Goose Loses appeal

[iwantmeseats]

So, just awesome. Now, you can be suspended for a accidental clash of heads?

Lord.Help.us.all.

Im seriously worried about this game and its direction in respect to physical contact.

[Milan Faletic]

You're kidding.

What a joke.

[avid]

I saw it on TV tonight and I just cannot believe it.
It's exactly what I loved about the way he played for us.
And it's one of the things I love about football -- genuine sacrifice in a situation of extreme danger.
They are trying to kill this off. I hate it.
Go Goose. And farewell.

(Just poted this on the other thread too.)

[iwantmeseats]

Sorry, didnt see the other thread.

[falka]

I just cant believe the decision v the Colin Sylvia Jaw break bump. They are absolutely pathetic. As soon as Anderson and Demitriou go, we may get some common sense back.

[plugger66]

I just cant believe the decision v the Colin Sylvia Jaw break bump. They are absolutely pathetic. As soon as Anderson and Demitriou go, we may get some common sense back.

Are they on the tribunal? The Sylvia one was obviously wrong but the Goose one was right under the rules that now apply. Goose could have tackled. Chose to bump and then pays the consequences.

By the way who should run the AFL afterall it has fallen apart in the last 7 years compared to the NRL, Union and Soccer.

[doppler effect]

That decision is a bloody disgrace!

And yet that pr*ck Giansiracusa had no case to answer when he destroyed Kosi's career.

[meher baba]

That decision is a bloody disgrace!

And yet that pr*ck Giansiracusa had no case to answer when he destroyed Kosi's career.

The rules have changed since then. Gia would probably go out for several weeks if he did that today.

[35...LEGEND]

I'm sure someone will tell me.........
But how was the Goose incident different to the Neon Leon clash with Fish?
Both accidental,similar consequences,different MRP/Tribunal ruling's.

Not saying Neon should have gone,just that Goose is very stiff in comparison.........IMO.

Both gone or both off.........seems a little inconsistent.

[Mr Magic]

That decision is a bloody disgrace!

And yet that pr*ck Giansiracusa had no case to answer when he destroyed Kosi's career.

The rules have changed since then. Gia would probably go out for several weeks if he did that today.

Like Josh Kennedy?

To me, that's the problem with this whole MRP/Tribunal farce.
Is there anybody out there who seriously thinks the MRP got that Kennedy/Sylvia incident correct?
And yet we have Anderson publicly spruiking that they did.

Therefore it is legitimate to hold it up as a precedent when watching any other similar case.

Until the AFL comes out and publicly declares that the Kennedy decision is wrong, then nobody can speak with confidence as to what the MRP/Tribunal decides on similar incidents.

[Dis Believer]

To me, that's the problem with this whole MRP/Tribunal farce.
Is there anybody out there who seriously thinks the MRP got that Kennedy/Sylvia incident correct?
And yet we have Anderson publicly spruiking that they did.

Therefore it is legitimate to hold it up as a precedent when watching any other similar case.

Until the AFL comes out and publicly declares that the Kennedy decision is wrong, then nobody can speak with confidence as to what the MRP/Tribunal decides on similar incidents.

Plunger can - watch him. The tribuneral, the MRP, the AFL admin, they are all demi-gods whom we should be thankful for, and heaping praise upon - shouldn't we Plunger 'ol pal.............

[plugger66]

To me, that's the problem with this whole MRP/Tribunal farce.
Is there anybody out there who seriously thinks the MRP got that Kennedy/Sylvia incident correct?
And yet we have Anderson publicly spruiking that they did.

Therefore it is legitimate to hold it up as a precedent when watching any other similar case.

Until the AFL comes out and publicly declares that the Kennedy decision is wrong, then nobody can speak with confidence as to what the MRP/Tribunal decides on similar incidents.

Plunger can - watch him. The tribuneral, the MRP, the AFL admin, they are all demi-gods whom we should be thankful for, and heaping praise upon - shouldn't we Plunger 'ol pal.............

Still got those hilarious names. That is sooooo funny. I dont think any of those are demi gods and make mistakes like many people, companies etc in life but does one mistake then mean that all decisions should be based on those mistakes and yes I know they didnt admit the mistake with Kennedy it certainly looked to me like an error.

[meher baba]

To me, that's the problem with this whole MRP/Tribunal farce.
Is there anybody out there who seriously thinks the MRP got that Kennedy/Sylvia incident correct?
And yet we have Anderson publicly spruiking that they did.

Therefore it is legitimate to hold it up as a precedent when watching any other similar case.

Until the AFL comes out and publicly declares that the Kennedy decision is wrong, then nobody can speak with confidence as to what the MRP/Tribunal decides on similar incidents.

Plunger can - watch him. The tribuneral, the MRP, the AFL admin, they are all demi-gods whom we should be thankful for, and heaping praise upon - shouldn't we Plunger 'ol pal.............

Still got those hilarious names. That is sooooo funny. I dont think any of those are demi gods and make mistakes like many people, companies etc in life but does one mistake then mean that all decisions should be based on those mistakes and yes I know they didnt admit the mistake with Kennedy it certainly looked to me like an error.

My reading of the press at the time was that Demetriou and Anderson were pretty pissed off with the MRP about the decision (how could they not have been? it was an absolutely ridiculous decision), had taken it up with the MRP, and had met with dumb stubborness in response.

