Lance Collard

[sks023]

One week less than JWeb got for injuring Simpkin.

A word is just a word.

Throw that word around a sporting field and it's purely a sledge.

Why are the AFL being so stupid about a word?
Stupid as in ramping up the penalty.
Finlayson got 3, which was manifestly excessive.

In law, no court in the damned world would give a harsher penalty to a crim for the same offence purely to send a message.
Doesn't happen. If it ever did, the crim would appeal and win

agree.

Ignoring the word is just a word rubbish that has been addressed a number of times in this thread, you guys understand that is basically exactly how criminal sentencing is intended to work right? The purpose of a criminal punishment is to create a disincentive to commit a crime. If the crime keeps being committed the penalties can be reviewed and increased to increase the disincentive. Look at stuff like mandatory minimum sentences to see how punishments change over time.

That is all beside the point though because in the other instances this year the abusive word was said once. Lance is alleged to have spouted it 10 times. Clearly an increase in the level of offending

So his a criminal now is he

[St Dave]

One week less than JWeb got for injuring Simpkin.

A word is just a word.

Throw that word around a sporting field and it's purely a sledge.

Why are the AFL being so stupid about a word?
Stupid as in ramping up the penalty.
Finlayson got 3, which was manifestly excessive.

In law, no court in the damned world would give a harsher penalty to a crim for the same offence purely to send a message.
Doesn't happen. If it ever did, the crim would appeal and win

agree.

Ignoring the word is just a word rubbish that has been addressed a number of times in this thread, you guys understand that is basically exactly how criminal sentencing is intended to work right? The purpose of a criminal punishment is to create a disincentive to commit a crime. If the crime keeps being committed the penalties can be reviewed and increased to increase the disincentive. Look at stuff like mandatory minimum sentences to see how punishments change over time.

That is all beside the point though because in the other instances this year the abusive word was said once. Lance is alleged to have spouted it 10 times. Clearly an increase in the level of offending

So his a criminal now is he

Wellard brought up the criminal comparison if you didn't notice

[sks023]

One week less than JWeb got for injuring Simpkin.

A word is just a word.

Throw that word around a sporting field and it's purely a sledge.

Why are the AFL being so stupid about a word?
Stupid as in ramping up the penalty.
Finlayson got 3, which was manifestly excessive.

In law, no court in the damned world would give a harsher penalty to a crim for the same offence purely to send a message.
Doesn't happen. If it ever did, the crim would appeal and win

agree.

Ignoring the word is just a word rubbish that has been addressed a number of times in this thread, you guys understand that is basically exactly how criminal sentencing is intended to work right? The purpose of a criminal punishment is to create a disincentive to commit a crime. If the crime keeps being committed the penalties can be reviewed and increased to increase the disincentive. Look at stuff like mandatory minimum sentences to see how punishments change over time.

That is all beside the point though because in the other instances this year the abusive word was said once. Lance is alleged to have spouted it 10 times. Clearly an increase in the level of offending

So his a criminal now is he

Wellard brought up the criminal comparison if you didn't notice

And you expanded on it

The arse lickin football league pull these sentences out of a hat

[WellardSaint]

He said it 10 times.
Big deal.

How many times, hundreds of times, have courts found crims guilty of several charges of the same offence type, and the judge, in sentencing, hands down several sentences TO BE SERVED CONCURRENTLY


It happens all the time.
He said it 10 times in a game. One game.
How many crims commit the same crime several times over a long period, and yet serve all the penalties concurrently

The media reporting on court cases, more often than not, will bemoan the fact that so-and-so was out on bail for the same crime that he/she committed.
Also the grieving victims, more often than not, will complain that the penalty 'is a joke' or 'is disgraceful'

THERE REALLY IS NO MULTIPLIER EFFECT UNDER THE LAW.

Get real.

SIX WEEKS IS MANIFESTLY EXCESSIVE and beyond pathetic.
It smacks of Virtue Signalling.
It's a WORD.
He didn't put anyone in hospital.
If any of his opponents have family members that belong to the Alphabet Club, you can bet they've heard it all before and they won't cry into their lockers after the game.

