MRP -Am i missing something

[st_Trav_ofWA]

The Collingwood game and WC game last season are two example of us getting reamed. Riewoldts farsical suspension the new rules invented to rub Baker out. Not a word from anyone at StkIlda. Probably a fair reaon why they continue to do so.

but why Curly ?? why would the AFL MRP or the umpires deliberatly pick on St Kilda ? there is no logical reason ... not disputing we get some calls that go against us but what you are suggesting is that somewhere in AFL house there is a secret meeting where the officals are looking for ways to dissadvantage St Kilda ... the question you have been asked is why would they do that ? what is to be gained by that ?

plugger is 100% right every club in some shape or form has people who believe that the AFL has it in for them ... heck i have WCE fans who swear they get a raw deal from the umps ... and they are 100% serious to everyone else in the comp WCE seem to get a pretty good ride from the umps ...

We have no voice is the reason.

so your logic is that the powers that be sit back at AFL house and say "lets ping St Kilda and rub out their players for more than anyones elseand lets disadvantage them cause they wont say anything" ...
WHY ??
why would they bother ? to keep us down the bottom? what beniefit does that give the AFL ?

yeah we dont complain and often just cop it on the chin but where does that link to the AFL are out to get us (most of the time because from a club level we acutally think that its a fair call)

[sunsaint]

Seen enough evidence ...

nope thats untrue
all current medical evidence indicates that's genetically and physically impossible to see out of a persons' backside
...there is of course plenty of conjecture as to a persons ability to talk from it

[CURLY]

but why Curly ?? why would the AFL MRP or the umpires deliberatly pick on St Kilda ? there is no logical reason ... not disputing we get some calls that go against us but what you are suggesting is that somewhere in AFL house there is a secret meeting where the officals are looking for ways to dissadvantage St Kilda ... the question you have been asked is why would they do that ? what is to be gained by that ?

plugger is 100% right every club in some shape or form has people who believe that the AFL has it in for them ... heck i have WCE fans who swear they get a raw deal from the umps ... and they are 100% serious to everyone else in the comp WCE seem to get a pretty good ride from the umps ...

so your logic is that the powers that be sit back at AFL house and say "lets ping St Kilda and rub out their players for more than anyones elseand lets disadvantage them cause they wont say anything" ...
WHY ??
why would they bother ? to keep us down the bottom? what beniefit does that give the AFL ?

yeah we dont complain and often just cop it on the chin but where does that link to the AFL are out to get us (most of the time because from a club level we acutally think that its a fair call)

Do they think its a fair call or do they know no one is listening? Do you think that the AFL tiptoe around Collingwood because they know Eddie will come out all guns blazing if they dont of course they do. Sydney have an incredible record when it comes to MRP results Adam Goodes seemed untouchable.

[st_Trav_ofWA]

Then why was Roo suspended yet Hodge wasnt? Both are deemed to be accidents both made head high contact yet Roo got 2 weeks Hodge was cleared not once but twice.

so you are saying the reason why was because the AFL hate Nick Riewoldt ? or hate St Kilda? or is all part of this whole new world order to keep st kilda down?
to what benefit is it to the MRP to do that ? seriously why would they do that ? what is to be gained by it ?

perhaps Hodge was able to argue his case better ? perhaps St Kilda saw Nick could prob do with a couple weeks off anyway so didnt fight it as hard as Hodge did ? perhaps there was more clear cut evidence that Roo was clearly at fault .. perhaps there was a object of doubt that hodge was at fault ..

[CURLY]

Then why was Roo suspended yet Hodge wasnt? Both are deemed to be accidents both made head high contact yet Roo got 2 weeks Hodge was cleared not once but twice.

so you are saying the reason why was because the AFL hate Nick Riewoldt ? or hate St Kilda? or is all part of this whole new world order to keep st kilda down?
to what benefit is it to the MRP to do that ? seriously why would they do that ? what is to be gained by it ?

perhaps Hodge was able to argue his case better ? perhaps St Kilda saw Nick could prob do with a couple weeks off anyway so didnt fight it as hard as Hodge did ? perhaps there was more clear cut evidence that Roo was clearly at fault .. perhaps there was a object of doubt that hodge was at fault ..

Or perhaps StKilda where past there Premiership window and Riewoldt being suspeneded was seen as no big deal. Hodge out with some Blockbuster games ahead well the AFL wont want that will they.

