Saintsational Fan Forum - A passionate community of St Kilda Football Club fans discussing news, history, players, trade rumours, results, AFL stats and more.
Saintsfan wrote:[
Kosi nailed a bloke when he had the choice of not doing so. He contacted his head and the player went off for it. He was nailed like a two-dolla thai hooker.
Plugger66 is correct. Most people on here just dislike that we were penalised depite Kosi actually braking the laws of the game. Thats that. Grow up the people that believe that the powers at be have it in for us too. It is plain childish
I don't have a propblem Kosi getting done for a week as it was high contact but don't give me 'he had another option' crap. Its called a shepard for BJ who was in a better position. Your allowed to do that.
I, like every single other person haven't seen the Kennedy incident from last week but i have no problem him getting off if he.. had his elbow tucked in, didnt leave the ground and didnt intentionally hit him high. Maybe Sylvia also contributed to the collesion somehow, we dont know.
Sometimes players get hurt on the football ground, someone doesnt have to get suspended every time it happens!
SainterK wrote:So you won't admit P66, that the MRP is inconsistent, and that is your take on this?
The head is supposed to be a no go zone, even if it's accidental contact, yet we see other people having no case to answer. This isn't about Kosi getting weeks or not, it's about the inconsistency of it all.
Bergsone, don't most players elbows make contact with the opponents head when attempting to mark?
Not a chest mark,if he was attempting to mark the ball,s*** i need my eyes tested.
Mr Magic wrote:Having only seen it on the replay -3 seems about right. He ran past the ball and collected Malcevski in the head.
As for Hille?????
Can someone tell me when it became illegal to 'run past the ball'? Its just another b/s new term like 'he chose to bump instead of tackle'. Its call a shepard or block, both of which are legal moves that have taken place or 100 years.. he accidently hit him high as Malcevski was falling so give him 1 week but 3 is too much. Malcevski wasn't even hurt badly as he was back on the field 5mins later, how does that deserve 3 weeks.
This game has turned into a game of pedantics controlled by power hungry suits that wish to control every aspect. Footy is a tough game, lets keep it that way!
Is it just me or do Saints players always cop the rougher end of suspentions while other teams players sometimes get off lucky?
Its never been illegal to run past the ball but if you hit someone in the head when there are other options then you pay the price. That rule has been in for 2 years now.
Saintsfan wrote:[
Kosi nailed a bloke when he had the choice of not doing so. He contacted his head and the player went off for it. He was nailed like a two-dolla thai hooker.
Plugger66 is correct. Most people on here just dislike that we were penalised depite Kosi actually braking the laws of the game. Thats that. Grow up the people that believe that the powers at be have it in for us too. It is plain childish
I don't have a propblem Kosi getting done for a week as it was high contact but don't give me 'he had another option' crap. Its called a shepard for BJ who was in a better position. Your allowed to do that.
I, like every single other person haven't seen the Kennedy incident from last week but i have no problem him getting off if he.. had his elbow tucked in, didnt leave the ground and didnt intentionally hit him high. Maybe Sylvia also contributed to the collesion somehow, we dont know.
Sometimes players get hurt on the football ground, someone doesnt have to get suspended every time it happens!
surely a week would've been sufficent!?
Switch it around and we would have been screaming blue murder if it was our player who was nailed illegally. Kosi done bad. Kosi now get suspended. End of story really
If you have not seen the Kennedy incident why are you speculating on it? There is no point because you like everyone else havve not seen it.
Saintsfan wrote:[
Kosi nailed a bloke when he had the choice of not doing so. He contacted his head and the player went off for it. He was nailed like a two-dolla thai hooker.
Plugger66 is correct. Most people on here just dislike that we were penalised depite Kosi actually braking the laws of the game. Thats that. Grow up the people that believe that the powers at be have it in for us too. It is plain childish
I don't have a propblem Kosi getting done for a week as it was high contact but don't give me 'he had another option' crap. Its called a shepard for BJ who was in a better position. Your allowed to do that.
I, like every single other person haven't seen the Kennedy incident from last week but i have no problem him getting off if he.. had his elbow tucked in, didnt leave the ground and didnt intentionally hit him high. Maybe Sylvia also contributed to the collesion somehow, we dont know.
Sometimes players get hurt on the football ground, someone doesnt have to get suspended every time it happens!
surely a week would've been sufficent!?
Switch it around and we would have been screaming blue murder if it was our player who was nailed illegally. Kosi done bad. Kosi now get suspended. End of story really
If you have not seen the Kennedy incident why are you speculating on it? There is no point because you like everyone else havve not seen it.
Its not called speculating, its agreeing with the decision if the things i listed were followed. I know i havent seen it, which is exactly what i said wasn't it. I was showing that if he did the right things than i have no problem anyone getting off.
I haven't got my saints glasses on, I feel the same when we have copped a hit that was fair, elbow in etc. Its the laws and how they're interprtated that I dislike.
bergsone wrote:Did i just hear right ch9 Hille got off ,because his was a legit marking contact ?
Yes I nearly fell over when I heard that and when they showed the video, pretty hard to take a mark when your elbow is cocked to hit a guy in the head.
Kosi, well remember he has no perif vision so doubt he was aware of who was at the ball so probably was always going to get weeks, I dont get how Hill got off though
Isn't funny, 5 years ago and this would've been called a classic bump, that would have been replayed as one of the highlights of the game.It wouldn't have even been considered as reportable.