A penalty should be based on the effect to the person it's directed to.
It obviously affected the d*ckwads at AFL House even though it was never directed at THEM.

HAVE WE BECOME NORTH KOREA

3 weeks like Finlayson.
That's still too much but it should make the Woke happy.
Jesus effin Christ

[St Dave]

One week less than JWeb got for injuring Simpkin.

A word is just a word.

Throw that word around a sporting field and it's purely a sledge.

Why are the AFL being so stupid about a word?
Stupid as in ramping up the penalty.
Finlayson got 3, which was manifestly excessive.

In law, no court in the damned world would give a harsher penalty to a crim for the same offence purely to send a message.
Doesn't happen. If it ever did, the crim would appeal and win

agree.

Ignoring the word is just a word rubbish that has been addressed a number of times in this thread, you guys understand that is basically exactly how criminal sentencing is intended to work right? The purpose of a criminal punishment is to create a disincentive to commit a crime. If the crime keeps being committed the penalties can be reviewed and increased to increase the disincentive. Look at stuff like mandatory minimum sentences to see how punishments change over time.

That is all beside the point though because in the other instances this year the abusive word was said once. Lance is alleged to have spouted it 10 times. Clearly an increase in the level of offending

So his a criminal now is he

Wellard brought up the criminal comparison if you didn't notice

And you expanded on it

The arse lickin football league pull these sentences out of a hat

Yeah that's how discussions on a forum work, Wellard was confused how sentencing acts as a deterrent for crime so I tried to help him understand.

I was hoping from past interactions that you might be actually willing to learn and move past intolerance, but based on your last few digs maybe not.

[St Dave]

He said it 10 times.
Big deal.

How many times, hundreds of times, have courts found crims guilty of several charges of the same offence type, and the judge, in sentencing, hands down several sentences TO BE SERVED CONCURRENTLY


It happens all the time.
He said it 10 times in a game. One game.
How many crims commit the same crime several times over a long period, and yet serve all the penalties concurrently

The media reporting on court cases, more often than not, will bemoan the fact that so-and-so was out on bail for the same crime that he/she committed.
Also the grieving victims, more often than not, will complain that the penalty 'is a joke' or 'is disgraceful'

THERE REALLY IS NO MULTIPLIER EFFECT UNDER THE LAW.

Get real.

SIX WEEKS IS MANIFESTLY EXCESSIVE and beyond pathetic.
It smacks of Virtue Signalling.
It's a WORD.
He didn't put anyone in hospital.
If any of his opponents have family members that belong to the Alphabet Club, you can bet they've heard it all before and they won't cry into their lockers after the game.

A penalty should be based on the effect to the person it's directed to.
It obviously affected the d*ckwads at AFL House even though it was never directed at THEM.

HAVE WE BECOME NORTH KOREA

3 weeks like Finlayson.
That's still too much but it should make the Woke happy.
Jesus effin Christ

Maybe footy isn't for you mate

[WellardSaint]

St Dave, I'm not your mate.
I pay membership every damn year, since Adam and Eve were dating, even though my club visits my state once a year, twice very rarely.
I buy merch, I support with my $$.

You cannot dictate or bully me.
You're now on my Foe list.
Good riddance

[CURLY]

He said it 10 times.
Big deal.

How many times, hundreds of times, have courts found crims guilty of several charges of the same offence type, and the judge, in sentencing, hands down several sentences TO BE SERVED CONCURRENTLY


It happens all the time.
He said it 10 times in a game. One game.
How many crims commit the same crime several times over a long period, and yet serve all the penalties concurrently

The media reporting on court cases, more often than not, will bemoan the fact that so-and-so was out on bail for the same crime that he/she committed.
Also the grieving victims, more often than not, will complain that the penalty 'is a joke' or 'is disgraceful'

THERE REALLY IS NO MULTIPLIER EFFECT UNDER THE LAW.

Get real.