[plugger66]

so your logic is that the powers that be sit back at AFL house and say "lets ping St Kilda and rub out their players for more than anyones elseand lets disadvantage them cause they wont say anything" ...
WHY ??
why would they bother ? to keep us down the bottom? what beniefit does that give the AFL ?

yeah we dont complain and often just cop it on the chin but where does that link to the AFL are out to get us (most of the time because from a club level we acutally think that its a fair call)

Do they think its a fair call or do they know no one is listening? Do you think that the AFL tiptoe around Collingwood because they know Eddie will come out all guns blazing if they dont of course they do. Sydney have an incredible record when it comes to MRP results Adam Goodes seemed untouchable.

Both those clubs would still have a person like you who thinks the AFL cheat against them. For example when maxwell appealed a decision and got off he was reported for nearly exactly the same decision the next game and got done. I will ask my mate I work with about the Swans and im sure he has got many examples where they were hard done by in his opinion. You have no stats at all to prove anything you have said and no logical reason just some examples that every single club could find. And how do you know Sydney get a good run but cant prove we get a bad run. I doubt you have Sydneys stats but not ours.

[plugger66]

Then why was Roo suspended yet Hodge wasnt? Both are deemed to be accidents both made head high contact yet Roo got 2 weeks Hodge was cleared not once but twice.

so you are saying the reason why was because the AFL hate Nick Riewoldt ? or hate St Kilda? or is all part of this whole new world order to keep st kilda down?
to what benefit is it to the MRP to do that ? seriously why would they do that ? what is to be gained by it ?

perhaps Hodge was able to argue his case better ? perhaps St Kilda saw Nick could prob do with a couple weeks off anyway so didnt fight it as hard as Hodge did ? perhaps there was more clear cut evidence that Roo was clearly at fault .. perhaps there was a object of doubt that hodge was at fault ..

Or perhaps StKilda where past there Premiership window and Riewoldt being suspeneded was seen as no big deal. Hodge out with some Blockbuster games ahead well the AFL wont want that will they.

But dont we have another person on here saying the AFL want Freo to win the flag this year so im guessing that was the same last year and losing Hodge for a period would have helped freo. Thats the problem with all this illogical thinking, there are others also thinking illogical who are completely the opposite of your illogical views. Which illogical is right? My guess is neither because its illogical.

[st_Trav_ofWA]

Do they think its a fair call or do they know no one is listening? Do you think that the AFL tiptoe around Collingwood because they know Eddie will come out all guns blazing if they dont of course they do. Sydney have an incredible record when it comes to MRP results Adam Goodes seemed untouchable.

Curly quit while you are well behind .... when has the AFL EVER tiptoed around collingwood ? honestly its an inferiority complex people have that proport that Collingwood some how have a control over the AFL .... Collingwood get a favourable draw ill admit but thats due to the fact they fill every stadium they play in... the AFL is not afraid of Collingwood and i think you over estimate the control Eddie has over the media and the AFL ... eddie is a vocal president that is all the AFL wouldnt give two hoots about how much noise he makes , heck the more noise eddie makes the more publicity the AFL get , the more bums the get on seats the more eyes the get on TV and the more $$ in their pockets ...

[st.byron]

When you see decisions like the Riewoldt and Baker one you can only believe there is a bias. How do you explain Margetts umpiring against us against Collingwood in 2012?

No Curly. YOU believe there's a bias. Most fans might think it's inconsistent or unfathomable from time to time, but not that there's a deliberate ongoing bias against us or any other team. Ridiculous. Trav has totally nailed you.

[st_Trav_ofWA]

Or perhaps StKilda where past there Premiership window and Riewoldt being suspeneded was seen as no big deal. Hodge out with some Blockbuster games ahead well the AFL wont want that will they.

ok so by that thinking what is to be gained by rubbing out Roo ? if the AFL are looking at it from a marketing point of view more people would go to the game with Roo playing then without him.. heck the MRP have rubbed out players from the grandfinal so that shoots your blockbuster game conspirisy ...

what about when the MRP rubbed out buddy surely that go's against the "they are in the premiership window" idea

i agree that the MRP are inconsistant that the major gripe i have with them but they are consistantly inconsistant not targetedly inconsistant ... its not a case of club a gets a better deal then club b ... its almost a lottery , best way to make sure you dont get screwed is not to get reported

[CURLY]

When you see decisions like the Riewoldt and Baker one you can only believe there is a bias. How do you explain Margetts umpiring against us against Collingwood in 2012?

No Curly. YOU believe there's a bias. Most fans might think it's inconsistent or unfathomable from time to time, but not that there's a deliberate ongoing bias against us or any other team. Ridiculous. Trav has totally nailed you.

Margetts was biased FACT. Cant argue against it. Trav hasnt nailed me at all he believes one thing I believe another. Ive pointed out incident where have been fingered yet no ond can bring up a MRP decision where weve been lucky.

[plugger66]

When you see decisions like the Riewoldt and Baker one you can only believe there is a bias. How do you explain Margetts umpiring against us against Collingwood in 2012?

