Baker cops 3rd striking charge & found guilty on 4th

BelfastSaint · Tue 29 Jun 2010 7:06pm

has changed his mind after further video evidence

saintbrat · Post: # 949922Post **saintbrat** » Tue 29 Jun 2010 7:09pm

now up to 7 weeks

which would be rd 20 which is when his 50% loading would have ended......

dcstkfc · Post: # 949923Post **dcstkfc** » Tue 29 Jun 2010 7:09pm

source?

saintbrat · Post: # 949924Post **saintbrat** » Tue 29 Jun 2010 7:09pm

dcstkfc wrote:source?

Newsheadlines on SEN- and Ch 9.

Saint Bev · Post: # 949925Post **Saint Bev** » Tue 29 Jun 2010 7:09pm

Are you saying that they will only contest one charge, more information.

saintbrat · Post: # 949926Post **saintbrat** » Tue 29 Jun 2010 7:10pm

just contesting the hitting hand- misconduct.

jays · Post: # 949927Post **jays** » Tue 29 Jun 2010 7:11pm

cant believe this we need him fit for finals for the rematch hehe

dcstkfc · Post: # 949929Post **dcstkfc** » Tue 29 Jun 2010 7:12pm

jays wrote:cant believe this we need him fit for finals for the rematch hehe

hehe

dcstkfc · Post: # 949931Post **dcstkfc** » Tue 29 Jun 2010 7:15pm

From Bondy on 3AW- club shown high resolution video evidence tonight that strike made contact to the head, decided to accept that charge.

Arguing re the hand incident that there is no proof Johnson was injured.

MC Gusto · Post: # 949933Post **MC Gusto** » Tue 29 Jun 2010 7:17pm

so now the best case is 7?

this is beyond ridiculous

dcstkfc · Post: # 949935Post **dcstkfc** » Tue 29 Jun 2010 7:18pm

MC Gusto wrote:so now the best case is 7?

this is beyond ridiculous

The loading has farked him over

realdeal · Post: # 949936Post **realdeal** » Tue 29 Jun 2010 7:18pm

dcstkfc wrote:From Bondy on 3AW- club shown high resolution video evidence tonight that strike made contact to the head, decided to accept that charge.

Arguing re the hand incident that there is no proof Johnson was injured.

is our club the weakest in the AFL when it comes to defending our players at the tribunal?!

It may have hit his head on high res video but surely there was not sufficent force to constitute a suspension!

I cant believe this rubbush!

SainterK · Post: # 949938Post **SainterK** » Tue 29 Jun 2010 7:20pm

He will end up with 10 weeks, no different to 9 really, still don't think there was any chance of him playing finals

iwantmeseats · Tue 29 Jun 2010 7:20pm

It would still be two games before finals. Ill take that after all of this clusterfuck of a situation.

Thinline · Post: # 949940Post **Thinline** » Tue 29 Jun 2010 7:22pm

realdeal wrote:
dcstkfc wrote:From Bondy on 3AW- club shown high resolution video evidence tonight that strike made contact to the head, decided to accept that charge.

Arguing re the hand incident that there is no proof Johnson was injured.
is our club the weakest in the AFL when it comes to defending our players at the tribunal?!

It may have hit his head on high res video but surely there was not sufficent force to constitute a suspension!

I cant believe this rubbush!

Apparently yes.

Soft as butter.

Shameful.

Badlands · Post: # 949943Post **Badlands** » Tue 29 Jun 2010 7:24pm

Can't help but notice the anti-bakes vitriol being spewed forth from the intellectually-challenged in comments under various articles about this case.
They should actually be quite concerned about this - the ramifications of what's going down at the tribunal as i type this could actually be felt by many clubs over the next 12 weeks, starting this weekend.

BigMart · Post: # 949947Post **BigMart** » Tue 29 Jun 2010 7:27pm

Why the F***ing hell did they challenge and then plead GUILTY.....who is running the F***ing CIRCUS down there....

ABSOLUTE JOKE....

F***ing weak as piss, scared, pathetic effort.....another example of having ZERO BALLS....

saint75 · Post: # 949948Post **saint75** » Tue 29 Jun 2010 7:29pm

BigMart wrote:Why the F***ing hell did they challenge and then plead GUILTY.....who is running the F***ing CIRCUS down there....