3rd generation saint wrote:Isn't funny, 5 years ago and this would've been called a classic bump, that would have been replayed as one of the highlights of the game.It wouldn't have even been considered as reportable.
That's the problem. Many people (myself included) were brought up on 70's style footy where that sort of thing was part of the game. Unfortunately there's different rules in place now.
Look, if Kosi had charged him like Lloyd, or Pickett from a few years ago, I would say he was an idiot and deserved the 4 weeks.
His bump was well within the spirit of the game, it wasn't overly hard, but hard enough to put the swans player on his backside. No broken anything because it wasn't hard enough to break anything.
This is just PC invading and ruining the game.
3rd generation saint wrote:Look, if Kosi had charged him like Lloyd, or Pickett from a few years ago, I would say he was an idiot and deserved the 4 weeks.
His bump was well within the spirit of the game, it wasn't overly hard, but hard enough to put the swans player on his backside. No broken anything because it wasn't hard enough to break anything.
This is just PC invading and ruining the game.
I agree with Kosi getting cited and his prior record doesn't help....but I am absolutely gobsmacked that Hille got off. Not attempt at the mark. Contact after the mark was taken. That is an absolute joke...a very unfunny joke
I agree with Kosi getting cited and his prior record doesn't help....but I am absolutely gobsmacked that Hille got off. Not attempt at the mark. Contact after the mark was taken. That is an absolute joke...a very unfunny joke
No joke he got off they deemed he was in the marking contest going for the mark
Also Brent Harvey no case to answer for his thrown punch
I'm with you not upset about Kosi but upset over who gets off and the reasoning. No way was Hill attempting to mark
SaintDippa wrote:Plugger {can't do the reposting of messages}
The last this we wanted Kosi to do was go the ball as he would have cleaned up his team mate who was taking possession.
My point is the farcical and bizzare system where penalities and decisions vary depending on the mood of the reviewer.
IMO Kosi should get weeks but the system under which the review is performed is bizzare.
Yes there are inconsistencies but under the old system it was even worse IMO. If someone could come up with a perfect system it would have been done by now.
Fair enough but the issue is that the games more than a century old and in the same round a bloke like Koz gets four weeks when he shoulda got 1 or 2 and a bloke like Hille got 0 when he shouda got 4!
Regardless of how the arithmetic adds re points etc up, it's plain WRONG.
It's simply silly that we have to debate this stuff over and over and over.
Just then on On the Couch it was said that the MRP considered Hille's blatant cowardice was a legitimate attempt to mark!!! For God's sake???! They must be on acid!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Koz was clumsy and punishable but his feet were grounded, he was as they say hard at a sheperd. Hille was in the back, swung a shoulder cum elbow, and he was airborne and nowhere near contesting the pill in the context of the particular contest.
It's a joke.
"The inches we need are everywhere around us. They're in every break in the game. Every minute, every second. On this team we fight for that inch. On this team we tear ourselves and everyone around us to pieces for that inch. We claw with our fingernails for that inch. Because we know when we add up all those inches that's gonna make the f***in' difference between winning and losing! Between living and dying!'
At least OTC looked at all incidents with both eyes, unlike the previous attempts by Darcy and Walls (to be fair Quartermain still says he is confused about the head being protected)
I tell you what we do, we just keep winning, stick it up the rest of the comp and it will be a good chance to try different forward strategies. Kosi knows the rules and knows he has a bad record, I just want him to get more of the ball instead of trying to use himself as a battering ram. He has forgotten how to take a big contested mark -his biggest weapon, and if he hasn't got that, he is just an ordinary player.
spert wrote:I tell you what we do, we just keep winning, stick it up the rest of the comp and it will be a good chance to try different forward strategies. Kosi knows the rules and knows he has a bad record, I just want him to get more of the ball instead of trying to use himself as a battering ram. He has forgotten how to take a big contested mark -his biggest weapon, and if he hasn't got that, he is just an ordinary player.
I reckon he's a pretty good battering ram though. There's always room for one.
"The inches we need are everywhere around us. They're in every break in the game. Every minute, every second. On this team we fight for that inch. On this team we tear ourselves and everyone around us to pieces for that inch. We claw with our fingernails for that inch. Because we know when we add up all those inches that's gonna make the f***in' difference between winning and losing! Between living and dying!'
Not happy, but Kosi got what he deserved by running past the ball and making head contact.
Hille was not attempting to mark the ball. Probably should have got a week, minimal contact.
Kennedy was a legitimate shepherd and you can see from the vision on OWT that Sylvia actually saw it coming. Still made head contact and broke his jaw, should have got weeks.
saintspremiers wrote:Some of you lot on here need to get glasses and remove your eye patches.
Kosi is guilty, no question.
YES it was reckless (it was definitely worse than negligent).
YES it was medium impact (the Swine player had a sore neck the next day - lucky it wasn't broken...)
YES it was high contact (derrrr.......he had a sore neck, his head hit the ground).
If you are too blind or ignorant not to understand how the points system works, you really have little idea IMO.
I'm comfortable with 3 with an early plea....it could've been worse.
Three is right given plea and points. No quibble. But when Hille gets nil in the same round you can stick your points, stick your MRP, stick your incomprehsibly ridiculous rules committee and I can spit venom justifiably thanks very much.
"The inches we need are everywhere around us. They're in every break in the game. Every minute, every second. On this team we fight for that inch. On this team we tear ourselves and everyone around us to pieces for that inch. We claw with our fingernails for that inch. Because we know when we add up all those inches that's gonna make the f***in' difference between winning and losing! Between living and dying!'