No Curly. YOU believe there's a bias. Most fans might think it's inconsistent or unfathomable from time to time, but not that there's a deliberate ongoing bias against us or any other team. Ridiculous. Trav has totally nailed you.

Margetts was biased FACT. Cant argue against it. Trav hasnt nailed me at all he believes one thing I believe another. Ive pointed out incident where have been fingered yet no ond can bring up a MRP decision where weve been lucky.

I think you need to read what fact means. Also i think you need to work what logical means. Pretty sure you illogical nailed though.

[st_Trav_ofWA]

Margetts was biased FACT. Cant argue against it. Trav hasnt nailed me at all he believes one thing I believe another. Ive pointed out incident where have been fingered yet no ond can bring up a MRP decision where weve been lucky.

Margetts was a poor umpire , what facts do you have that he deliberatly came out to punish St Kilda ? he had a shocker and we copped it but where are these facts that you talk of that he was doing it on bias ? ... your comment should read "Margetts was biased- my strong opinion" there is no FACT at all ....

as for the MRP we have had more than our fair share of players recieving only a reprimand just taking a quick google search against freo alone we have had :
2010 — ROUND 4 — Leigh Montagna (StK) charged with tripping Des Headland (Fre) in Q4 - repremand
2010 — ROUND 12 - Justin Koschitzke (StK) for striking Ryan Crowley (Fre) in Q2. - This charge was withdrawn.
- Leigh Montagna (StK) charged with a Level One tripping offence against Garrick Ibbotson (Fre) in Q1.- repremand

2011 — ROUND 10 - Brett Peake (StK) charged with a Level Two striking offence against Dylan Roberton (Fre) in Q3..- repremand

[st_Trav_ofWA]

i can give you more ...
2009 — ROUND 18 - Stephen Milne (StK) reported for striking Jared Crouch (Syd) in Q1. The charge was withdrawn as insufficient force was used to warrant a report.
2008 — ROUND 7 Justin Koschitzke (StK) reported for striking Troy Simmonds (Rch). Charge withdrawn.
2010 — ROUND 20 Jason Gram (StK) reported for high contact on Cruize Garlett (NM) in Q1.
The report was assessed. The force was below that required to constitute a reportable offence. No further action was taken.
2012 — ROUND 5 Leigh Montagna (StK) charged with a Level Three striking offence against James Magner (Mel) in Q1.
Due to a poor record, Montagna's two-game suspension must remain, even with an early plea.
The St Kilda club sought the adjudication of the Tribunal. However on Tuesday afternoon AFL Tribunal counsel Jeff Gleeson SC withdrew the charge after speaking to Montagna and Magner, and determining that both men's evidence was that Montagna's knee had accidentally made contact with Magner's cheek.
The Tribunal was not required to hear the matter.
2011 — ROUND 1 Farren Ray (StK) for forceful head-high contact against Joel Selwood in Q1.
The MRP assessed the charge The panel said that both players were running to contest the ball. Ray had his arms down to collect the ball and had his eyes on the ball at all times. The St Kilda player turned his body just prior to contact being made and it was the panel’s view that Ray did not have a realistic alternative way to contest the ball. No further action was taken.

[CURLY]

So pinned Joey for two yet the luckily we appealed or another reaming. Farren Ray why would you bring that up it was more than fair. Lots of reprimands so basically found a way to find the player guilty.

[Freebird]

Joey has been suspended 4 times one he was cleared when viewing the video. I thought the mrp viewed the video before finding/offerings.

All of the 4 would not have gone any further to most clubs.

No doubt the saints have been harshly treated without much pressure being applied to juristiction. They don't let the slightest diving act go when its us.

666 would have defended hitler

[joffaboy]

666 would have defended hitler

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Godwin's_law

[st.byron]

So pinned Joey for two yet the luckily we appealed or another reaming. Farren Ray why would you bring that up it was more than fair. Lots of reprimands so basically found a way to find the player guilty.

You're hilarious. Got to admire your sticking to your one-eyed-ness. Pretty amusing really that you're so incredibly one-eyed and you can't see it at all, sticking doggedly to your 'facts'. You're really working yourself up for round one. Go get 'em.

[CURLY]

So pinned Joey for two yet the luckily we appealed or another reaming. Farren Ray why would you bring that up it was more than fair. Lots of reprimands so basically found a way to find the player guilty.

You're hilarious. Got to admire your sticking to your one-eyed-ness. Pretty amusing really that you're so incredibly one-eyed and you can't see it at all, sticking doggedly to your 'facts'. You're really working yourself up for round one. Go get 'em.

Not one eyed at all there are a number of sides that get the rough end while some get looked after.