ABSOLUTE JOKE....

F***ing weak as piss, scared, pathetic effort.....another example of having ZERO BALLS....

I believe they said cop to the one and get off the other. 7 weeks is better than 9.

saint75 · Post: # 949950Post **saint75** » Tue 29 Jun 2010 7:30pm

saintbrat wrote:now up to 7 weeks

which would be rd 20 which is when his 50% loading would have ended......

Saintbrat, what happens now with the 50% loading? How do the new charges affect it? (no idea how this current tribunal system works re-loading and carry over penalties).

SainterK · Post: # 949953Post **SainterK** » Tue 29 Jun 2010 7:31pm

They commented on the lack of legal eagles....I am feeling more optimistic now.

See how it pans out, but I'd say the AFL met with St Kilda today and they have said if he pleads guilty on this charge, that they will throw out the misconduct charge.

Still a statement by the AFL, Baker still back in time for the finals.

realdeal · Post: # 949954Post **realdeal** » Tue 29 Jun 2010 7:32pm

BigMart wrote:Why the F***ing hell did they challenge and then plead GUILTY.....who is running the F***ing CIRCUS down there....

ABSOLUTE JOKE....

F***ing weak as piss, scared, pathetic effort.....another example of having ZERO BALLS....

Yep. Baker has been let down again.. this time by his own club! Could you imagine Pies, dons, blues etc copping this treatment.

santazzi · Post: # 949959Post **santazzi** » Tue 29 Jun 2010 7:37pm

jays wrote:cant believe this we need him fit for finals for the rematch hehe

i cannot believe that every body is making this huge asumption that we will meet the cats at the GF............i do not think we will ..........may be a big may be in the prems......I think the cats have done thier dash for the season............we are more likely to face the filth......or the haze at the GF...

ace · Post: # 949961Post **ace** » Tue 29 Jun 2010 7:38pm

If Bakes pleaded guilty to the 4th charge he would be rubbed out for 9 weeks.
Back in time to play the finals.

If he unsucessfully challenges the 4th charge he would be rubbed out for 9 weeks.
Back in time to play the finals.

If he sucessfully chalenges the 4th charge he iwould be rubbed out for 7 weeks.
Back in time to play 2 matches before the finals.
Obviuosly worth challenging especially as the player Johnson continued to play after the incident and did not go off the field injured.

Whatever the outcome Demetriou and Anderson win again and St Kilda loses.

St Michele · Post: # 949962Post **St Michele** » Tue 29 Jun 2010 7:40pm

Can't have hit him too hard he never flinched in any of the ones I saw. Feel very let down by the club's support of Bakes at the moment.

saintbrat · Post: # 949963Post **saintbrat** » Tue 29 Jun 2010 7:40pm

SainterK wrote:They commented on the lack of legal eagles....

See how it pans out, but I'd say the AFL met with St Kilda today and they have said if he pleads guilty on this charge, that they will throw out the misconduct charge.

Still a statement by the AFL, Baker still back in time for the finals.

reports Are they saw the clearer vision available- at afl house/ tribunal

he has a player advocate with him- they mainly mentioend he arrived without legals but nothing to say they weren't already teere

Saintbrat, what happens now with the 50% loading? How do the new charges affect it? (no idea how this current tribunal system works re-loading and carry over penalties).

http://www.fanfooty.com.au/tribunal.php

Carryover points. These demerit points are the total left over after a player is suspended. They take one AFL year to expire - an "AFL year" is the time it takes for the same round to come again in the next AFL season, so that points from an offence in round 7 of 2009 don't expire until round 7 of 2010. If the points have not expired and a new offence is committed, the points are added to the points for the new offence.

Similarly, loading refers to a percentage that affects demerit points for future offences. As the regulations state: "A player will receive a 10% loading for an offence for each match that he has been suspended in the previous three AFL years. The maximum weighting a player can receive for offences in the past three AFL years will be capped at 50%."

if it wasn't capped at 50% Bakes would be playing games for the AFL - just to get his weeks down to a retirement level >>>:(

The second table lists all the AFL players who have loading from suspensions over the last three AFL years as part of the tribunal process, but do not have carryover points.