 2 weeks

Fraser's tummy tap - 2 weeks

Do I need to go on?

Then there are incidents against our players where the opposition gets off (Xavier Clarke and Kosi) yet when it is one of our players doing the same thing, we get weeks.

Do you need anything else?

St Kilda have to fight the Zac Dawson penalty. Kosi's one will depend on whether he was going to play this week or not. If he was going to be out anyway, let it go.
That isnt what asked for. Just about every club could come up with stupid Trbunal decisions. Ask the pies when Cloke was rubbed out for a GF. They could say it cost them the GF which is a fairly important game. No one has stats for the last 2 years to see how we fair.
So you don't think that CONSISTENT bad decisions against St Kilda players shows a pattern in the rough deal we get from the tribunal? What do you define as a bad deal then? Hawthorn are lauded for their 'unsociable' football and our players are called reckless and stupid when we do the same.
Do you know all the other clubs bad decisions. We remember ours because we follow our club. Hawthorn got heaps of reports last year so i dont get your point. By the way Hawthorn were given heaps in the media last year about suspensions and many said it could cost them the GF. If you listen through one ear you will hear what you want to hear just as watching through one eye.

What is your point. Are you honestly saying the MRP want us to get plenty of reports?


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

Post: # 779548Post saint75 »

No, my point is that we consistently get some dubious MRP decisions and up until this year our success rate at challenging them was pitiful. Not for a moment am I saying that all of our decisions have been incorrect, but there are a quite a number of them that have been dubious and the ones mention above were just a sample of them. You don't have to be a St Kilda supporter to see that.

It might actually surprise you that my 'one eye' actually manages to watch other teams play each week, not just St Kilda. Though I may only have 'one eye', I do have 2 ears and I do watch and listen quite closely to the other 15 teams in the competition. Any supporter who with half an idea does. If you want to assess where you are as a club, it is crucial.


Fortius Quo Fidelius
Post Reply