EYES ON THE PRIZE
Moderators: Saintsational Administrators, Saintsational Moderators
- BackFromUSA
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 4639
- Joined: Tue 09 Mar 2004 12:38am
- Has thanked: 51 times
- Been thanked: 506 times
EYES ON THE PRIZE
I know everyone is emotional about this Baker decision but let's just step back for a moment and remember that it is not about 1 player or a game during the season ... 2010 is only about 1 thing ... OUR FINALS CAMPAIGN AND PREMIERSHIP.
Appealing the Baker findings is all a game of probabilities but as it stands right now, Baker would be free to play ALL FINALS and will be fresh and uninjured or suspended for the all important finals series. Although he will not have played a game for 9 weeks, he should still be in good touch because unlike a player with a long term injury he will be able to train and keep his ball touch every day.
Imagine appealing and he gets between 10 and 12 weeks instead of 9 ... what have we gained?
Imagine appealing and he gets 7 or 8 weeks so is back a few weeks before the finals and is then lured into a reportable act and we lose him for the finals and grand final through another petty suspension.
If there is no risk of increasing the games per charge or the total of games ... then perhaps cherry pick one or maximum two charges to contest. The misconduct charge is one ... the roundhouse perhaps the other.
On a positive note, this gives us 7 to 9 weeks to find another small defender ... and we desperately need another small defender because teams now know through our recent losses that we are unable to cover 3 or 4 quality smalls.
Appealing the Baker findings is all a game of probabilities but as it stands right now, Baker would be free to play ALL FINALS and will be fresh and uninjured or suspended for the all important finals series. Although he will not have played a game for 9 weeks, he should still be in good touch because unlike a player with a long term injury he will be able to train and keep his ball touch every day.
Imagine appealing and he gets between 10 and 12 weeks instead of 9 ... what have we gained?
Imagine appealing and he gets 7 or 8 weeks so is back a few weeks before the finals and is then lured into a reportable act and we lose him for the finals and grand final through another petty suspension.
If there is no risk of increasing the games per charge or the total of games ... then perhaps cherry pick one or maximum two charges to contest. The misconduct charge is one ... the roundhouse perhaps the other.
On a positive note, this gives us 7 to 9 weeks to find another small defender ... and we desperately need another small defender because teams now know through our recent losses that we are unable to cover 3 or 4 quality smalls.
AwayInUSA no longer ... have based myself back in Melbourne for a decade of Saintsational Success (with regular trips back to the USA)
"Saintsational Player Sponsor 2007 - 2018"
"Saintsational Player Sponsor 2007 - 2018"
-
- Club Player
- Posts: 718
- Joined: Fri 09 Apr 2004 1:04pm
- Has thanked: 26 times
- Been thanked: 31 times
bulls***. We have to make a stand and fight this or we will forever be treated like a second class citizen of the AFL. Presently there are rules for one lot of clubs and rules for the rest, and we'll always be treated with disdain by those pricks if we don't do something about it...
I agree we can't let it derail our main objective, but that doesn't mean we have to roll over and take this abomination...
I agree we can't let it derail our main objective, but that doesn't mean we have to roll over and take this abomination...
The future's so bright I've got to wear shades...
-
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 18579
- Joined: Thu 11 Mar 2004 1:36am
- Has thanked: 1905 times
- Been thanked: 843 times
Re: EYES ON THE PRIZE
Respect for standing up to a decision that is blatantly unjust. The club should fight it all the way because it is just plain f****** wrong.BackFromUSA wrote:Imagine appealing and he gets between 10 and 12 weeks instead of 9 ... what have we gained?
-
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 18579
- Joined: Thu 11 Mar 2004 1:36am
- Has thanked: 1905 times
- Been thanked: 843 times
Re: EYES ON THE PRIZE
Self respect for standing up to a decision that is blatantly unjust.BackFromUSA wrote:Imagine appealing and he gets between 10 and 12 weeks instead of 9 ... what have we gained?
The club should fight it all the way because it is just plain f****** wrong.
- BackFromUSA
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 4639
- Joined: Tue 09 Mar 2004 12:38am
- Has thanked: 51 times
- Been thanked: 506 times
The only respect i want is as 2010 Premiers.
Losing Baker for 10-12 weeks and thus the crucial finals series is counter-productive.
Appealing should only be done where there is little or no risk of increasing the activation points to a level that results in an extra or extra weeks.
Losing Baker for 10-12 weeks and thus the crucial finals series is counter-productive.
Appealing should only be done where there is little or no risk of increasing the activation points to a level that results in an extra or extra weeks.
AwayInUSA no longer ... have based myself back in Melbourne for a decade of Saintsational Success (with regular trips back to the USA)
"Saintsational Player Sponsor 2007 - 2018"
"Saintsational Player Sponsor 2007 - 2018"
-
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 18579
- Joined: Thu 11 Mar 2004 1:36am
- Has thanked: 1905 times
- Been thanked: 843 times
If he's out for 9 he's effectively out for the season.BackFromUSA wrote:The only respect i want is as 2010 Premiers.
Losing Baker for 10-12 weeks and thus the crucial finals series is counter-productive.
Appealing should only be done where there is little or no risk of increasing the activation points to a level that results in an extra or extra weeks.
The other thing is that sometimes you have to take a stand on principle.
It is a blatantly biased and wrong decision.
-
- Club Player
- Posts: 1717
- Joined: Thu 24 Sep 2009 2:18am
- Location: Noble Park
No point bringing him back because he would not be able to go near someone without drawing a free or some weeks. Right now he is target number 1 and they need to revamp the whole system or baker might as well retire right now.
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
- Dr Spaceman
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 14102
- Joined: Thu 24 Sep 2009 11:07pm
- Location: Newtown Institute of Saintology
- Has thanked: 104 times
- Been thanked: 62 times
Re: EYES ON THE PRIZE
Leaving aside the pathetic, fruitlooply opposition fans, it appears the majority of sensible football people are just as shocked & horrified by this decision as we are. People such as Mike Sheehan simply can't believe it.bigcarl wrote:Self respect for standing up to a decision that is blatantly unjust.BackFromUSA wrote:Imagine appealing and he gets between 10 and 12 weeks instead of 9 ... what have we gained?
The club should fight it all the way because it is just plain f****** wrong.
IMO, given how ridiculous these decisions are there is no way the penalties will be increased if we will challenge them. The Tribunal will take the opportunity to rectify the idiocy shown by the MRP. They may not chuck them out but they certainly won't make themselves, and the AFL, a bigger laughing stock than they are tonight.