ZAC VERDICT !!

[Dal'sGal26]

I dont think it was even worth a free kick let alone 2 weeks out

100% agree. It was right in front of where I was sitting, it was a fair hip and shoulder, something I thought was still allowed in football!!!!!

[happy feet]

How the hell was that worth 2 weeks. The hit Gian put on Kosi was not deemed rough conduct but fractured his skull? What a joke.

If we are to maintain any credibility and not be an AFL whipping boy we must appeal.

[maverick]

Shocked? It's a joke, but worth taking to the Appeals Board which can look at any evidence, including past incidents. Remember, this was the Tribunal.

Not worth it. We shouldnt get involved in that staff. Need to look at the bigger picture.

You are kidding aren't you, absolutely worth it....

[ace]

I am not sure have I ever said

"AFL an abbreviation for corruption"

[Dan Warna]

same penalty as halls intentional punch to the face with halls track record...brilliant...

[Bernard Shakey]

Must appeal!

[kosifantutti23]

Must appeal!

What grounds?

It will just waste another chunk of money and chunk of time.

[midas_touch]

Just further evidence that there is a vendetta towards us with it comes to the tribunal and suspensions.

[Moccha]

Shocked? It's a joke, but worth taking to the Appeals Board which can look at any evidence, including past incidents. Remember, this was the Tribunal.

Well it is chooklotto with this brilliant system:-

Jordan Lewis punches Firrito in the stomach hard enough to drop him to his kness and gets told by the Tribunal that there was 'insufficient force to constitute a blow'.

You've gotta get on your knees for that

[3rd generation saint]

Well, by this verdict, the AFL has just declared that it's umpires are incompetent, after all, as I mentioned in the other thread, the closest umpire, who had a clear view of the incident, deemed that it wasn't worthy of a report, 50 metre, or even a free kick to get a 50 metre.
Therefore is decision has been over rided by the AFL's officials, meaning a declaration of incompetence.
Gee just think of the stink if a coach did the same thing, oh wait a coach has and then an AFL commentator was called liar.

[BakesFan]

Well, seeing as Launie locked the other thread, I'll ask the question here..

Where's plugger66 telling us how 'fair' the system is?
Then he should tell us how Zac would have got the exact same penalty if he played for The Filth, The Scum, or The Bummers.

Better get the skirts out fellas, because it's officially become a girl's game as of today... (absolutely no disrespect meant to the girls; but they have to admit they can't play the game at the highest level)

AFL = A pack of Flowering CAN'TS!!!

[Devilhead]

Must appeal!

What grounds?

It will just waste another chunk of money and chunk of time.

On the grounds that we are sick and tired of being rogered in the arse time and time again by the tribunal

Sorry Roger

[happy feet]

Newsflash - in a groundbreaking ruling, the AFL tribunal has suspended the entire St Kilda football team after its bruising preliminary final win over Geelong. In justifying its actions, the tribunal has advised that it cannot possibly entertain the possibility of St Kilda winning the 2009 flag. It has recommended that AFL favourites, the Sydney Swans, take the place of the now suspended Saints against the other AFL all time favourite Essendon. League pundits are trying to guess how many goals Matthew Lloyd will kick from dubious free kicks. It is rumoured that the Swans will bring Big Bad Bazza out of retirement to belt a few of the Don's around in the first quarter, without being reported or being found guilty of anything by the match review committee.

[CORDZ]

St Kilda must have the worst team of legal experts in the entire AFL. When was the last time we successfully argued a case to get someone off?? It seems whenever we fight a decision - we may as well save the time and money and double the penalty!!!!!

[kosifantutti23]

St Kilda must have the worst team of legal experts in the entire AFL. When was the last time we successfully argued a case to get someone off?? It seems whenever we fight a decision - we may as well save the time and money and double the penalty!!!!!

Should have taken the King decision to the tribunal. The MRP got this right under their (flawed) system.

[Stephen Theodore]

If thats worth two weeks, its now official, NETBALL rules are more lenient on bumps than AFL.

Absolutely pathetic.

[Jimmy1972]

Bugger

[Devilhead]

If thats worth two weeks, its now official, NETBALL rules are more lenient on bumps than AFL.

Absolutely pathetic.

This is what gets me - the charge was

Reckless conduct, medium impact and body contact

Body contact????

Aussie Rules Football as we know it ..... is dead

[Young Georgie]

Bad call. Stupid call. Totally effen biased bullshite corrupt call.

But, what's to gain at this stage by appealing? Fight the power that be? Impale Vlad and gut Adrian Anonymous? Pfft!

The system's farkd and I'm as pssed off as the next Sainter but I reckon as someone said earlier they've got bigger fish to fry. Like with Rudi Kuertzen and the Strauss 'catch' and all those patently shite decisions, sometimes you've got to just wear it and you've got to move on.

We've got the luxury of ready made replacements in Max, Goose, Begley, Gardiner, etc and Zac will miss the Dogs and the Swans not the finals. And if St Kilda's legals are anything to go by the appeal would fail and we'd give someone more ammo to have a go.

We've had the rough end of the stick for decades and they've got to have a whipping boy but once St Kilda wins its 2nd flag and stamps its authority the AFL can jam it up someone else for a while.

Hopefully we won't have to wait too long for some hard earned respect!!

[FullMonty]

Typical kangaroo court decision when it comes to StKilda players.

Probably compares well with Frasers love tap (1 week).

Either we should give up contesting or get a decent QC.

[Milne]

I'm just glad this isn't during the finals.

[SainterK]

I am more worried that this may impact Zac's confidence, I have been enjoying his natural instinct on the field and how he imposes himself on a game. I don't want him to think twice, or change his style....

[skeptic]

I thought it was a stupid decsion to challenge this in the 1st place.

The offer was 1 week for god's sake. Even though the principle is wrong, principles don't win you premierships.
Stevie Baker could have lied RE the Baker incident and said that he stopped suddenly and Farmer ran into him. Instead, he told the truth thathe stopped suddenly and doubled back to bump into him and BAMO 6 weeks.

Everyone knows that our track record with the tribunal is not good. We have to appeal now but i doubt anything will change.

Should have just taken the week on the chin, not ruffled the boat and gone on with it.

*NEWS FLASH!!! We can't stick it to the AFL and win. GT tried it with the umpires and it cost us big time. Suck it up and keep on marching IMO

[maverick]

Why does everyone think by appealing we are "sticking it up the AFL"?
The tribunal is independent, they took over half an hour to make a decision, which means it was not a clear cut decision.

Pay the money, fight the good fight, defend our player as he deserves to be defended, not because the AFL is corrupt or we are being victimised, but because Zac did the team thing and somehow has been suspended.
The decision is incorrect, that is why the appeal is required, nothing more nothing less.

[oneteam]

St Kilda must have the worst team of legal experts in the entire AFL. When was the last time we successfully argued a case to get someone off?? It seems whenever we fight a decision - we may as well save the time and money and double the penalty!!!!!

We won the last one, which was in round 4 this year. They argued the force by Montagna was not enough to justify the report. The tribunal agreed and threw it out.