Saintsational Fan Forum - A passionate community of St Kilda Football Club fans discussing news, history, players, trade rumours, results, AFL stats and more.
plugger66 wrote:Nothing in the Chapman incident. Not forceful enough contact.
none of bakers were either
Probably not but 2 wrongs doesnt make a right.
cheers Mahatma.
You keep fighting for the "common good of man" but dont mind the rest of us for pointing out what can only be described as disgraceful hypocrisy.
Yes it must you feel better thinking the world is against us. Well i'd worry about things the Saints can control like winning the GF.
Well if Chapman missed last year's GF we would have won, but take your point, we won't talk about anything else other than the Saints or what you think is OK.
Not sure I ever mentioned what others can talk about. I think I only mentioned what is important to me.
You got anymore holidays coming up ...? So many more interesting chats when you went away ...
...we can hope....
.everybody still loves lenny....and we always will
"Freedom of expression is the cornerstone of a free society,"
However, freedom of expression is not encouraged in certain forums.
I haven't seen any footage of the Chapman incident(s) but I am intrigued by the MRP report dealing with a single strike when all of the media reports I've heard or read have referred to "repeated upper body punches".
My reading of the significance of the Baker finding was that the MRP were flagging that they would now cite each contact as a separate incident.
The incident was assessed as intentional conduct (three points), low impact (one point) and body contact (one point). This is a total of five activation points, resulting in a classification of a level two offence, drawing 125 demerit points and a one-match sanction. He has no existing good or bad record. An early plea reduces the penalty by 25 per cent to a reprimand and 93.75 points towards his future record.
I was just going to post the same thing Fidelis? I am perplexed was only 1 of the three punches seen as reportable?
AlpineStars wrote:The incident was assessed as intentional conduct (three points), low impact (one point) and body contact (one point). This is a total of five activation points, resulting in a classification of a level two offence, drawing 125 demerit points and a one-match sanction. He has no existing good or bad record. An early plea reduces the penalty by 25 per cent to a reprimand and 93.75 points towards his future record.
I was just going to post the same thing Fidelis? I am perplexed was only 1 of the three punches seen as reportable?
was shown on Football Classified and they can't believe that it was only classed as one strike. Seems one rule for Baker and one for everyone else. By my calculations he punched him 4 times, so thats 370 points after takings the early plea on each one? Thats means he misses the first final.... hmmmm who would they play then??
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
A disgrace,yet another one,well two if you count Picken's also. His round arm king hit deserved a month on the sidelines at least....absolutly pathetic again from that laughable lot.
Stkilda continue to get reamed,and accept it. They should get on the front foot and demand an explanation for these glaring differences
AlpineStars wrote:The incident was assessed as intentional conduct (three points), low impact (one point) and body contact (one point). This is a total of five activation points, resulting in a classification of a level two offence, drawing 125 demerit points and a one-match sanction. He has no existing good or bad record. An early plea reduces the penalty by 25 per cent to a reprimand and 93.75 points towards his future record.
I was just going to post the same thing Fidelis? I am perplexed was only 1 of the three punches seen as reportable?
was shown on Football Classified and they can't believe that it was only classed as one strike. Seems one rule for Baker and one for everyone else. By my calculations he punched him 4 times, so thats 370 points after takings the early plea on each one? Thats means he misses the first final.... hmmmm who would they play then??
While Chapman can receive a one-game suspension reduced to a reprimand by pleading guilty today, he joins teammates Matthew Scarlett, Corey Enright, James Podsiadly, Cameron Mooney and Steve Johnson, who will all carry sizeable demerit points totals through September
The really piss weak outfit here is the players association. What a disgrace, let the afl go about their business without making a fuss. Baker should sue the afl at the end of his career as he would be able to argue that they have limited his future opportunities of income by victimising him on an assumed personality. It would be easy to show that his charge was grossly over the expected penalty for ant other player, including Barry Hall who has committed the most aggressive act on a footy field in modern times.
The fact that he is judged on a perception of guilt before a charge is made is unfair and inequitable. If he misses the finals and the Saints win he would be seriously disadvantaged compared to the opportunities he would receive as a premiership player.
wallbanger wrote:Hmmm...noticed the Umpires Apologist Plugger went very quiet when the topic of how many punches landed was brought up?
If ONE was deemed forceful enough, surely all four were.
Another absolute joke - we can only hope that there is a karma god around somewhere this year.
I have already said what I thought should happen to Chapman and i was wrong but glad that you would even think of me. I didnt realise I was so important to your life. By the way what has Umpiring apologist got to do with the MRP?