It's hard to understand what the reasoning of the MRP could possibly have been: the AFL made it crystal clear that the duty of care not to injure another player's head rested with the player making the tackle. Sylvia didn't have the ball, his head got injured, end of story.

As I understand it, the video footage didn't definitively show the contact with the head. So Demetriou and Anderson didn't have much of an opportunity to take it any further at this stage: other than to start WW III with the MRP and embarass the AFL even more than it had been by the ludicrous decision.

Demetriou was clearly not happy. I've been around enough public figures to know that they don't make statements like "I talked about the reasons for the decision with X and they explained them to me and I'm totallly relaxed about the outcome" if you're happy: you say something more like "X made absolutely the right decision and I support him 100%".

I suspect that the AFL will deal with this issue by moving those responsible on at the first opportunity. I certainly would.

[bozza1980]

I'm sure someone will tell me.........
But how was the Goose incident different to the Neon Leon clash with Fish?
Both accidental,similar consequences,different MRP/Tribunal ruling's.

Not saying Neon should have gone,just that Goose is very stiff in comparison.........IMO.

Both gone or both off.........seems a little inconsistent.

Not that I necessarily agree with the decision on Maguire but the difference is that Davis only option to not cause head contact was to not contest.

Maguire had the option of tackling.

Which when compared to the Sylvia incident is consistent, ie the only option for the player was to bump.

So the sancrosanct head isn't as sancrosanct when the contest is a bump or not compete situation.

But why should a rule make sense to anybody, apparently there is a deliberate rushed behind rule but if a player rushes a behind under pressure he is fine. Apart from the famous Joel Bowden rushed behinds a few years back how many times would a player have rushed a behind under no pressure.

Just a couple of examples of the league talking tough but not having the intestinal fortitude to actually follow through.

[Dis Believer]

Still got those hilarious names. That is sooooo funny. I dont think any of those are demi gods and make mistakes like many people, companies etc in life but does one mistake then mean that all decisions should be based on those mistakes and yes I know they didnt admit the mistake with Kennedy it certainly looked to me like an error.

Not a hilarious name at all Plunger - I jsut happen to think it's a more accurate reflection of your internet persona that your chosen nic.

It's really about as amusing as your constant habit of defending the AFL, umpires, and any associated hierarchy with one line sarcarstic retorts, no matter what the incident. If you doubt that how you are perceived on here then we could always try and run a poll?
If an umpire pulled out a gun and shot one of our players, on the field, during a game and then penalised us for an interchange infringement if the replacement player run on before the stretcher came off, I would be waiting for you to post in the resultant thread about how the umpire was technically correct as the deceased player's body hadn't left the ground so we technically had 19 men on the field.
It wears very thin after a few years.

Promise I'll stop if you do...........

[plugger66]

Still got those hilarious names. That is sooooo funny. I dont think any of those are demi gods and make mistakes like many people, companies etc in life but does one mistake then mean that all decisions should be based on those mistakes and yes I know they didnt admit the mistake with Kennedy it certainly looked to me like an error.

Not a hilarious name at all Plunger - I jsut happen to think it's a more accurate reflection of your internet persona that your chosen nic.

It's really about as amusing as your constant habit of defending the AFL, umpires, and any associated hierarchy with one line sarcarstic retorts, no matter what the incident. If you doubt that how you are perceived on here then we could always try and run a poll?
If an umpire pulled out a gun and shot one of our players, on the field, during a game and then penalised us for an interchange infringement if the replacement player run on before the stretcher came off, I would be waiting for you to post in the resultant thread about how the umpire was technically correct as the deceased player's body hadn't left the ground so we technically had 19 men on the field.
It wears very thin after a few years.

Promise I'll stop if you do...........

Please make me be the most popular on an internet forum. It is so important. God help people like you who want to be liked because they dont have a true friend in the world and rely on unknown internet people. Now please go run that poll because it would really upset me if even 2% of people liked me.

[Solar]

shame cause he was doing well for my supercoach and dreamteams.... makes gram getting up or silvagni playing even more important....

[rexy]

To me, that's the problem with this whole MRP/Tribunal farce.
Is there anybody out there who seriously thinks the MRP got that Kennedy/Sylvia incident correct?
And yet we have Anderson publicly spruiking that they did.

Therefore it is legitimate to hold it up as a precedent when watching any other similar case.

Until the AFL comes out and publicly declares that the Kennedy decision is wrong, then nobody can speak with confidence as to what the MRP/Tribunal decides on similar incidents.

Plunger can - watch him. The tribuneral, the MRP, the AFL admin, they are all demi-gods whom we should be thankful for, and heaping praise upon - shouldn't we Plunger 'ol pal.............

What has pluggers opinion got to do with your opinin, why bait another poster and turn a post into a personal stoush rather than just state your opinion. Dont understand the point of this post. Looks like deliberately trying to get in to an argument to me.

Surely somewhere on the internet there is a forumn for people that just want to argue but this is not it. This forumn is to debate and discuss football issues. Stick to the point and leave the personal crap at the door mate.

Goose was stiff and the AFL need to hold the MRP accountable for a wrong decision IMO, Goose wasnt even trying to bump, thought he was just going at the ball which he has a right to do.