[plugger66]

So pinned Joey for two yet the luckily we appealed or another reaming. Farren Ray why would you bring that up it was more than fair. Lots of reprimands so basically found a way to find the player guilty.

You're hilarious. Got to admire your sticking to your one-eyed-ness. Pretty amusing really that you're so incredibly one-eyed and you can't see it at all, sticking doggedly to your 'facts'. You're really working yourself up for round one. Go get 'em.

Not one eyed at all there are a number of sides that get the rough end while some get looked after.

Again based on a one eyed opinion and no facts. You have been asked many times for facts or logical reasons for your opinions yet give nothing. Yep there are 17 other forums with people like you. I suppose they are the one eyed people and you are right.

I can honestly say no matter how much i loved my club if i honestly beleived what you think i would never again waste my time watching a single second of footy.

[plugger66]

Joey has been suspended 4 times one he was cleared when viewing the video. I thought the mrp viewed the video before finding/offerings.

All of the 4 would not have gone any further to most clubs.

No doubt the saints have been harshly treated without much pressure being applied to juristiction. They don't let the slightest diving act go when its us.

666 would have defended hitler

If 666 is supposed to be me i find that pretty offensive considering my dad is jewish. Maybe you should think a bit more when making comments.

[CURLY]

You're hilarious. Got to admire your sticking to your one-eyed-ness. Pretty amusing really that you're so incredibly one-eyed and you can't see it at all, sticking doggedly to your 'facts'. You're really working yourself up for round one. Go get 'em.[/quote]

Not one eyed at all there are a number of sides that get the rough end while some get looked after.[/quote]


Again based on a one eyed opinion and no facts. You have been asked many times for facts or logical reasons for your opinions yet give nothing. Yep there are 17 other forums with people like you. I suppose they are the one eyed people and you are right.

I can honestly say no matter how much i loved my club if i honestly beleived what you think i would never again waste my time watching a single second of footy.[/quote]


Where do you think theyed print umpire mistakes for all to read? Watch a Round of football and then tell me you honestly think teams and players get treated the same.

[plugger66]

You're hilarious. Got to admire your sticking to your one-eyed-ness. Pretty amusing really that you're so incredibly one-eyed and you can't see it at all, sticking doggedly to your 'facts'. You're really working yourself up for round one. Go get 'em.

Not one eyed at all there are a number of sides that get the rough end while some get looked after.[/quote]


Again based on a one eyed opinion and no facts. You have been asked many times for facts or logical reasons for your opinions yet give nothing. Yep there are 17 other forums with people like you. I suppose they are the one eyed people and you are right.

I can honestly say no matter how much i loved my club if i honestly beleived what you think i would never again waste my time watching a single second of footy.[/quote]


Where do you think theyed print umpire mistakes for all to read? Watch a Round of football and then tell me you honestly think teams and players get treated the same.[/quote]

Saw that on 17 other forums as well. Again they are one eyed and you are right.

[kosifantutti]

i can give you more ...
2009 — ROUND 18 - Stephen Milne (StK) reported for striking Jared Crouch (Syd) in Q1. The charge was withdrawn as insufficient force was used to warrant a report.
2008 — ROUND 7 Justin Koschitzke (StK) reported for striking Troy Simmonds (Rch). Charge withdrawn.
2010 — ROUND 20 Jason Gram (StK) reported for high contact on Cruize Garlett (NM) in Q1.
The report was assessed. The force was below that required to constitute a reportable offence. No further action was taken.
2012 — ROUND 5 Leigh Montagna (StK) charged with a Level Three striking offence against James Magner (Mel) in Q1.
Due to a poor record, Montagna's two-game suspension must remain, even with an early plea.
The St Kilda club sought the adjudication of the Tribunal. However on Tuesday afternoon AFL Tribunal counsel Jeff Gleeson SC withdrew the charge after speaking to Montagna and Magner, and determining that both men's evidence was that Montagna's knee had accidentally made contact with Magner's cheek.
The Tribunal was not required to hear the matter.
2011 — ROUND 1 Farren Ray (StK) for forceful head-high contact against Joel Selwood in Q1.
The MRP assessed the charge The panel said that both players were running to contest the ball. Ray had his arms down to collect the ball and had his eyes on the ball at all times. The St Kilda player turned his body just prior to contact being made and it was the panel’s view that Ray did not have a realistic alternative way to contest the ball. No further action was taken.

That doesn't prove anything. All of those incidents could have been ones that shouldn't even be looked at.
In my opinion, we win some and lose some.

[st.byron]

"Not one eyed at all." That's your best line yet. You should do stand-up. Classic.

Oh dear I just realised I could be sparring with a 15 year old.
Asks self the point of it all.