Hayes faces reprimand, Sandilands free to play
Moderators: Saintsational Administrators, Saintsational Moderators
Hayes faces reprimand, Sandilands free to play
http://www.afl.com.au/news/newsarticle/ ... fault.aspx
Because the original offence constituted a less than 100 point violation, Hayes remains eligible for the Brownlow Medal this year.
In summary, he can accept a reprimand and 60 points towards his future record with an early plea.
The incident was assessed as negligent conduct (one point), low impact (one point) and high contact (two points). This is a total of four activation points, resulting in a classification of a Level One offence, drawing 80 demerit points and a reprimand. He has no existing good or bad record. An early plea reduces the sanction by 25 per cent to a reprimand and 60 points towards his future record.
_______________________________________
Contact involving Fremantle’s Aaron Sandilands and the Adelaide Crows’ Phil Davis from the second quarter of Saturday’s match was assessed. The panel said Sandilands was running towards the ball in a legitimate attempt to mark the football. Contact was made while both players were seeking to take possession of the ball. No further action was required.
Because the original offence constituted a less than 100 point violation, Hayes remains eligible for the Brownlow Medal this year.
In summary, he can accept a reprimand and 60 points towards his future record with an early plea.
The incident was assessed as negligent conduct (one point), low impact (one point) and high contact (two points). This is a total of four activation points, resulting in a classification of a Level One offence, drawing 80 demerit points and a reprimand. He has no existing good or bad record. An early plea reduces the sanction by 25 per cent to a reprimand and 60 points towards his future record.
_______________________________________
Contact involving Fremantle’s Aaron Sandilands and the Adelaide Crows’ Phil Davis from the second quarter of Saturday’s match was assessed. The panel said Sandilands was running towards the ball in a legitimate attempt to mark the football. Contact was made while both players were seeking to take possession of the ball. No further action was required.
Last edited by SainterK on Mon 07 Jun 2010 5:07pm, edited 2 times in total.
-
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 25303
- Joined: Tue 01 Feb 2005 4:25pm
- Location: Trump Tower
- Has thanked: 142 times
- Been thanked: 284 times
60 points for that?
WTF!
If we weren't about to fly across to Perth I reckon this one might've been worth taking to the tribunal - we really don't want Lenny carrying 60 points for a bulltish charge.....I thought the strike was not foreceful enough to constitute a report.
As for Sandilands, no charge laid per below from dimwit.com.au:
Contact involving Fremantle’s Aaron Sandilands and the Adelaide Crows’ Phil Davis from the second quarter of Saturday’s match was assessed. The panel said Sandilands was running towards the ball in a legitimate attempt to mark the football. Contact was made while both players were seeking to take possession of the ball. No further action was required.
WTF!
If we weren't about to fly across to Perth I reckon this one might've been worth taking to the tribunal - we really don't want Lenny carrying 60 points for a bulltish charge.....I thought the strike was not foreceful enough to constitute a report.
As for Sandilands, no charge laid per below from dimwit.com.au:
Contact involving Fremantle’s Aaron Sandilands and the Adelaide Crows’ Phil Davis from the second quarter of Saturday’s match was assessed. The panel said Sandilands was running towards the ball in a legitimate attempt to mark the football. Contact was made while both players were seeking to take possession of the ball. No further action was required.
- degruch
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 8948
- Joined: Mon 19 May 2008 4:29pm
- Location: Croydonia
- Has thanked: 146 times
- Been thanked: 237 times
Yes, well, I don't know about taking it to the tribunal, as he's hardly likely to add any points to his total any time soon. But if Sandilands get nothing for a legitimate marking attempt (and the player crushed and mamed in the process...who wouldn't be with Sandy landing on top of them), why does Lenny got points for a spoil gone wrong? Who knows what logic these guys use...best not to compare cases, as we know, 1 + 1 always equals 3.6 when it comes to the MRP.saintspremiers wrote:60 points for that?
WTF!
If we weren't about to fly across to Perth I reckon this one might've been worth taking to the tribunal - we really don't want Lenny carrying 60 points for a bulltish charge.....I thought the strike was not foreceful enough to constitute a report.
As for Sandilands, no charge laid per below from dimwit.com.au:
Contact involving Fremantle’s Aaron Sandilands and the Adelaide Crows’ Phil Davis from the second quarter of Saturday’s match was assessed. The panel said Sandilands was running towards the ball in a legitimate attempt to mark the football. Contact was made while both players were seeking to take possession of the ball. No further action was required.
- TazzieSaintGirl83
- Club Player
- Posts: 727
- Joined: Wed 07 Oct 2009 1:16pm
- Location: Beautiful Isle of Tasmania :)
I agree in reference to not being able to make sense of the MRP findings. I am not saying I think we get crucified more than other teams I just mean in general.
Does anyone know if the same members of the MRP judge each incident or whether they rotate? just curious
Does anyone know if the same members of the MRP judge each incident or whether they rotate? just curious
100% Sainter Girl Through and Through
- super dooper
- Club Player
- Posts: 858
- Joined: Sat 20 Mar 2004 12:24am
- widereceiver
- Club Player
- Posts: 701
- Joined: Tue 12 Apr 2005 6:26pm
- Location: near Linton St.
Not in this post, but it has been in others. I agree, it was fair FWIW.degruch wrote:No-one said it wasn't fair, did they?super dooper wrote:Sandi's contest was fair, lets get the blinkers off here people!!!
"Winning's not everything, it's the ONLY thing!" Vince Lombardi.
Sam Gilbert #1 booster - always on the attack!!!
Win more for Winmar
Sam Gilbert #1 booster - always on the attack!!!
Win more for Winmar
it was clumsy, which is why it was a free kick for high contact.super dooper wrote:I thought it was a bit clumsy on Lenny's behalf, take the reprimand and move on.
