STEVEN BAKER APPEAL UPDATES HERE ONLY PLEASE!!!!

Shades · Post: # 440794Post **Shades** » Thu 23 Aug 2007 7:38pm

A collingwood man hird me talking about baker to my mate today, He came up to me and said that baker has to go coz he is a rat, he said they grow up in the same town said baker was and still is a dirty player, we both started yelling and got kicked out of the cafe lol

other clubs hate him, we love him

saintbrat · Post: # 440795Post **saintbrat** » Thu 23 Aug 2007 7:40pm

saint66au wrote:
Newsflash: He won a B and F in a team that made a Preliminary Final!!!!!

Battler with no skills?? Pfffffffffttt

someone tried to say on radio this morning that he only won that because of the scoring system the team/ club was using at the time;

most commentators and players actually give Bakes great credance.

and yes they can only appeal on the process NOT take into account any further evidence etc.

yipper · Post: # 440799Post **yipper** » Thu 23 Aug 2007 7:43pm

saintbrat wrote:[

and yes they can only appeal on the process NOT take into account any further evidence etc.

Again, have they changed the rules for appeal?? I hought you actually needed NEW evidence to appeal OR u could claim the tribunal got it wrong because......

saintbrat · Post: # 440805Post **saintbrat** » Thu 23 Aug 2007 7:46pm

I was under the inpression it was only the 'tribunal got it wrong ' area that could be debated- Ie the level of contact reckless, etc and height of contact etc. and just took it that 'New evidence wasn't allowed- ie Farmer letter.

Post: # 440808Post **n1ck** » Thu 23 Aug 2007 7:48pm

So how long should we expect to wait?

Its been an hour.

Keeping in mind that the actual tribunal hearing took over FOUR hours...

SaintBot · Post: # 440810Post **SaintBot** » Thu 23 Aug 2007 7:48pm

Shady wrote:A collingwood man hird me talking about baker to my mate today, He came up to me and said that baker has to go coz he is a rat, he said they grow up in the same town said baker was and still is a dirty player, we both started yelling and got kicked out of the cafe lol

other clubs hate him, we love him

thank go im not the only one...numerous fights around school atm

us saint supporters jump at the mention of anything negative towards our players

saint66au · Post: # 440815Post **saint66au** » Thu 23 Aug 2007 7:54pm

n1ck wrote:So how long should we expect to wait?

Its been an hour.

Keeping in mind that the actual tribunal hearing took over FOUR hours...

Actually I reckon the longer it goes the better chance we hav...Id have hated after 10 mins for the board to say "well if thats all you can say the charges stick"

Shades · Post: # 440816Post **Shades** » Thu 23 Aug 2007 7:54pm

SaintBot wrote:
Shady wrote:A collingwood man hird me talking about baker to my mate today, He came up to me and said that baker has to go coz he is a rat, he said they grow up in the same town said baker was and still is a dirty player, we both started yelling and got kicked out of the cafe lol

other clubs hate him, we love him
thank go im not the only one...numerous fights around school atm

us saint supporters jump at the mention of anything negative towards our players

Mate i was the only saints supporter at my high skool and got heaps of slack 4 it in 2000 on the bottem of the ladder. but i always yelled back so much i got the st kilda logo tattoo on my arm.

FREE BAKER

backit · Post: # 440819Post **backit** » Thu 23 Aug 2007 7:56pm

Just on Ch9 no verdict still. Must be thinking carefully, could open a can of worms if decision is not seen as correct.

If there is reasonable doubt in any case there has to be an aquittal.

Shades · Post: # 440821Post **Shades** » Thu 23 Aug 2007 7:58pm

SEN just said that it looks like they r gonna be in there 4 a wile

joffaboy · Post: # 440826Post **joffaboy** » Thu 23 Aug 2007 7:59pm

Second phase of argument now occurring.

Truthfully and honesty of Baker should be taken into account after $15k for Brown to lie.

Still arguing the case and then if he is still found guilty, will go for a reduced sentance.