SIX WEEKS IS MANIFESTLY EXCESSIVE and beyond pathetic.
It smacks of Virtue Signalling.
It's a WORD.
He didn't put anyone in hospital.
If any of his opponents have family members that belong to the Alphabet Club, you can bet they've heard it all before and they won't cry into their lockers after the game.

A penalty should be based on the effect to the person it's directed to.
It obviously affected the d*ckwads at AFL House even though it was never directed at THEM.

HAVE WE BECOME NORTH KOREA

3 weeks like Finlayson.
That's still too much but it should make the Woke happy.
Jesus effin Christ

But don’t you understand that if you don’t fully condone this you are backward a biggot a disgrace.

Heaven forbid anyone that thinks this has gone way too far.

Seriously 6 weeks for calling a grown man a word that it doesn’t even represent.

Go call everyone a gutless c word all day.

[saynta]

One week less than JWeb got for injuring Simpkin.

A word is just a word.

Throw that word around a sporting field and it's purely a sledge.

Why are the AFL being so stupid about a word?
Stupid as in ramping up the penalty.
Finlayson got 3, which was manifestly excessive.

In law, no court in the damned world would give a harsher penalty to a crim for the same offence purely to send a message.
Doesn't happen. If it ever did, the crim would appeal and win

agree.

Ignoring the word is just a word rubbish that has been addressed a number of times in this thread, you guys understand that is basically exactly how criminal sentencing is intended to work right? The purpose of a criminal punishment is to create a disincentive to commit a crime. If the crime keeps being committed the penalties can be reviewed and increased to increase the disincentive. Look at stuff like mandatory minimum sentences to see how punishments change over time.

That is all beside the point though because in the other instances this year the abusive word was said once. Lance is alleged to have spouted it 10 times. Clearly an increase in the level of offending

So his a criminal now is he

it appears so. I will get shat on for my next comment but I find it unbelievable that a surprisingly large number of footballers went tittle telling on Lance FFS. What is the world coming to?

[sks023]

One week less than JWeb got for injuring Simpkin.

A word is just a word.

Throw that word around a sporting field and it's purely a sledge.

Why are the AFL being so stupid about a word?
Stupid as in ramping up the penalty.
Finlayson got 3, which was manifestly excessive.

In law, no court in the damned world would give a harsher penalty to a crim for the same offence purely to send a message.
Doesn't happen. If it ever did, the crim would appeal and win

agree.

Ignoring the word is just a word rubbish that has been addressed a number of times in this thread, you guys understand that is basically exactly how criminal sentencing is intended to work right? The purpose of a criminal punishment is to create a disincentive to commit a crime. If the crime keeps being committed the penalties can be reviewed and increased to increase the disincentive. Look at stuff like mandatory minimum sentences to see how punishments change over time.

That is all beside the point though because in the other instances this year the abusive word was said once. Lance is alleged to have spouted it 10 times. Clearly an increase in the level of offending

So his a criminal now is he

Wellard brought up the criminal comparison if you didn't notice

And you expanded on it

The arse lickin football league pull these sentences out of a hat

Yeah that's how discussions on a forum work, Wellard was confused how sentencing acts as a deterrent for crime so I tried to help him understand.

I was hoping from past interactions that you might be actually willing to learn and move past intolerance, but based on your last few digs maybe not.

Because I don't agree it doesn't mean I'm intolerant

But your a smart dude who already knows that

[St Dave]

St Dave, I'm not your mate.
I pay membership every damn year, since Adam and Eve were dating, even though my club visits my state once a year, twice very rarely.
I buy merch, I support with my $$.

You cannot dictate or bully me.
You're now on my Foe list.
Good riddance

No worries, I just figured if you are getting that worked up over a punishment you could see coming since they escalated the last one, that maybe you wouldn't enjoy the direction for will be taking going forward.

I don't know what a foe list means, but I will be around if you actually want to try empathy and understanding.

[sks023]

St Dave, I'm not your mate.
I pay membership every damn year, since Adam and Eve were dating, even though my club visits my state once a year, twice very rarely.
I buy merch, I support with my $$.

You cannot dictate or bully me.
You're now on my Foe list.
Good riddance

He comes across as verry passive aggressive

[St Dave]

One week less than JWeb got for injuring Simpkin.