However i noticed that it only accrued 80 points so may as well challenge for the hell of it, who knows whats around the corner.
Sandi's contest was fair, lets get the blinkers off here people!!!
otherwise, he has nothing to lose in challenging it but everything to gain!
philip
Just looking forward to us having a real crack each week, and appreciating the younger talent coming through.
if lenny gets 80 points then you might as well hand out points ever week because similar incidents where a player attempts to spoil and hits the play on the head happens week in week out. Free kick, maybe 50 if the player took the mark but a report.... WHAT?
FQF
loyal in the good times and bad
In richo I trust
2013 trade/draft best ever?
Billings - future brownlow medallist Longer - future best ruck
Dunstan - future captain Eli - future cult hero
Acres - future norm smith
loyal in the good times and bad
In richo I trust
2013 trade/draft best ever?
Billings - future brownlow medallist Longer - future best ruck
Dunstan - future captain Eli - future cult hero
Acres - future norm smith
- ace
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 10744
- Joined: Sun 16 Dec 2007 3:28pm
- Location: St Kilda
- Has thanked: 30 times
- Been thanked: 822 times
Take it to the tribunal.
The jackasses on the match review panel are trying to intimidate the club.
The tribunal will take one look at it and say how is this slap worse than the 100 stomach punches that go unpunished every season.
The jackasses on the match review panel are trying to intimidate the club.
The tribunal will take one look at it and say how is this slap worse than the 100 stomach punches that go unpunished every season.
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
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
Re: Hayes faces reprimand, Sandilands free to play
Explains why sandilands got off, and rightly so!SainterK wrote:Contact was made while both players were seeking to take possession of the ball. No further action was required.
Now to work out how Maguire got rubbed out earlier in the year?
Inconsistancy is the problem, no doubt.
Maybe this year?
- ace
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 10744
- Joined: Sun 16 Dec 2007 3:28pm
- Location: St Kilda
- Has thanked: 30 times
- Been thanked: 822 times
Over 5 years clean record gives you a good recordsaint3d wrote:I wonder how one would establish an 'existing good record'. Does not getting reported count or do you have to get reported and subsequently get off at the tribunal?He has no existing good or bad record.
Less than 3 years since last report gives you a bad record.
No record of less than 5 years or between 3 & 5 years gives you neither a good or bad record.
![Rolling Eyes :roll:](./images/smilies/icon_rolleyes.gif)
![Rolling Eyes :roll:](./images/smilies/icon_rolleyes.gif)
![Rolling Eyes :roll:](./images/smilies/icon_rolleyes.gif)
![Rolling Eyes :roll:](./images/smilies/icon_rolleyes.gif)
![Rolling Eyes :roll:](./images/smilies/icon_rolleyes.gif)
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
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
- ace
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 10744
- Joined: Sun 16 Dec 2007 3:28pm
- Location: St Kilda
- Has thanked: 30 times
- Been thanked: 822 times
It's OK to put your shoulder through an opponents face breaking his jaw, if that is your only way of competing because a teammate has the ball.
But dont slap another players face because his mummy might get upset.
But dont slap another players face because his mummy might get upset.
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
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
- ace
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 10744
- Joined: Sun 16 Dec 2007 3:28pm
- Location: St Kilda
- Has thanked: 30 times
- Been thanked: 822 times
degruch wrote:I told you not to make comparisons...they don't add up.ace wrote:It's OK to put your shoulder through an opponents face breaking his jaw, if that is your only way of competing because a teammate has the ball.
But dont slap another players face because his mummy might get upset.
I think chimpanzees are better at adding up than AFL HQ.
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
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
- degruch
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 8948
- Joined: Mon 19 May 2008 4:29pm
- Location: Croydonia
- Has thanked: 146 times
- Been thanked: 237 times
Don't leak the AFL's new outsourcing policy.ace wrote:degruch wrote:I told you not to make comparisons...they don't add up.ace wrote:It's OK to put your shoulder through an opponents face breaking his jaw, if that is your only way of competing because a teammate has the ball.
But dont slap another players face because his mummy might get upset.
I think chimpanzees are better at adding up than AFL HQ.
-
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 6043
- Joined: Mon 21 May 2007 5:31pm
- Location: Currumbin, Quoinslairnd
Didn't Sandilands hit a bloke in the head?
I thought fair or not, that was that. Buddy, for instance?
I thought fair or not, that was that. Buddy, for instance?
"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!'
-
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 6043
- Joined: Mon 21 May 2007 5:31pm
- Location: Currumbin, Quoinslairnd
I don't have a drama with the decision per se, I just find the whole 'head' thing very confusing. FWIW I reckon he swung his shoulder into the collision rather than 'out' of it (which is why I reckon Buddy was a bit stiff), but splitting hairs especially for a bloke who's a bit of a gentle giant really.plugger66 wrote:Not if they say you are going for a mark which to me he was.Thinline wrote:Didn't Sandilands hit a bloke in the head?
I thought fair or not, that was that. Buddy, for instance?
Who cares. Lendog reads him beautifully.
"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!'
Buddy could have tackled though. If you had another option and you hit them in the head with enough force you are in trouble. That is why Goose went. He could have tackled Bolton but went the bump and knocked both out.Thinline wrote:I don't have a drama with the decision per se, I just find the whole 'head' thing very confusing. FWIW I reckon he swung his shoulder into the collision rather than 'out' of it (which is why I reckon Buddy was a bit stiff), but splitting hairs especially for a bloke who's a bit of a gentle giant really.plugger66 wrote:Not if they say you are going for a mark which to me he was.Thinline wrote:Didn't Sandilands hit a bloke in the head?
I thought fair or not, that was that. Buddy, for instance?
Who cares. Lendog reads him beautifully.