You duck and weave better then Robert Harvey at his best Plugger.
Nice response to the point that was raised - just ignore it! I like that - you should be a politician.
You 'fight the good fight' for the authorities on every possible occasion, reagrdless of whether it be the umpires, the MRP or the AFL in general.
Your choice, and your right - it is beyond comprehension though, and indefensible surely, to argue one of those 4 punches was worthy of being cited and reprimanded but the other three weren't?
Absurd.
Please...let's win a Premiership before GEELONG!!!! (O.k., so we've missed that opportunity...maybe let's win the next one before Geelong????)
wallbanger wrote:Hmmm...noticed the Umpires Apologist Plugger went very quiet when the topic of how many punches landed was brought up?
If ONE was deemed forceful enough, surely all four were.
Another absolute joke - we can only hope that there is a karma god around somewhere this year.
I have already said what I thought should happen to Chapman and i was wrong but glad that you would even think of me. I didnt realise I was so important to your life. By the way what has Umpiring apologist got to do with the MRP?
Plugger, unlike many I appreciate your commentary most of the time. You know your stuff. You've got plenty of valid things to say.
But fact is plenty of the rest of the time you wind people up then when people bite back you play all coy as if you're surprised they bother.
It's a pretty tiresome routine to be honest.
Avoiding said routine would save plenty of us the loathsome chore of scrolling past all the spot fires you get yourself wound up in.
Just my 10c.
No doubt I'll cop some kind of cynical retort for bothering to buy in.
"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!'
wallbanger wrote:Hmmm...noticed the Umpires Apologist Plugger went very quiet when the topic of how many punches landed was brought up?
If ONE was deemed forceful enough, surely all four were.
Another absolute joke - we can only hope that there is a karma god around somewhere this year.
I have already said what I thought should happen to Chapman and i was wrong but glad that you would even think of me. I didnt realise I was so important to your life. By the way what has Umpiring apologist got to do with the MRP?
Plugger, unlike many I appreciate your commentary most of the time. You know your stuff. You've got plenty of valid things to say.
But fact is plenty of the rest of the time you wind people up then when people bite back you play all coy as if you're surprised they bother.
It's a pretty tiresome routine to be honest.
Avoiding said routine would save plenty of us the loathsome chore of scrolling past all the spot fires you get yourself wound up in.
Just my 10c.
No doubt I'll cop some kind of cynical retort for bothering to buy in.
I have looked through this thread again and said what I thought would happen. Not once was anything mentioned to me about how many puches were thrown untill wallbanger said it. he never actually asked me a question but i told him what I thought of the incident. There was no winding or baiting. It was an answer and as I said I had already given my opinion of the report. I am serious for a change on this and if you point out a post or question that I may have missed I will answer but I am pretty I gave my opinion and it was before the MRP have sat.
plugger66 wrote:I am serious for a change on this and if you point out a post or question that I may have missed I will answer but I am pretty I gave my opinion and it was before the MRP have sat.
one thing i am willing to bet a grand that you are not..........pretty that is
.everybody still loves lenny....and we always will
"Freedom of expression is the cornerstone of a free society,"
However, freedom of expression is not encouraged in certain forums.
plugger66 wrote:I am serious for a change on this and if you point out a post or question that I may have missed I will answer but I am pretty I gave my opinion and it was before the MRP have sat.
one thing i am willing to bet a grand that you are not..........pretty that is
plugger66 wrote:I am serious for a change on this and if you point out a post or question that I may have missed I will answer but I am pretty I gave my opinion and it was before the MRP have sat.
one thing i am willing to bet a grand that you are not..........pretty that is
I am pretty
Pretty ugly.
holly crap.......an honest post from plugga for once.......
.everybody still loves lenny....and we always will
"Freedom of expression is the cornerstone of a free society,"
However, freedom of expression is not encouraged in certain forums.
The difference between the two is that in the Chapman incident the tagger was being punched and in the Baker incident it was the tagger doing the punching.
The AFL will not admit it but they are allowing provacation by a tight checking opponent be a defense to a report and are lowering the suspensions in these case.
Eg: Hall and his headlock should hav got weeks but because the big girl was being pushed a few times he got off.
Johnson got less for hitting baker than he deserved because baker had been hitting him earlier. (forgetting the fact that Johnson broke his hand before the first bounce on Bakers face).
The Afl hate taggers an will do anything to stop them including letting other players committ offenses against them and get away with it as was the case when 7 collingwood thugs ran at CJ before the bounce in the Collingwood game then he defended himself and got free awarded aganst him.