A word is just a word.

Throw that word around a sporting field and it's purely a sledge.

Why are the AFL being so stupid about a word?
Stupid as in ramping up the penalty.
Finlayson got 3, which was manifestly excessive.

In law, no court in the damned world would give a harsher penalty to a crim for the same offence purely to send a message.
Doesn't happen. If it ever did, the crim would appeal and win

agree.

Ignoring the word is just a word rubbish that has been addressed a number of times in this thread, you guys understand that is basically exactly how criminal sentencing is intended to work right? The purpose of a criminal punishment is to create a disincentive to commit a crime. If the crime keeps being committed the penalties can be reviewed and increased to increase the disincentive. Look at stuff like mandatory minimum sentences to see how punishments change over time.

That is all beside the point though because in the other instances this year the abusive word was said once. Lance is alleged to have spouted it 10 times. Clearly an increase in the level of offending

So his a criminal now is he

Wellard brought up the criminal comparison if you didn't notice

And you expanded on it

The arse lickin football league pull these sentences out of a hat

Yeah that's how discussions on a forum work, Wellard was confused how sentencing acts as a deterrent for crime so I tried to help him understand.

I was hoping from past interactions that you might be actually willing to learn and move past intolerance, but based on your last few digs maybe not.

Because I don't agree it doesn't mean I'm intolerant

But your a smart dude who already knows that

I thought we had a good chat, but your last few post have digs at arse licking and forcing someone to go to mardi gras with their butt cheeks handing out so that doesn't scream respect. You still choose to make the comments though so you aren't at indifference, so I landed on intolerance, but if you have a preferred word to address that behavior I would be happy to use it. Maybe just immature?

[sks023]

One week less than JWeb got for injuring Simpkin.

A word is just a word.

Throw that word around a sporting field and it's purely a sledge.

Why are the AFL being so stupid about a word?
Stupid as in ramping up the penalty.
Finlayson got 3, which was manifestly excessive.

In law, no court in the damned world would give a harsher penalty to a crim for the same offence purely to send a message.
Doesn't happen. If it ever did, the crim would appeal and win

agree.

Ignoring the word is just a word rubbish that has been addressed a number of times in this thread, you guys understand that is basically exactly how criminal sentencing is intended to work right? The purpose of a criminal punishment is to create a disincentive to commit a crime. If the crime keeps being committed the penalties can be reviewed and increased to increase the disincentive. Look at stuff like mandatory minimum sentences to see how punishments change over time.

That is all beside the point though because in the other instances this year the abusive word was said once. Lance is alleged to have spouted it 10 times. Clearly an increase in the level of offending

So his a criminal now is he

Wellard brought up the criminal comparison if you didn't notice

And you expanded on it

The arse lickin football league pull these sentences out of a hat

Yeah that's how discussions on a forum work, Wellard was confused how sentencing acts as a deterrent for crime so I tried to help him understand.

I was hoping from past interactions that you might be actually willing to learn and move past intolerance, but based on your last few digs maybe not.

And do you think I care what you think of me

I can't wait for Trump to win the election, so I can sit back and watch on youtube all the lgbtq snowflakes have a mental breakdown

You want to talk about tolerance, well watch how they behave on that day

[WellardSaint]

Collard stuffed up.

Collard needs a penalty. Others got punished.

ten weeks is FAR too much

OK.
Those of you who are so keen on him getting a huge whack- every single one of you is the type of hero that sees a Facebook post about an earthquake or bushfire
- you post thoughts and prayers, add some emojis to spice it up-

And forget all about it, and move on.
Stop with the faux outrage because you're embarrassing yourselves.

You're the sort who would say 'Oh, I recycle all my plastics, I care about the environment'.

[WellardSaint]

He said it 10 times.
Big deal.