Snowballs change in hell I'm afraid.

saintbrat · Post: # 440827Post **saintbrat** » Thu 23 Aug 2007 8:00pm

good Saints
make them work for their money- Hope they took a cut lunch.

plugger66 · Post: # 440828Post **plugger66** » Thu 23 Aug 2007 8:00pm

joffaboy wrote:Second phase of argument now occurring.

Truthfully and honesty of Baker should be taken into account after $15k for Brown to lie.

Still arguing the case and then if he is still found guilty, will go for a reduced sentance.

Snowballs change in hell I'm afraid.

Have to agree with you. Last 10 at appeal have been dismissed.

Behind Play · Thu 23 Aug 2007 8:01pm

Saints still haven't finished giving their arguments. A little worried though, if we have gone in trying to use the argument Baker told the truth.

Thats what convicted him in the first place.

Dan Warna · Post: # 440834Post **Dan Warna** » Thu 23 Aug 2007 8:05pm

still we are dealing with AFL stooges, maybe we can baffle them.

WOOKIE DEFENCE!!!!

Milne · Post: # 440835Post **Milne** » Thu 23 Aug 2007 8:07pm

im not even gonna bother listening out for the results, we're screwed anyway.

HSVKing · Post: # 440836Post **HSVKing** » Thu 23 Aug 2007 8:07pm

Dan Warna wrote:

"That does not make sense!"

kalsaint · Post: # 440837Post **kalsaint** » Thu 23 Aug 2007 8:11pm

Behind Play wrote:Saints still haven't finished giving their arguments. A little worried though, if we have gone in trying to use the argument Baker told the truth.

Thats what convicted him in the first place.

The onlything that will make them take notice is if it goes to a real court where standards are generally maintained for all people irrespective of their reputation.

Gehrigs_son · Thu 23 Aug 2007 8:17pm

i can make it known to everybody, that if bakes doesnt get off, I'm ringin up

Behind Play · Thu 23 Aug 2007 8:18pm

kalsaint wrote:
Behind Play wrote:Saints still haven't finished giving their arguments. A little worried though, if we have gone in trying to use the argument Baker told the truth.

Thats what convicted him in the first place.
The onlything that will make them take notice is if it goes to a real court where standards are generally maintained for all people irrespective of their reputation.

Spot on kal, I really hope the club does take this further if we are bent over tonight. The AFL have only themselves to blame if that occurs.

redwhite&blackblood · Thu 23 Aug 2007 8:25pm

From a report on the ABC news the arguments made by the club were not all that convincing. Didn't sound too good in getting off the charges.

Oh When the Saints · Thu 23 Aug 2007 8:28pm

redwhite&blackblood wrote:From a report on the ABC news the arguments made by the club were not all that convincing. Didn't sound too good in getting off the charges.

Well, all the media said we were very convincing at the first hearing, and Bakes got rubbed out there, so let's wait and see ...

Dal_Santos_Gal · Thu 23 Aug 2007 8:32pm

I am starting to get very nervous....

I am really hoping that the longer it takes the better the result will be...

saintsrus · Post: # 440857Post **saintsrus** » Thu 23 Aug 2007 8:35pm

Dal_Santos_Gal wrote:I am starting to get very nervous....

I am really hoping that the longer it takes the better the result will be...

Dont be, Rb is there i can see this going further if we fail, this will be his time to stand up

saintspremiers · Thu 23 Aug 2007 8:35pm

Dal_Santos_Gal wrote:I am starting to get very nervous....

I am really hoping that the longer it takes the better the result will be...

nup, means absolutely nothing.

Due to the bad media the corrupt tribunal has received over the last 2 days, they have to be seen to have being fair to St.Kilda by listening to the truth again in even more detail.....and then shafting us like they did on Tuesday night.

The corrupt pricks will never fall on their swords.

STEVEN BAKER APPEAL UPDATES HERE ONLY PLEASE!!!!

no verdict as yet