How many times, hundreds of times, have courts found crims guilty of several charges of the same offence type, and the judge, in sentencing, hands down several sentences TO BE SERVED CONCURRENTLY


It happens all the time.
He said it 10 times in a game. One game.
How many crims commit the same crime several times over a long period, and yet serve all the penalties concurrently

The media reporting on court cases, more often than not, will bemoan the fact that so-and-so was out on bail for the same crime that he/she committed.
Also the grieving victims, more often than not, will complain that the penalty 'is a joke' or 'is disgraceful'

THERE REALLY IS NO MULTIPLIER EFFECT UNDER THE LAW.

Get real.

SIX WEEKS IS MANIFESTLY EXCESSIVE and beyond pathetic.
It smacks of Virtue Signalling.
It's a WORD.
He didn't put anyone in hospital.
If any of his opponents have family members that belong to the Alphabet Club, you can bet they've heard it all before and they won't cry into their lockers after the game.

A penalty should be based on the effect to the person it's directed to.
It obviously affected the d*ckwads at AFL House even though it was never directed at THEM.

HAVE WE BECOME NORTH KOREA

3 weeks like Finlayson.
That's still too much but it should make the Woke happy.
Jesus effin Christ

But don’t you understand that if you don’t fully condone this you are backward a biggot a disgrace.

Heaven forbid anyone that thinks this has gone way too far.

Seriously 6 weeks for calling a grown man a word that it doesn’t even represent.

Go call everyone a gutless c word all day.

❤

[sks023]

I'm taking the SS commodore for a burn

[sks023]

Additionally, he should be made to march in the Sydney Madi Gra with his arse cheeks hanging out

That should help him get his moral compass back

I was using humour to make a point, but Saint Dave is as thick as bricks

[St Dave]

One week less than JWeb got for injuring Simpkin.

A word is just a word.

Throw that word around a sporting field and it's purely a sledge.

Why are the AFL being so stupid about a word?
Stupid as in ramping up the penalty.
Finlayson got 3, which was manifestly excessive.

In law, no court in the damned world would give a harsher penalty to a crim for the same offence purely to send a message.
Doesn't happen. If it ever did, the crim would appeal and win

agree.

Ignoring the word is just a word rubbish that has been addressed a number of times in this thread, you guys understand that is basically exactly how criminal sentencing is intended to work right? The purpose of a criminal punishment is to create a disincentive to commit a crime. If the crime keeps being committed the penalties can be reviewed and increased to increase the disincentive. Look at stuff like mandatory minimum sentences to see how punishments change over time.

That is all beside the point though because in the other instances this year the abusive word was said once. Lance is alleged to have spouted it 10 times. Clearly an increase in the level of offending

So his a criminal now is he

Wellard brought up the criminal comparison if you didn't notice

And you expanded on it

The arse lickin football league pull these sentences out of a hat

Yeah that's how discussions on a forum work, Wellard was confused how sentencing acts as a deterrent for crime so I tried to help him understand.

I was hoping from past interactions that you might be actually willing to learn and move past intolerance, but based on your last few digs maybe not.

And do you think I care what you think of me

I can't wait for Trump to win the election, so I can sit back and watch on youtube all the lgbtq snowflakes have a mental breakdown

You want to talk about tolerance, well watch how they behave on that day

If you are excited about some imaginary day in the future when people you don't like will suffer then I was clearly misreading your attempt at understanding earlier. Clearly you are a more old testament wrathful God type than a new testament forgiveness and empathetic God type.

[sks023]

One week less than JWeb got for injuring Simpkin.

A word is just a word.

Throw that word around a sporting field and it's purely a sledge.

Why are the AFL being so stupid about a word?
Stupid as in ramping up the penalty.
Finlayson got 3, which was manifestly excessive.

In law, no court in the damned world would give a harsher penalty to a crim for the same offence purely to send a message.
Doesn't happen. If it ever did, the crim would appeal and win

agree.

Ignoring the word is just a word rubbish that has been addressed a number of times in this thread, you guys understand that is basically exactly how criminal sentencing is intended to work right? The purpose of a criminal punishment is to create a disincentive to commit a crime. If the crime keeps being committed the penalties can be reviewed and increased to increase the disincentive. Look at stuff like mandatory minimum sentences to see how punishments change over time.

That is all beside the point though because in the other instances this year the abusive word was said once. Lance is alleged to have spouted it 10 times. Clearly an increase in the level of offending

So his a criminal now is he

Wellard brought up the criminal comparison if you didn't notice

And you expanded on it

The arse lickin football league pull these sentences out of a hat

Yeah that's how discussions on a forum work, Wellard was confused how sentencing acts as a deterrent for crime so I tried to help him understand.

I was hoping from past interactions that you might be actually willing to learn and move past intolerance, but based on your last few digs maybe not.

And do you think I care what you think of me

I can't wait for Trump to win the election, so I can sit back and watch on youtube all the lgbtq snowflakes have a mental breakdown

You want to talk about tolerance, well watch how they behave on that day

If you are excited about some imaginary day in the future when people you don't like will suffer then I was clearly misreading your attempt at understanding earlier. Clearly you are a more old testament wrathful God type than a new testament forgiveness and empathetic God type.

Because I commented about Christians it makes me one? O Daveey boy! don't even begin to think to know how my mind works

[seano1]

Interesting the carry on …. Half if you couldn’t care if he got the arse at the end of the year due to lack if showing whatever skills he has got ….to me if the shoe was on the other foot and he was called out for being indigenous 10 times , he would and the club would be calling for blood. This time he got caught out ….now to see whether he gets a gig here next year .

[St Dave]

One week less than JWeb got for injuring Simpkin.

A word is just a word.

Throw that word around a sporting field and it's purely a sledge.

Why are the AFL being so stupid about a word?
Stupid as in ramping up the penalty.
Finlayson got 3, which was manifestly excessive.

In law, no court in the damned world would give a harsher penalty to a crim for the same offence purely to send a message.
Doesn't happen. If it ever did, the crim would appeal and win

agree.

Ignoring the word is just a word rubbish that has been addressed a number of times in this thread, you guys understand that is basically exactly how criminal sentencing is intended to work right? The purpose of a criminal punishment is to create a disincentive to commit a crime. If the crime keeps being committed the penalties can be reviewed and increased to increase the disincentive. Look at stuff like mandatory minimum sentences to see how punishments change over time.

That is all beside the point though because in the other instances this year the abusive word was said once. Lance is alleged to have spouted it 10 times. Clearly an increase in the level of offending

So his a criminal now is he

Wellard brought up the criminal comparison if you didn't notice

And you expanded on it

The arse lickin football league pull these sentences out of a hat

Yeah that's how discussions on a forum work, Wellard was confused how sentencing acts as a deterrent for crime so I tried to help him understand.

I was hoping from past interactions that you might be actually willing to learn and move past intolerance, but based on your last few digs maybe not.

And do you think I care what you think of me

I can't wait for Trump to win the election, so I can sit back and watch on youtube all the lgbtq snowflakes have a mental breakdown

You want to talk about tolerance, well watch how they behave on that day

If you are excited about some imaginary day in the future when people you don't like will suffer then I was clearly misreading your attempt at understanding earlier. Clearly you are a more old testament wrathful God type than a new testament forgiveness and empathetic God type.

Because I commented about Christians it makes me one? O Daveey boy! don't even begin to think you know how my mind works

No but maybe I am? I thought because you were concerned about Christians you might understand the reference. Would it make it easier to understand if I had said Sith/Jedi? Or would you prefer something simple like just evil and good?

[Yorkeys]

So the penalty handed out to Clarkson; obviously wrong, too light?.
Penalty to Port player wrong; also too light.
Penalty to the Suns player, also wrong; again too light.
Penalty to Lance just right, Goldilocks.
Give us a break.
Afl Secretariat is making it up as it goes along. Floggings will continue until behaviour improves.
Meanwhile no AFL player has come out. So maybe the AFL is taking the wrong approach. Infallibly of the Secretariat notwithstanding.

[sks023]

Now
you're just clutching
Take your moral and intellectual superiority of to the many other forums you frequent, no doubt

I'm sure their missing you

[Darth Vader]

Whether you agree with it or not, it’s just not that hard in this day and age to know where the line is and not cross it. Lance might be a moron.